Agenda — Marina City Council, March 17, 2026 (part 2 of 2)

POLICY:

1. A Sister/Friendship City proposal will require recommendation by a member of the City Council.
a. Establishing a Sister City or Friendship City relationship requires approval by the City Council by a signed Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between the City and the proposed Sister/Friendship City. The term of the Sister City relationship is f ive years; the term of a Friendship City relationship is three years, and the Friendship City may apply for a Sister City status anytime during the three year term or later.

2. The Program Subcommittee will evaluate proposals for a new Sister/Friendship City affiliation and the City Council will give approval based on, but not limited to, the following guidelines:
a. A city chosen for a Sister /Friendship City affiliation should be from a country that has established diplomatic relations with the United States. There should be the potential for genuine people-to-people contact; communication and visitation should be able to occur freely in both directions.
b. The proposed Sister/Friendship City should be similar in population size, and/or role in the region, and/or have cultural, educational, socio-economic, governmental, or other tangible features in common with Marina, making it an appropriate Sister/Friendship City. c. There should exist in the City an identifiable resident group or association, which favors the proposed affiliation and intends to pursue a meaningful program after the relationship is established. The group should be in a position to be the pr imary organizer and finance its own activities.
d. A governmental entity/person should exist in the affiliate Sister City, with a clear indication of intent to carry out mutual Program projects and initiatives. e. The municipal government’s high ranking official of the affiliate Sister City (e.g., Mayor) should demonstrate support for establishing and developing a Sister /Friendship City affiliation with the City.

3. The City will support the Sister City Program activities as follows:
a. The City establishes a Program Subcommittee which will be composed of a maximum of 10 members that will include citizens, 501(c)(3) organization representatives, and the City staff liaison.
b. The City Manager shall designate a City staff member to the Subcommittee to serve as the City’s liaison regarding Sister/Friendship City activities to the City Council. c. The City staff liaison will act in a support capacity to the affiliat e City that will assume primary responsibility for the planning and execution of activities and events for visits of delegations to Marina from Sister/Friendship Cities.

EXHIBIT A
6 Sister Cities Policy

Page 3 ends

d. The City will provide set -up and complimentary access to City facilities for Sister/Friendship City events. Sister/Friendship City delegations and community sponsoring organizations must contact City staff at least sixty (60) calendar days in advance for any formal visits, events, and meetings.

e. Modest City promotional gifts may be funded by the City with the approval of the City Manager. Such minor City funds may be exempted from section 3f below, such as:

i) Light refreshments for meetings and activities when deemed appropriate.

ii) Reasonable postage, facsimile, copying and/or printing support for Sister/Friendship City events in which the City is participating.

iii) Exchange of promotional and formal gifts are typical of Sister/Friendship City visits between both delegations.

f. If funds from the City are requested, a budget request m ust be submitted to the City staff liaison detailing proposed Sister City-related expenditures. City funds may be provided to the Program Subcommittee 501(c)(3) association to support their general operating expenses as submitted in the budget request. Only incidental expenses (see section 3e) will be provided for Friendship City activities.

i) When a Councilmember or other City official initiates a request to visit a n affiliate Sister City, such a request will be made in writing to the City Council, outlining the proposed itinerary, how travel and expenses will be funded, and other assistanc e City staff will be asked to provide (e.g., gifts to be presented to officials of the affiliate Sister/Friendship City). All budget requests must be approved by the City Council for visitation to the affiliate Sister City for Councilmembers or others acting as an official City representative.

ii) Gifts and/or memorabilia presented to the City from a Sister/Friendship City delegation and intended for the City becomes the prop erty of the City and shall be displayed at a City facility or distributed at the City’s discretion. Gifts or memorabilia intended for and received by individual City Councilmembers or City employees are subject to applicable Fair Political Practices Commis sion and Government Code reporting requirements.

g. Travel accommodations and expenses for affiliate Sister/Friendship Cities visiting the City will be paid by the affiliate’s individual participant(s), or sponsoring community or governmental entities. The City will not fund travel nor reimburse travel or lodging expenses for affiliate Sister/Friendship City visitors to the U.S.

4. If a Friendship City affiliation is inactive for a period of three years or longer or if a Sister City affiliation is inactive for a period of five years or longer, or if there is a lack of community support through the community sponsoring organization for the Sister /Friendship City to continue, the City may initiate the process to place the relations hip into emeritus status (an inactive Sister/Friendship City relationship) or terminate the Sister/Friendship City affiliation with the Sister/Friendship City.

EXHIBIT A
7 Differences between Friendship City and Sister City
under the Marina Sister City Program:

Friendship City Sister City
General description
• Informal
• Short-term project focused
• Three-year commitment
• Formal
• Long-term relationship
with varied yearly
initiatives
• Five-year commitment
City Council approval to
engage? Yes Yes
Sister City Subcommittee
application approval? Yes Yes
MOU required, signed by
both Marina and affiliate
Sister City
Yes Yes
Involved citizen and/or
community association
involvement in Sister City
Program?
No Yes
Possible funding from the
City of Marina?
• Incidental expenses (gifts,
printing, refreshments, etc.)
• No funding for travel &
lodging
• Incidental expenses and
events
• Limited funding for official
travel/lodging

EXHIBIT B
8 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

AGREEMENT FOR A FRIENDSHIP CITY RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY OF MARINA AND ____________________
WHEREAS, the City of Marina, California, United States of America, and _______________, established a Friendship City relationship on _______________, and; WHEREAS, both cities seek to enrich cultural understanding, create cultural, educational, leadership, business exchanges between the two cities, and broaden and encourage goodwill between the cities, and;
WHEREAS, t he City of Marina and _______________ support the promotion of mutual understanding, expansion of official and non -governmental exchanges to enhance friendship, peace, stability and prosperity in their respective region and the world at large, and; WHEREAS, in order to develop a Friendship City relationship with cooperation between the City of Marina and _______________, both cities agree to a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) to support a Friendship City relationship on the following terms:

1. To promote common prosperity and development, both cities will organize, on the basis of equality, mutual benefit and goodwill, cultural exchanges and other information sharing that may include tradition and culture, business and commerce, governmental administration, health and sports interests, history, science, technology and other information sharing.

2. Citizens, civic and business groups of each city are recognized as ambassadors of goodwill to organize cultural exchanges that may include the above topics.

3. A governmental entity/person should exist in both the City of Marina and the participating Friendship City with clear indication of intent to carry out mutual program projects and initiatives.

4. Each city shall organize cultural, business, and educational excha nges involving adults and/or students within the duration of the MOU to the extent possible (may entail overlap with a future renewal of the MOU). Each exchange or visit shall be reviewed in advance with the City of Marina’s Sister City Program Subcommittee that includes resident groups/ associations and representatives of relevant school entities for student exchange projects, and businesses for trade exchanges, as appropriate.

5. In-person exchange visit details and activities shall be cooperatively agreed upon by the sponsoring organizations. Activities shall be provided with the objective to deepen cultural awareness and friendship among citizens, business leaders, and governmental leaders.

EXHIBIT C
9 Friendship City MOU

Page 2 ends

6. Both Friendship Cities will agree that all elements of the Friend ship City relationship are to remain noncontroversial and will maintain that historically controversial political issues play no part in this Friendship City relationship.

7. The effective term for an MOU for Friendship Cities shall be three years following the date of execution with the ability to renew or apply for Sister City status.

8. Prior to expiration of the MOU of the Friendship City relationship renewal by the City Council of the City of Marina, the City Sister City Program Subcommittee will evaluate the progress of the relationship and recommend whether the relationship shall continue.

9. Termination of this MOU agreement can occur at any time by either city or the affiliate city with 60 calendar days’ notice to close any previously arranged initiatives, as necessary.

If a Friendship City affiliation is inactive for a period of three years or longer, or if there is a lack of community support through the community sponsoring organization for the Friendship City to continue, the City of Marina may initiate the process to place the relationship into emeritus status (an inactive Friendship City relationship) or terminate the Friendship City relationship.

10. This represents the entire agreement between the cities. It may not be changed or modified without a resolution signed by city officials from both participating cities.

These two cities hereby execute the MOU to expire within three years from the noted date(s).

____________________,
On its behalf
City of Marina,
On its behalf

____________________________
(City Official, Title)
Date signed:

____________________________
Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor
Date signed:

EXHIBIT C
10 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

AGREEMENT FOR A SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY OF MARINA AND ____________________
WHEREAS, the City of Marina, California, United States of America, and _______________, established a Sister City relationship on _______________, and; WHEREAS, both cities seek to enrich cultural understanding, create cultural, educational, leadership, business exchanges between the two cities, and broaden and encourage go odwill between the cities, and;
WHEREAS, the City of Marina and _______________ support the promotion of mutual understanding, expansion of official and non -governmental exchanges to enhance friendship, peace, stability and prosperity in their respective region and the world at large, and; WHEREAS, in order to develop a Sister City relationship with cooperation between the City of Marina and _______________, both cities agree to a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) to support a Sister City relationship on the following terms:

2. Citizens, civic and business groups of each city are recognized as ambassadors of goodwill to organize cultural exchanges that may include the above topics.

3. A governmental entity/person should exist in both the City of Marina and the participating Sister City with clear indication of intent to carry out mutual program projects and initiatives.

4. Each city shall organize cultural, business, and educational exchanges involving adults and/or students within the duration of the MOU to the extent possible (may entail overlap with a future renewal of the MOU). Each exchange or visit shall be reviewed in advance with the City of Marina’s Sister City Program Subcommittee that includes resident groups/associations and representatives of relevant school entities for student exchange projects, and businesses for trade exchanges, as appropriate.

EXHIBIT D
11 Sister City MOU

Page 2 ends

6. Both Sister Cities will agree that all elements of the Sister City relationship are to remain noncontroversial and will maintain that historically controversial political issues play no part in this Sister City relationship.

7. The effective term for this MOU for Sister Cities shall be for five years following the date of execution with ability to renew or apply alternatively for a Friendship City status.

8. Prior to expiration of the MOU of the Sister City relationship renewal by the City Council of the City of Marina, the City Sister City Program Subcommittee will evaluate the progress of the relationship and recommend whether the relationship shall continue.

9. Termination of this MOU agreement can occur at any time by either city or the affiliate city with 60 calendar days’ notice to close any previously arranged initiatives, as necessary. If a Sister City affiliatio n is inactive for a period of five years or longer, or if there is a lack of community support through the community sp onsoring organization for the Sister City to continue, the City of Marina may initiate the process to place the relationship into emeritus status (an inactive Sister City relationship) or terminate the Sister City relationship.

10. This represents the entire agreement between the cities. It may not be changed or modified without a resolution signed by city officials from both participating cities.

These two Cities hereby execute the MOU to expire within five years from the noted date(s).

____________________,
On its behalf
City of Marina,
On its behalf

____________________________
(City Official, Title)
Date signed:

____________________________
Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor
Date signed:

EXHIBIT D
12 EXHIBIT B
13 EXHIBIT B
14 EXHIBIT C
15 EXHIBIT C
16 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDI NG

AGREEMENT

FOR A SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY

OF MARINA AND
____________________
WHEREAS, the City of Marina, California, United States of America, and , established a Sister City relationship on , and; WHEREAS, both cities
seek to enrich cultura l understanding, create cu ltural, educational, leadership, business exchanges between the tw o cities, and broaden and encourage goodwill between the cities, and;
WHEREAS, the City of
Marina and support the promo tion of mutual
understanding, expansion of official and non-governmental exchanges to enhance friendship, peace, stability and prosperity in their respec tive region and the world at large, and; WHEREAS, in order to develop a Sister City relationship with cooperation between the City of Marina
and , both cities agree to a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) to support a Sister City relationship on the following terms:

1. To promote common prosperity and development, both cities w ill organize, on the basis of equality, mutual benefit and goodw ill, cultural exchanges and ot her information sharing that may include tradition and culture, business and commerce, governmental administration, health and sports interests, history, science, technology and other information sharing.

2. Citizens, civic and business groups of each city are recognized as ambassadors of goodwill to organize cultural exchanges that may include the above topics.

3. A governmental entity/person shoul d exist in both the City of Marina and the participating Sister City with clear indication of intent to carry out mutual program projects and initiatives.

4. Each city shall organize cultural, business, and educational exchanges involving adults and/or students within the duration of the MOU to the extent possible (may entail overlap with a future renewal of the MOU). Each exchange or visit sh all be reviewed in advance with the City of Marina’s Sister City Program Subcommittee th at includes resident gr oups/associations and representatives of relevant sc hool entities for student exchange projects, and businesses for trade exchanges, as appropriate.

5. In-person exchange visit details and activities sh all be cooperatively agreed upon by the sponsoring organizations. Activities shall be pr ovided with the objective to deepen cultural awareness and friendship among citizens, business leaders, and governmental leaders.

EXHIBIT D
17 Sister City MOU

Page 2 ends

7. The effective term for this MOU for Sister Cities shall be for five years following the date of execution with ability to renew or apply alternatively for a Friendship City status.

8. Prior to expiration of the MOU of the Sister City relationship renewal by the City Council of the City of Marina, the City Sister City Progr am Subcommittee will evaluate the progress of the relationship and recommend whether the relationship shall continue.

9. Termination of this MOU agreement can occur at any time by either city or the affiliate city with 60 calendar days’ notice to close any previo usly arranged initiatives, as necessary. If a Sister City affi liation is inactive for a period of five years or longer, or if there is a lack of community support through the community sponsoring organization for the Sister City to continue, the City of Marina may initiate the process to place the relationship into emeritus status (an inactive Sister City relationship) or terminate the Sister City relationship.

10. This represents the entire agreement between th e cities. It may not be changed or modified without a resolution signed by city officials from both participating cities.

These two Cities hereby execute the MOU to expire within five years from the noted date(s). ,
On its behalf
____________________________
(City Official, Title)
Date signed:

City of Marina,
On its behalf
____________________________
Layne P. Long, City Manager
Date signed:

Approved as to form:
____________________________
City Attorney
Date signed:

EXHIBIT D
18 March 13, 2026 Item No. 10g(3)

Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of of the Marina City Council March 17, 2026

CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 202 6-,

ADOPTING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ( MOU)

BETWEEN THE CITY OF MARINA AND THE MARINA PUBLIC

SAFETY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (MPSMA), AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE MOU, AND AMENDING THE
CITY SALARY SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEARS 25/26 AND 26/27.

RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2026-, approve the following:

1. Adopting an MOU between the City and the Marina P ublic Safety Management Association (MPSMA) (EXHIBIT B); and

2. Authorizing the City Manager to execute the MOU; and

3. Authorizing amendments to the City salary schedule for Fiscal Years 2025 -26 and 2026- 27 (EXHIBIT A); and

4. Authorizing Finance Director to make appropriate accounting and budgetary entries.

BACKGROUND:

California Government Code Section 3500, et seq., (Meyers -Milias-Brown Act) requires that public employers meet and confer regarding wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment. The City’s general pattern of negotiations has been to consider both competitive market considerations and appropriate cost of living adjustments. City Management and the representatives of the Marina Public Safety Management Association (MPSMA) began negotiations in 2025 regarding terms of new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) , as the previous terms for the above-listed employee groups were set to expire on June 30, 2025. The final MOU is now before the City Council for approval.

ANALYSIS:

The policy goals communicated to the negotiating team by the City Council for this negotiation included considerations of the job market and increased cost of living. This agreement is intended to enhance employee retention and provide competitive salaries. The proposed salary and benefit adjustments are based on comparing salary data with comparable cities, similar in size, demographics, and services to the public.

The proposed MOU reflects the tentative agreement reached with the employee group (EXHIBIT C). The MOU presented for City Council approval has been approved by the MPSMA memberships. City staff was able to reach agreement with the above-listed employee group for a two-year term. Agreements set for two -year term s are advantageous, as they promote stability within the organization and enable the City to more accurately forecast salary expenditures over the next two years. The MOU will be effective as of July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2027.

Additionally, City staff is requesting approval of the updated Salary Table for the classifications in the MPSMA labor group. The updates are included in the attached Table (EXHIBIT A).

1 Summary of major changes to terms and conditions of the MPSMA - MOU are as follows:

1. Term – July 1, 2025 – June 30, 2027

2. Salary 4% increase effective the first pay period after July 1, 2025. 4% increase effective the first pay period after July 1, 2026.

3. Change in Longevity Compensation Structure: to include an additional 5% after 18 years of accumulated service with either the Police or Fire Department for the City of Marina.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impact of the proposed increases to the Marina Public Safety Management Association presented to Council are approximately $85,000 for FY 25-26 and approximately $103,000 for FY 26-27. For a total of $188,000 over the term of the two-year agreements.

At this time, a budget amendment is not needed for FY 25 -56. The remaining difference is anticipated to come from savings in other line items. The amount for the FY 26-27 will be adjusted as part of the mid-cycle budget process.

Respectfully submitted,

__________________________
Belinda Varela, Director
Human Resources/Risk Management
City of Marina

REVIEWED/CONCUR:

_____________________________
Layne P. Long
City Manager
City of Marina

Exhibit A – Salary Table Update
Exhibit B – MOU 2025-2027
Exhibit C – Tentative Agreement

2 RESOLUTION NO. 2026-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA ADOPTING A

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN THE CITY OF MARINA AND

THE MARINA PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (MPSMA),

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE MOU, AND AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY SALARY SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEARS 25/26 AND 26/27.

WHEREAS, the existing Memorandum of Understandings between the City of Marina and the Marina Public Safety Management Association (MPSMA) expired on June 30, 2025; and

WHEREAS, the City of Marina met and conferred in good faith with the MPSMA and have reached tentative agreements to approve a new Memorandum of Understanding; and

WHEREAS, the term of the new Memorandum of Understanding will expire on June 30, 2027, and;

WHEREAS, the estimated cost of all salary and benefit adjustments in the MOU for the MPSMA, is approximately $85,000 for FY 25-26 and approximately $103,000 for FY 26-27. For a total of $ 188,000 over the term of the two-year agreements; and

WHEREAS, the update to the Salary Table will indicate the negotiated changes; and

WHEREAS, the cost of the proposed salary and benefit adjustments can be funded by savings in other line items in the current FY 202 5-2026 and the amount for the FY 26 -27 will be adjusted as part of the mid - cycle budget process.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Marina do hereby:

1. Adopt a new a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Marina and the Marina Public Safety Management Association (MPSMA); and

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the MOU; and

3. Amend the City salary schedule for Fiscal Years 2025-26 and 2026-27; and

4. Authorize the Finance Director to make appropriate accounting and budgetary entries.

PASSED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Marina at a regular meeting duly held on the 17th day of March 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

__________________________
Bruce Delgado, Mayor
ATTEST:

_____________________________
Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

3 Exhibit A

Salary Table Adjustments

Effective July 1, 2025
Classification Step A Step B Step C Step D Step E
Fire Division Chief $75.5130 $79.2886 $83.2530 $87.4157 $91.7865 Commander $81.4410 $85.5131 $89.7888 $94.2782 $98.9921

Effective July 1, 2026
Classification Step A Step B Step C Step D Step E
Fire Division Chief $78.5335 $82.4602 $86.5832 $90.9123 $95.4579 Commander $84.6987 $88.9336 $93.3803 $98.0493 $102.9518

4 1

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF

MARINA AND THE PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGEMENT

EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION OF MARINA
2025 - 2027
This A
greement is entered into by and between the City of Marina and the Public Safety Management Employees effective July 1, 2025 and shall extend the current MOU through June 30, 2027. The Parties agree to the following Terms and Conditions

1. Term
A. Expires June 30, 2027

2. Salary
For y
ear one of this MOU, salary range changes will be effective July 1, 2025. For year two of this MOU, salary range changes will be effective July 1, 2026.

A. A step Police Commander Salary Range will be at least 5% above E step Police Sergeant Salary Range.

B. A step Fire Division Chief Salary Range will be at least 5% above the E step Fire Captain Salary Range.

C. These ranges will adjust in the future as the Police Sergeant and Fire Captain ranges change. Salary adjustment will go into effect when Police Sergeant and Fire Captain salary changes are effective.

3. Medical, Dental & Vision, Flexible Benefit Plan
A. Effective January 1, 2023 the City shall contribute towards the monthly insurance premium equal to 75% of the lowest cost medical plan offered by City.

B. The City shall pay Dental insurance premium per month as follows:

Dental Plan Employee Only Employee + 1 Employee + 2 or more Premier Access $9.67 $24.00 $29.00
C. The City shall pay vision insurance premium per month as follows:

Vision Plan Employee Only Employee + 1 Employee + 2 or more Vision Service Plan $20.00 $20.00 $20.00
D. Flexible Benefit Plan: The City shall implement a Section 125 Flexible Benefit Plan for the members of the Association, as follows:
i. City shall provide an allowance of $575 per month to each member for medical insurance and voluntary programs such as Dental insurance, Vision insurance and Long-Term Disability Insurance, Term Life Insurance, Medical Expense Reimbursement Account and Dependent Care Reimbursement account.
ii. The allowance must be applied toward payment of monthly premium for the PERS Health plan, previously described to all members for members and their families except a member may decline coverage for the member and/or a member’s family if the member provides proof

EXHIBIT B
5 2
satisfactory to the City that the person for whom coverage is declined is covered under a qualifying group health insurance policy from another source.

iii. City shall offer Dental insurance, Vision insurance, Term Life insurance, Medical Expense Reimbursement and Dependent Care Reimbursement on a voluntary basis. At the members election, the cost of these benefits may be paid from any portion of the allowance described above or an offset to the members salary, if the combined cost of the benefits exceeds the allowance.

iv. If the allowance is in excess of the cost of all benefits, the difference may be taken in cash. Any amounts taken in cash will be paid out in a bi- monthly payment. It is expressly understood that any future limit on the amount of cash and deferred compensation shall be subject to the meet- and-confer process.

v. City will provide a Medical Expense Reimbursement Account into which a member may pay any amount not to exceed $2,160 annually ($180 per month). A member may also pay into the Dependent Care Reimbursement Account which member may pay any amount not to exceed $5,000 annually ($416.66 per month). City shall prepare a Flexible Benefit Plan worksheet for distribution to all members, which shall reflect the premiums for each element of the plan.

vi. City shall pay up to $60.00 per member for the cost of setting up the Flexible Benefit Plan.

vii. City shall pay up to $6.00 per member per month for the administrative fee Flexible Benefit Plan.

viii. The dental benefit cap is $2000 per year

4. Life Insurance. City will provide on behalf of each member $100,000 life insurance coverage.

5. Long Term Care Disability: City will provide on behalf of each member Long Term Disability which will pay 60% of pre disability earnings up to a max of $180,000.

6. Retirement: The City shall provide retirement benefits for each Public Safety Management employee under the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS), as follows:

A. Retirement Plans

1. For sworn public safety management,
a. Tier 1 – CalPERS 3%@ 50 provided to all Public Safety Management member hired prior to December 31, 2012 and considered Classic members
b. Tier 2 – CalPERS 2.7% @ 57 plan will be provided to all Public Safety Management member hired on or after January 1, 2013 who are new members as defined under the PEPRA

EXHIBIT B
6 3
B. Contributions

1. Effective January 1, 2013 Tier 1 and Tier 2 Public Safety Management members will pay the full member contribution rate required by CalPERS

2. Effective January 1, 2013, Tier 2 Public Safety Management members shall pay 50% of the normal cost of the retirement plan as identified annually by CalPERS. This contribution may change annually as required by the PEPRA

3. The City will include in reportable wages to PERS the City payment of the Public Safety Management member's PERS contribution. It is agreed any costs that are incurred by the City will be assumed by the Public Safety Management member.

7. Survivor Benefits
A. The PERS contract will include 1959 Survivors Benefit Level four for the Association. The employee cost will be $2.00 per month.

8. Holiday Schedule
A. For each member of the group the following holiday schedule shall apply • Martin Luther King Jr. Birthday (3rd Monday of January) • Presidents Day (3rd Monday of February)
• Memorial Day (Last Monday of May)
• Juneteenth (June 19)
• Independence Day (July 4)
• Labor Day (First Monday of September)
• Veterans Day (November 11)
• Thanksgiving Day and the next day (4th Thursday and next Friday of November)
• Winter Break (December 24 – January 1)
B. When one of the above designated holidays falls on a weekend, then the weekday nearest that day will be considered as that holiday

9. Leaves: Leave for Public Safety Management members shall accrue and be administered, as follows:

A. Administrative Leave. Members shall receive one hundred (100) hours' yearly Administrative Leave, earned in a lump sum on July 1st of each year.

Maximum Administrative Leave Accrual: A maximum of two hundred forty (240) hours of Administrative Leave may be accrued by a member. Unused Administrative Leave shall be paid at current salary upon termination of employment to a maximum of two hundred (240) hours.

B. Cash-out: The City will pay each Member at their request a maximum amount of eighty (80) hours of administrative leave each fiscal year, at the Member's individual regular rate of pay upon 30 days’ notice to payroll.

C. Vacation: Vacation time shall be accrued as described in the City Personnel Rules.

EXHIBIT B
7 4

Members in this unit may accrue vacation leave up to the following maximum leave balance based upon years of service as follows:

0 through 9 years - 200 hours 10 or
more years - 300 hours

Any employee who reaches their maximum vacation accumulation shall stop accruing vacation until the balance falls below his/her maximum vacation accumulation. Unused Vacation accrual shall be paid at the current salary upon termination of employment or retirement.

Emergency Cash Draws on Vacation. Under extreme financial need, caused by either a death or medical emergencies in the family, at the request of the member, the City Manager with approval of the City Council may grant up to eighty (80) hours of cash draw on accrued vacation time if such a practice is not precluded by law or regulation.

D. Sick Leave: All members of the Association shall accrue Sick Leave at the rate of 3.69 hours per pay period (12 days per year. A maximum of 1,440 hours may be accumulated at retirement, 35% of the hours accumulated, to a maximum of 504 hours, will be paid to the employee.

10. Longevity Compensation
A. After nine (9) years of accumulated service with the City, an employee with overall "outstanding" evaluations for the previous two (2) years shall receive an additional five percent (5%) in compensation,

After ten (10) years of accumulated service with the City, an employee shall receive an additional five percent (5%) in compensation.

B. In recognition of unit members’ long-term contributions to the public safety of the City of Marina and their continuing commitment to ensuring service, integrity, responsibility, and professionalism as members of public safety management, after eighteen (18) years of accumulated service with either the Police or Fire Departments for the City of Marina, an employe shall receive an additional five percent (5%) in compensation. This provision shall be effective as of December 22, 2025.

11. Fire Division Chief – Extraordinary Events
A. Fire Division Chiefs are exempt employees who are occasionally required to commit to catastrophic events that may span multiple operational periods. These types of events would include flood, earthquakes, declared disasters, fires, and prolonged emergency situations. These extraordinary events may be more than fifteen (15) hours in duration. Such service is considered "extraordinary" and is beyond the scope of their normal duties, as determined by the Fire Chief. The City intends to fairly compensate exempt classes of employees at an overtime pay rate for work during such extraordinary events in order to protect life, property and the environment.

EXHIBIT B
8 5
Pay for such extraordinary time worked shall be defined as time worked in excess of eight (8) hours, Monday through Friday, and any hours on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays. For incidents of fifteen (15) hours or less, there may be no extraordinary duty pay. If the duration of the response exceeds fifteen (15) hours, the hourly pay shall cover the entire time of the extraordinary commitment, beginning at the time of initial dispatch from home base to the time of return to home base.

There shall be only one fifteen (15) hour period from the time of original dispatch, regardless of the number of assignments, until normal scheduled duties are resumed. Extraordinary pay for such time worked by exempt classes of employees shall be compensated at an overtime pay rate.

The overtime for such time worked by exempt classes of employees shall be compensated at one and one-half times the base hourly rate. The base hourly rate is computed by adding the monthly base salary, monthly educational, and in lieu pay to determine the total monthly pay. The monthly pay is then multiplied by 12 to determine the yearly pay, then the yearly pay is divided by 2080 to determine the base hourly rate.

B. Portal to Portal
The City will compensate City employee’s portal to portal while in the course of their employment and away from their official duty station and assigned to an emergency incident, in support of an emergency incident, or pre -positioned for emergency response.

C. Shift Coverage
Division Chief weekend shift coverage pay, for up to 8 hours per day, shall be provided to those division chiefs who assume an additional Division Chief weekend shift assignment, when the regularly scheduled Division Chief is assigned to an extraordinary event.

The compensation rate for a Division Chief weekend shift Coverage will be equal to one and one half (1.5) times the average base rate of pay. The Fire Chief will submit all salary information to Cal OES.

12. Police Commander - Extraordinary Events
A. Police Commanders are exempt employees who are occasionally required to work significant excess hours during extraordinary emergency events in order to protect life, property and/or the environment. Examples of such events include flood, earthquakes, declared disasters, large-scale emergency incidents and other prolonged emergency situations. Because such work may greatly exceed the scope of the employee’s normal duties, the Police Chief has the discretion to award Police Commander Emergency Response Coverage Compensation, for such extraordinary time worked. .

B. Employees will be entitled to Emergency Response Coverage Compensation if the extraordinary work time exceeds two (2) hours over the regularly scheduled eight (8) hour day Monday through Friday, and time worked in excess of two (2) hours on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays. If the duration of the response exceeds two (2 ) hours, the hourly pay shall cover the entire time of the extraordinary commitment, beginning at the time of initial dispatch from home base to the time of return to home base. For incidents of two (2) hours or

EXHIBIT B
9 6
less, there may be no extraordinary duty pay. Extraordinary pay for such time worked by exempt classes of employees shall be compensated at the hourly rate defined below.

C. The hourly rate for such pay is computed by adding the monthly base salary, monthly educational, and in lieu pay to determine the total monthly pay. The monthly pay is then multiplied by 12 to determine the yearly pay, then the yearly pay is divided by 2080 to determine the base hourly rate.

13. Severance Pay: Provide one (1) month's severance pay for the layoff or reductions in force causing the termination of any member of this group.

14. Physical: The City shall pay up to Three Hundred Dollars ($300.00) for the cost of a physical examination for each Association Member annually. Employees shall provide the medical billing record to the City prior to receipt of reimbursement payment.

15. Educational Incentive. Members of this association shall be awarded an educational incentive. The Administrative Justice Certificate will be deleted from this list and replaced with a Post Management Certificate. For the fire side we will add Executive Chief Officers Certificate. Members of this unit shall be allowed to mix and match education incentives and will be eligible for up to 7.5% for any combination of education pay and/or certificate pay incentives:

Commanders:

Intermediate Post Certificate ........................................ 2.5% Advanced POST Certificate ......................................... 2.5% Post Management Certificate ....................................... 2.5%

Division Fire Chief:

Fire Certificate ............................................................. 2.5% Chief Officers Certificate .............................................. 2.5% Executive Fire Officer ................................................... 2.5%

Education for both Police & Fire
Associate Degree ........................................................ 2.5% Bachelor Degree .......................................................... 2.5% Advanced Degree ........................................................ 2.5%

In no event will an employee receive more than 7.5% incentive pay, with the exception of the grandfathered* in employee(s) who in no event will receive more than 10% incentive pay.

16. Uniform Allowance: A uniform allowance of Six Hundred Fifty ($600.00) Dollars annually, shall be given to members of the Association, to be paid on a bi-weekly basis.

Public Safety members will be provided with uniforms and equipment.

17. Bilingual Pay: Seventy Five dollars ($75) per pay period salary increase shall be granted to up to one (1) employee from the Fire Department and up to one (1) employee from the Police Department who are fluent in both English and Spanish and acts as the City's interpreter. Eligibility for English-Spanish interpreter pay shall be determined by successfully passing the English-Spanish interpreter's oral test administered by the County of Monterey or another approved agency.

EXHIBIT B
10 7

18. Catastrophic Leave: Catastrophic Leave provides that employees who have suffered major non-job related physical or mental disability to themselves or a direct family member, as defined herein, and has exhausted or is about to exhaust all accrued leaves, shall be entitled to receive accrued vacation, administrative, sick and/or compensatory leave time earned by another employee to augment a portion or portions of the employee's sick leave, on behalf of the employee, employee's spouse, child, father, mother, step-father, step-mother, father- in-law, mother-in-law, brother, sister, brother-in-law, sister- in-law, grandparent or grandchild. Both the donor and the recipient must be non-probationary, regular, full-time employees. Catastrophic Leave requests shall conform to the following criteria:
a. Requests for donation of accrued vacation, administrative, sick and/or compensatory leave time shall be processed in accordance with procedures specified by the City Manager.
b. All donations shall be voluntary. Donated leave time shall not exceed more than twenty five percent (25%) of the donor's individually accrued vacation, sick, and/or compensatory leave time totals at the time of the request. c. The minimum donation shall be eight (8) hours and, thereafter, in whole hour increments
d. Once granted, all time transferred shall be deducted from the donor's account and shall thereafter be treated the same as though it had been earned by the done as sick leave.
e. Generally, the total leave credits received by the employee shall normally not exceed three (3) months for any single occurrence within a twelve (12) month period.

19. Bereavement Leave:

Regular and probationary employees are entitled to bereavement leave due to the death of a family member as follows:

A. For purposes of this Section, “family member” means an employee’s spouse (including domestic partner), child of either spouse), parent (of either spouse and including stepparent), sibling (including sibling-in-law), grandparent (of either spouse), and grandchild (of either spouse).

B. For the death of a family member within the state, bereavement leave shall be limited to three (3) paid working days (or shifts) and two (2) unpaid working days (or shifts), except that an employee may use vacation, sick, or compensatory time off that is otherwise available to the employee to substitute for unpaid time. For the death of a family member out of state, bereavement leave shall be limited to five (5) paid working days (or shifts).

C. Days of bereavement leave need not be consecutive but shall be completed within three months of the date of death of the family member.

D. If requested by the City, the employee, within thirty (30) days of the first day of leave, shall provide documentation of the death of the family member. As used in this section, “documentation” includes, but is not limited to, a death certificate, a published obituary, or written verification of death, burial, or memorial services from a mortuary, funeral home, burial society, crematorium, stitution, or governmental agency.

20. No Strike or Lockout: The Association and its members, individually and collectively, agree that during the term of this Memorandum of Understanding there shall be no strike or lockout.

EXHIBIT B
11 8
a. In the event of an unauthorized strike, slow-up or stoppage, the City agrees that there will be no liability on the part of the Association, provided the Association promptly and publicly disavows such unauthorized strike, orders the employees to return to work, and attempts to bring about a prompt resumption of normal operations, and provided further that the Association notifies the City, in writing, within forty -eight (48) hours after the commencement of such strike, what measures it has taken to comply with the provisions of this Article.
b. In the event that such action by the Association has not affected resumption of normal work practices, the City shall have the right to discipline, by way of discharge or otherwise, any member of the Association who participates in such strike, slow-up or stoppage; and no such disciplinary action shall be subject to the grievance procedure provided for in this Memorandum of Understanding.

21. Severance: Should any sentence, paragraph, section or portion of this agreement be determined to be invalid or unenforceable by any subsequent law, regulation or order of a court of competent jurisdiction, then the remainder of this agreement will remain valid and in full force and effect between the parties hereto.

22. Re-Opener
The City and the MPSMA agree to reopen the Memorandum of Understanding for the sole purpose of discussing a change in work schedule for Fire Management to the 56-hour workweek (48/96 schedule) no later than six (6) months after the appointment of a new Fire Chief at the request of either party. No changes shall occur to the Memorandum of Understanding as a result of this reopener without mutual agreement of the parties. This reopener in no way obligates either party beyond the agreement to discuss this limited issue.

Duration of this agreement: This agreement shall take effect on July 1, 2025 and shall continue in force to and including June 30, 2027 . If either party wishes to amend this Memorandum of Understanding, it shall provide written notice to the other no sooner than 120 days prior to the termination of the agreement. If neither party notifies the other in writing, the MOU shall remain in effect.

MARINA PUBLIC SAFETY CITY OF MARINA

MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION

_________________________ __________________________
Steve Russo Date Belinda Varela Date MPSMA Director, Human Resources
and Risk Management

__________________________ __________________________ Isaac Segal Date Andrew M. Aller, Esq. Date MPSMA Lead Negotiator

_________________________ __________________________
Elizabeth Silver, Esq. Date Layne Long Date
City Manager

EXHIBIT B
12 EXHIBIT C
13 3/9/26

EXHIBIT C
14 March 13, 2026 Item No. 10g(4)

Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
of the Marina City Council of March 13, 2026

CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 2026- ,

AUTHORIZING APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH BOB MURRAY AND

ASSOCIATES FOR RECRUITMENT SERVICES, AND AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT SUBJECT TO
REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.

REQUEST: It is recommended that the City Council consider adopting Resolution No. 2026 -,:

1. Adopting Resolution No. 2026- approving an agreement with Bob Murray and Associates to provide recruitment services to the City of Marina for the City Manager recruitment; and

2. Authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement subject to review and approval by the City Attorney.

BACKGROUND:

The City Manager has announced their intent to retire from the position of City Manager for the City of Marina. The City Manager serves as the chief administrative officer of the City and is responsible for implementing City Council policies, overseeing City operations, managing staff, preparing the City’s annual budget, and ensuring the delivery of municipal services to the community.

Due to the critical nature of the position and the need to ensure continuity of leadership and operational stability, the City will begin the recruitment process promptly. The goal of the recruitment is to identify and attract highly qualified candidates who possess the experience, leadership skills, and commitment necessary to lead the City of Marina into its next phase of growth and community development.

Given the complexity and magnitude of the City Manager position, many municipalities engage the services of a professional executive recruitment firm to assist with the recruitment process.

Recruitment for executive level and city management positions can be difficult as the positions are generally considered “hard-to-fill” positions. In the past, the City has recruited department heads both using internal resources and professional recruiting firms. The City understands the critical nature of the City Manager position, as well as the need to be financially prudent. In an effort to ensure timely recruitment that will result in candidate placement, City staff is requesting approval to enter into an agreement with Bob Murray and Associates for the services of an executive search to maximize outreach to qualified and talented applicants. Due to the critical need for this position, and the specialized recruitment process, the assistance of a professional executive search firm will allow the City to more aggressively seek out candidates who may not be seeking new employment and would not normally respond to routine advertising, garnering a diverse and top-qualified pool of applicants.

ANALYSIS:

Executive recruitment firms specializing in public sector leadership positions provide expertise in identifying and recruiting highly qualified candidates nationwide. These firms typically assist with the following components of the recruitment process:

• Conducting outreach and national advertising to attract a diverse pool of qualified candidates • Developing a recruitment brochure and candidate profile that reflects the City’s priorities and community values
• Screening and evaluating applicants
1 • Facilitating stakeholder engagement and gathering input regarding desired qualifications and leadership attributes
• Conducting preliminary interviews and background research • Assisting Human Resources with the interview processes and candidate evaluations • Coordinating reference checks and recruitment logistics

Utilizing a professional recruitment firm can significantly expand the reach of the City’s recruitment efforts while providing technical expertise and administrative support to the City Council during the hiring process.

With the current City Manager announcing their retirement, staff recommends initiating the recruitment process as soon as possible to minimize the potential for a leadership gap and ensure continuity in City operations and service delivery.

Following Council direction, staff solicited proposals from qualified executive recruitment firms with experience in municipal City Manager recruitments. The City received 6 proposals and evaluated such proposals based on qualifications, experience, recruitment methodology, and cost.

Based on the evaluation, staff is presenting an agreement for Council approval with Bob Murray and Associates.

Bob Murray and Associates is a public sector executive search firm specializing in leadership positions that report directly to elected boards and councils. The firm understands the unique expectations, governance dynamics, and political awareness required for these roles. Their team includes experienced executive recruiters and former public-sector leaders who are committed to identifying candidates aligned with the City of Marina’s goals, values, and organizational culture, including the City’s commitment to attracting qualified, diverse candidates. With more than 34 years of experience and a professional network of over 40,000 public sector professionals and organizations, the firm has established a strong reputation for successfully placing high-quality candidates and maintaining long-term client relationships.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no impact to the Fiscal Year 25/26 budget as this will be funded through salary savings.

CONCLUSION:

This request is submitted for City Council consideration and approval.

Respectfully submitted,

____________________________
Belinda Varela, Director, Human Resources & Risk Management City of Marina

REVIEWED/CONUR:

____________________________
Layne Long
City Manager
City of Marina

Attachments:

Exhibit A – Proposal Submitted by Bob Murray and Associates Exhibit B – Agreement
2 RESOLUTION NO. 2026-

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA APPROVING

AGREEMENT WITH BOB MURRAY AND ASSOCIATES FOR RECRUITMENT

SERVICES

WHEREAS, in February of 2026, the City Manager announced his retirement; and,

WHEREAS, the City searched for specialized recruitment service firms for City Manager recruitments; and,

WHEREAS, under the recommended and proposed agreement, Bob Murray and Associates will provide to the City of Marina, recruitment services to fill the upcoming City Manager vacancy; and;

WHEREAS, the contract with Bob Murray and Associates, proposes Valerie Gaeta Phillips as the lead recruiter; and,

WHEREAS, Valerie Gaeta Phillips has extensive experience in the industry and specialized in recruiting for City Manager and other executive level positions.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Marina do hereby:

1. Adopting Resolution No. 2026- approving an agreement with Bob Murray and Associates to provide recruitment services to the City of Marina; and

2. Authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement

PASSED AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Marina at a regular meeting duly held on the 17th day of March 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

__________________________
Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor
ATTEST:

___________________________
Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk
3 A Proposal to Conduct an Executive Recruitment
for the Position of

CITY MANAGER
on behalf of the
1544 Eureka Road, Suite 180
Roseville, CA 95661
(916) 784-9080
(916) 784-1985 fax

EXHIBIT A
4 February 25, 2026

Mayor Bruce Carlos Delgado and
Members of City Council
City of Marina
211 Hillcrest Ave.

Marina, CA 93933

Submitted via email to: [email protected]

Dear Mayor Delgado & Members of City Council:

Bob Murray & Associates is pleased to submit a proposal to conduct the City Manager recruitment for the City of Marina. The following details our unique qualifications and describes our systematic—yet flexible—method of identifying, recruiting, and screening outstanding candidates on your behalf. Bob Murray & Associates is proud to offer straightforward, all-in pricing, eliminating surprises and making the experience simple and stress-free. This proposal includes information on our proven process, a timeline, and a guarantee.

As the premier public sector executive search firm specializing in positions that report directly to elected boards /councils, we understand the unique dynamics, high expectations, and political acumen required of leaders in these critical roles. We don’t just fill positions—we ensure the candidates we present to City of Marina are well-aligned with your organization’s goals, values, and culture. Our team is composed of experienced executive recruiters and former public -sector executives —professionals who are passionate about public service and attuned to current trends in government leadership. With over 34 years of experience and a network of more than 40,000 professionals and organizations, we’ve built a strong reputation for delivering exceptional candidates and achieving repeat success with our clients.

Bob Murray & Associates recognizes that we work at the pleasure of the City Council and our job is to facilitate the Council in finding the City’s next City Manager. Our best practice is to establish a strong partnership with the Council, to ensure the pla cement of a City Manager who is ideally suited to its needs. In developing this collaborative approach, we will seek the opportunity to meet with the council members individually to discuss their expectations for the City’s new City Manager. The feedback r eceived from the council members will be essential in providing guidance when recruiting and screening candidates for the position.

Current and recent recruitments we have completed similar in scope to your upcoming search include the following:

EXHIBIT A
5 2026
Lemon Grove, CA (City manager) –
current
South Lake Tahoe, CA (City Manager) –
current
Pacifica, CA (City Manager) – current
Sausalito, CA (City Manager) – current
Concord, CA (City Manager) – current
Santa Rosa, CA (City Manager)
Monterey, CA (City Manager)
Eugene, OR (City Manager)
Cathedral City, CA (City Manager)
Hanford, CA (City Manager)

2025
Hayward, CA (City Manager)
Apple Valley, CA (Town Manager)
Davis, CA (City Manager)
Live Oak, CA (City Manager)
Oakdale, CA (City Manager)
Fowler, CA (City Manager)
Louisville, CO (City Manager)
Manhattan Beach, CA (Deputy City
Manager)
2024
Vernon, CA (City Administrator)
Folsom, CA (City Manager)
Murrieta, CA (City Manager)
Aliso Viejo, CA (City Manager)
Manhattan Beach, CA (City Manager)
Emeryville, CA (City Manager)
Reno, NV (City Manager)
Clovis, CA (City Manager)
Clayton, CA (City Manager)
Vancouver, WA (City Manager)
Orinda, CA (City Manager)
Pinole, CA (City Manager)
Novato, CA (City Manager)
Saratoga, CA (City Manager)
Sparks, NV (City Manager)
Salinas, CA (City Manager)
Pacific Grove, CA (City Manager)
Marin County, CA (County Administrator)

We are also very familiar with the region having recently completed the following recruitments in your area:

2026
Monterey, CA (City Manager)

2025
Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority, CA (General Manager) Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District, CA (General Manager) Salinas, CA (Assistant City Manager)
Marina, CA (Assistant City Manager)
County of Monterey, CA (Public Defender)
County of Monterey, CA (Assistant Director of Social Services)

2024
Salinas, CA (City Manager)
Salinas, CA (Chief of Police)
County of Monterey, CA (County Counsel)
Pacific Grove, CA (Police Chief)
Pacific Grove, CA (City Manager)

EXHIBIT A
6 We work as a team on every search at Bob Murray & Associates. Your Project Lead would be Valerie Gaeta Phillips who would not only direct and supervise the project team from beginning to end but also serve as the Recruiter for the project.

To learn first -hand about the quality of our services and why the majority of our engagements come from repeat and referred clients, we invite you to contact the references listed on page 14 of the attached proposal.

We look forward to your favorable consideration of our qualifications. Please do not hesitate to contact us at (916) 784-9080 with any questions.

Sincerely,

Valerie Gaeta Phillips
President, Bob Murray & Associates

EXHIBIT A
7 TABLE OF CONTENTS
THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS ................................ ................................ ........2 STEP 1 DEVELOP THE CANDIDATE PROFILE ........................................................ 2 STEP 2 DESIGN/DISTRIBUTE BROCHURE AND ADVERTISEMENTS ........................ 3 Reaching Diverse Candidates ...................................................................... 4 STEP 3 RECRUIT CANDIDATES ............................................................................ 4 STEP 4 SCREEN CANDIDATES ............................................................................. 5 STEP 5 CONDUCT PRELIMINARY INTERVIEWS ...................................................... 5 STEP 6 SEARCH PUBLIC RECORDS ...................................................................... 5 STEP 7 MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................... 5 STEP 8 FACILITATE FINAL INTERVIEWS ................................................................ 6 STEP 9 CONDUCT BACKGROUND AND REFERENCE CHECKS ............................. 6 STEP 10 ASSIST IN NEGOTIATIONS ..................................................................... 7 COMPLETE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANCE ................................ ................ 7 COSTS AND GUARANTEE ................................ ................................ .............. 8 PROFESSIONAL FEE AND EXPENSES ................................................................... 8 Optional Services ........................................................................................... 8 GUARANTEE ....................................................................................................... 9 RECRUITMENT SCHEDULE ................................ ................................ .......... 10 FIRM PROFILE ................................ ................................ ................................ 11 REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ................................ . 14

EXHIBIT A
8 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 2

THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS

Bob Murray & Associates’ recruiters are specialists in finding positive placements and providing security and fairness to candidates and clients while ensuring the integrity of the search process. Outlined below are the steps in our proven recruitment process, refined through our 34+ years of experience in executive recruiting.

STEP 1 DEVELOP THE CANDIDATE PROFILE

Our understanding of the City of Marina’s needs will be key to a successful search.

Valerie Gaeta Phillips will meet virtually with the City Council and key stakeholders to learn as much as possible about the ideal candidate for the City Manager position. Key stakeholders often include:

• Council/Board Members – up to five virtual one -on-one meeting s with the Recruiter
• Internal Stakeholders (e.g. Department Heads) – up to two virtual group meetings with the Recruiter
• External Stakeholders (e.g. Chamber of Commerce, Community Groups) – one virtual one-on-one or group meeting with the Recruiter

Internal and External Stakeholders

We find that many of our clients value a recruitment process that opens the opportunity for employees, community members, business leaders, and organization representatives to provide input regarding the ideal candidate. Our recruiters are skilled in virtually facilitating group staff meetings, forums for the business community, and/or town hall meetings that provide for equitable involvement from a variety of constituencies.

If the City of Marina desires, we will work with the City Council to create a customized virtual community and/or staff input process. Please note: Virtual facilitation of stakeholder meetings is included in the professional fee. On-site Recruiter facilitation is available for an additional fee – please refer to “Costs and Guarantee” on page 7 for pricing information.

Online Stakeholder Surveys

Sometimes clients are seeking input from a wider range of stakeholders —such as community members, business leaders, and organization representatives —online surveys are ideal to solicit input regarding qualities of the ideal candidate. Our experienced recruiters excel at craftin g targeted, thoughtful, open -ended questions and can design a customized survey, providing a link for easy sharing on your website.

After closing, your dedicated Recruitment Coordinator will send you the survey

EXHIBIT A
9 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 3 response data for your review and analysis. This proposal includes one Online Survey.

Additional Online Surveys are available under Optional Services (please refer to page 8).

We want to become familiar with the values and culture of the organization, as well as to understand the current and future issues, challenges, and opportunities in the City of Marina.

Ms. Gaeta Phillips will review and help define the City’s wish -list regarding the ideal candidate’s personality, management style, knowledge, skills, and abilities and will work with the City to identify expectations regarding education and experience. The City Council and your Recruiter will discuss compensation, benefits, and other key information necessary to ensure that outstanding candidates are attracted to this opportunity. The profile we develop together at this stage will drive subsequent recruitment efforts.

STEP 2 DESIGN/DISTRIBUTE BROCHURE AND ADVERTISEMENTS

Your Recruiter and your dedicated Recruitment Coordinator will use the candidate profile developed with the City of Marina to create a professional recruitment brochure, with the assistance of our professional graphic designer . The four-page, full-color brochure will describe the community, organization, position, ideal candidate, and compensation and will include pictures provided by the City of Marina that you feel best represent your organization and your community.

Upon your approval, your Recruiter will send the brochure by email (and postal mail if desired) to a targeted audience, personally inviting potential candidates to apply for the City Manager position. We will also place the recruitment brochure on our website, which attracts over 11,000 unique hits weekly and is a trusted resource for candidates seeking executive and professional positions. Two sample brochures are included in this proposal package for your reference.

Your Recruiter will also design an effective advertising campaign appropriate for the City Manager recruitment. Our broadest outreach comes through our active social media involvement on LinkedIn as well as our monthly newsletter where upcoming and current positions are featured. Sources such as Western City Magazine, PublicCEO, and the Careers in Government website will be used to reach an extensive local government audience, while position-specific postings will be chosen to attract candidates who have built their careers in and are committed to the City Management field.

Suggested City Manager -specific advertising sources for the City of Marina’s search include but are not limited to:

EXHIBIT A
10 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 3 California City Management Foundation
International City County Management Association
League of Women in Government
National League of Cities
League of California Cities

Bob Murray & Associates does not typically place ads with job aggregators or general job posting sites such as CareerBuilder, Monster, or Indeed, as we have found that the broad reach of these sites does not necessarily lead to quality candidates for executive and professional positions.

Reaching Diverse Candidates

Bob Murray & Associates, a woman - and minority -owned business, is proud of its commitment to attracting and placing diverse candidates . Nearly 50% of our last 100 placements were women; Hispanic placements 25%; African American placements 13%; Asian placements 21%; and Native American placements at 1%. Not only do we place advertisements with websites designed to attract minority and female candidates, but our President, Valerie Phillips, is a member herself of many diversity -focused organizations including the Local Government Hispanic Network, the Leag ue of Women in Government, the Professional Women’s Network, Mexican Professionals, and Women Leading Government. She networks frequently with fellow members to gain insight into which potential candidates are leaders in their field.

Your Recruiter will seek to reach candidates in communities and organizations with demographic profiles and populations served like that of the City of Marina, to maximize the potential for individuals from a wide variety of backgrounds, cultures, and life experiences to be considered for the City Manager position.

STEP 3 RECRUIT CANDIDATES

The strongest candidates are often those who are successful and content in their current positions and need to be sold on a new opportunity. Our extensive network of contacts, developed through over 2,100 successful placements, is a primary source for identifying and obtaining referrals for these candidates. Our in -house database of 40,000 current and former executive and professional candidates is a valuable resource that can only be built over time —time that we have invested into perfecting our process fo r finding the right candidates for our clients. Our aggressive outreach efforts are focused on phone calls to personally invite potential applicants, answer questions, and allay any reservations, and these efforts are essential to the success of the City Manager recruitment.

EXHIBIT A
11 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 4 STEP 4 SCREEN CANDIDATES

Following the closing date for the recruitment, your Recruiter will screen all resumes we have received, using the criteria established in the candidate profile as a basis upon which to narrow the field of candidates. Internal candidates receive sensitive consideration, and your Recruiter will discuss with the City Council how the City of Marina wishes to proceed with these candidates.

STEP 5 CONDUCT PRELIMINARY INTERVIEWS

Ms. Gaeta Phillips will personally interview the top 10 to 15 candidates from the resume screening, with the goal of determining which candidates have the greatest potential to succeed in your organization. To reduce travel -related expenses to our clients and increase efficiency in the search process, these interviews are typically conducted via Zoom, Teams, or other convenient videoconferencing applications.

STEP 6 SEARCH PUBLIC RECORDS

Under the direction of your Recruiter , your dedicated Recruitment Coordinator will conduct a review of published print and online articles for each recommended candidate. Sources include Lexis-Nexis™, Google, social media, and our contacts in the field. This will alert your Recruiter to any further detailed inquiries we may need to make before our recommendations are finalized.

STEP 7 MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on our findings during the preliminary interview process, your Recruiter will meet with the City Council virtually or on site to share the complete applicant list and recommend a limited number of candidates for your further consideration. Your Recruiter will make specific recommendations and will help facilitate discussions regarding the candidate pool, but the final determination of interviewees will be up to you.

We typically recommend 6-8 candidates that we feel best match your expectations and prepare a detailed report on each candidate. This virtual “Recommended Finalist” eBook is provided to each member of the decision-making body and includes:

Candidate list with Recommended Finalists identified in Group 1 and Group 2 (primary and secondary recommendations), as well as Internal candidates Summary of experience and education for each Recommended Finalist candidate
Complete cover letter and resume for each Recommended Finalist candidate List of Other Applicants (those who did not meet minimum qualifications or were otherwise unsuitable, based on our screening process)

EXHIBIT A
12 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 5 Bob Murray & Associates maintains all search records for a period of seven (7) years following each recruitment, and we are happy to forward cover letters and resumes for each applicant by postal mail or email as soon as the recruitment closes to new applications.

STEP 8 FACILITATE PANEL INTERVIEWS

Our years of experience will be invaluable as we help you develop an interview process that objectively assesses the qualifications of each candidate. We will work with the City of Marina to craft and implement an interview approach that fits your needs. This may include panel and/or individual interviews by the City Council ; key stakeholders, community/employee interview panels ; writing and presentation samples ; meet-and- greets; or other specialized process elements your Recruiter helps the City of Marina to design.

Ms. Gaeta Phillips will be present on -site during the panel interviews to facilitate as necessary during the process and to guide discussion to consensus regarding final candidates. Bound interview books will be provided for each interview panel member containing:

Recruitment brochure with candidate profile
Interview schedule
Suggested interview questions
Experience summary, cover letter, resume, and rating form for each candidate
Ranking forms for use during the panel interview process

We will work closely with your staff to coordinate and schedule interviews. Our goal is to ensure that each candidate has a positive experience, as the way the entire process is conducted will influence the final candidates’ perception of your organization.

STEP 9 CONDUCT BACKGROUND AND REFERENCE CHECKS

Ms. Gaeta Phillips and your Recruitment Coordinator will conduct detailed reference checks for up to two (2) final candidates . To gain an accurate and honest appraisal of the candidates’ strengths and weaknesses, we will talk candidly with people who have direct knowledge of their work and management style. In addition to gaining a 360- degree view of candidates from the perspective of their supervisors, subordinates and peers for the past several years, we will make a point of speaking confidentially to individuals who may have further insight into a candidate’s abilities but who may not be on their preferred list of contacts.

EXHIBIT A
13 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 6 Your Recruitment Coordinator will work with the two (2) final candidates and our professional backgrounding firm, HireRight, to conduct credit, civil litigation, and motor vehicle record checks and verify candidates’ degrees.

STEP 10 ASSIST IN NEGOTIATIONS

We recognize the critical importance of successful negotiations and can serve as your representative during this process . Ms. Gaeta Phillips knows what other organizations have done to put deals together with great candidates and what the current market is like for City Manager positions in organizations like the City of Marina’s. Your Recruiter will be available to advise you regarding current approaches to difficult issues , such as housing and relocation. We will represent your interests and advise the chosen candidate and you regarding salary, benefits , and employment agreements , with the goal of putting together a deal that results in the appointment of your chosen candidate.

With our proven experience and vested interest in a positive outcome, we can turn a very difficult aspect of the recruitment into one that is straightforward and agreeable for all parties involved.

COMPLETE ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANCE

We receive many unsolicited testimonials each year from clients and candidates alike noting our prompt, considerate, accurate, and professional service during the search process. Throughout the recruitment , in time intervals that suit the City of Marina, we will provide you with updates on the status of the search and attend to all administrative details on your behalf.

Candidates receive immediate acknowledgement of their applications, as well as personal phone calls and/or emails (as appropriate) advising them of their status at each critical point in the recruitment. Candidates who receive preliminary or final interviews and are not chosen to move forward in the interview process will receive personal calls from your Recruiter on behalf of the City of Marina.

It is our internal company standard that all inquiries from clients and candidates receive a response within the same business day whenever possible, and certainly within 24 hours if the inquiry is received during the work week. Your Recruiter will be available to the City of Marina by office phone, cell phone, and email at any time to ensure a smooth and stress-free recruitment process.

EXHIBIT A
14 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 7

COSTS AND GUARANTEE

PROFESSIONAL FEE AND EXPENSES

The all-inclusive professional services fee for conducting the City Manager recruitment on behalf of the City of Marina is $33,000. Services provided for in this fee consist of all steps outlined in this proposal , including design and distribution of the recruitment brochure, advertising, marketing and promotion, administrative support, public records research, comprehensive background reporting on the final candidate s, postage, technology, and three days of on-site meetings. This proposal is valid for 60 days from the date of the proposal.

Optional Services are listed below and ar e in addition to the professional services fee.

Expense reimbursement for Consultant travel related to additional on-site meeting days is billed at the actual rate (airfare/mileage, lodging) and is the responsibility of the City of Marina.

The professional fee does not limit the amount of time invested by Bob Murray & Associates in promoting a successful outcome for this project. In fact, our mission for this project is to ensure we assist in identifying the right candidate for the City of Marina.

Therefore, your Recruiter will contact the City at the first anniversary of the placement to confirm an effective transition has occurred.

Optional Services

Additional virtual stakeholder meetings: $250/meeting
Additional on-site meeting days: $1,500/day/Consultant, plus travel expenses Online Surveys : $500/each (includes preparing recommended questions, preparing and sharing the survey link, closing the survey, and sending the survey response data for your review and analysis
Additional background checks: $300/candidate
Additional reference checks: $500/candidate
Additional hires: $9,000/candidate

EXHIBIT A
15 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 8

GUARANTEE

In the event a candidate recommended by our firm resigns or is terminated within the first 12 months of employment, Bob Murray & Associates will provide the City of Marina with professional services to secure a replacement. Services will be provided at no cost, aside from the following reimbursable expenses incurred on the City of Marina’s behalf during the new search:

Brochure design and distribution ($695 reprint only, $1,275 edit/reflow/reprint)(if needed)
Advertising actual costs (estimated at $2,975)
Public records search for all new candidates ($500)
Background Checks ($300/candidate)
Reference Checks ($500/candidate)
Consultant travel reimbursement (if travel is needed)
Plus any applicable Optional Services, if desired

In the event that a placement is not made from the initial recruitment, Bob Murray & Associates will provide professional services to conduct one additional recruitment.

Services will be provided at no cost. However, the City of Marina will be responsible for the reimbursable expenses as noted above.

We are confident in our ability to recruit outstanding candidates and do not expect the City to find it necessary to exercise this provision of our proposal.

EXHIBIT A
16 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 9

RECRUITMENT SCHEDULE

We are prepared to start work on this assignment upon receipt of a signed professional services agreement or other written, authorized notification . A full search can be completed in 12-14 weeks from the date of initial meetings with our client.

The final recruitment schedule will be determined in collaboration with City of Marina.

EXHIBIT A
17 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 10

FIRM PROFILE

OUR STAFF

Bob Murray & Associates is a small firm focusing exclusively on executive search services. We have a team of seventeen (17):

Bob Murray, Founder
Valerie Gaeta Phillips, President
Gary Phillips, Executive Vice President
Joel Bryden, Vice President
Yasmin Beers, Senior Executive Recruiter
Adele Fresé, Senior Executive Recruiter
Stacy Stevenson, Senior Executive Recruiter
Jon Lewis, Executive Recruiter
Stephanie Dietz, Executive Recruiter
Melanie Richardson, Executive Recruiter
Jeff Mori, Executive Recruiter
Michael Ishii, Executive Recruiter
Ian Schmutzler, Executive Recruiter
Alexandria Huesca, Recruitment and Operations Manager
Kathy Lolas, Senior Recruitment Coordinator
Grace Marshall, Senior Recruitment Coordinator
Steph Souza, Recruitment Coordinator

Please see your lead recruiter’s biography below:

VALERIE GAETA PHILLIPS, PRESIDENT AND RECRUITER

Ms. Gaeta Phillips has over 18 years of recruiting experience, including more than a decade of recent experience in executive search for public, private, and startup companies nationwide. Since joining Bob Murray & Associates, Valerie has completed over 16 0 searches in a diverse range of fields, including city and general management, planning, finance, human resources, transportation, communication and public relations, community and economic development, information technology, parks and recreation, and operations. She has recruited at all levels of municipal and non -profit organizations, from technicians and engineers to Executive Directors and Chief Executive Officers.

Valerie is valued for her passion for finding and retaining the most outstanding candidates for even the most difficult or untraditional assignments and for her commitment to her clients’ success; she is also active in a variety of industry organizations and in diversity-focused associations. Valerie is called upon often to serve

EXHIBIT A
18 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 11 as an expert speaker on topics such as managing one’s online reputation, diversity issues in municipal and non-profit leadership, and how to identify a positive placement for the organizational culture.

Ms. Gaeta Phillips, along with Executive Vice President Gary Phillips, has a passion for helping people, evidenced by fundraising, sponsorship, and involvement in raising awareness for organizations such as Autism Speaks, the UC Davis M.I.N.D. Institute, and the Northern California Special Olympics.

EXHIBIT A
19 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 12

CORPORATION

Bob Murray & Associates was founded in May 2000 and operated under the corporation name MBN Services, Inc. until June 2014; our new corporation name is GVP Ventures, Inc., incorporated in California in 2014. Contact information for the corporation and the firm is as follows:

GVP Ventures, Inc. OR Bob Murray & Associates
1544 Eureka Road, Ste. 180
Roseville, CA 95661
(916) 784-9080
[email protected]

Our corporation and firm are financially sound (and have been so since 2000), with documentation from our accountant available to your organization prior to final execution of a professional service agreement. We have never been involved in any litigation, aside from our personnel serving as expert witnesses when called to do so.

PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS

Our firm, represented by either our President or our Executive Vice President, are involved in the following organizations to remain engaged with current and future issues relevant to the work we conduct on behalf of clients like City of Marina:

California Special Districts Association
California City Management Foundation (CCMF)
Engaging Local Government Leaders (ELGL)
International City/County Management Association (ICMA) International Network of Asian Public Administrators (I-NAPA) League of California Cities
League of Women in Government
Municipal Management Association of Northern California (MMANC) Municipal Management Association of Southern California (MMASC) National Forum for Black Public Administrators (NFBPA)

Members of our leadership team not only attend events sponsored by these associations but are also frequently called upon to serve as panel members and to provide specialized lectures regarding industry -specific issues. Recent and upcoming speaking engagements and trainings provided by our staff include:

“Role of the Chief” class, annually presented by Jon Lewis on behalf of the California Police Chiefs Association;
MMANC and MMASC annual mock interviews;
Annual League of California Cities Booth; and
Annual League of California Cities City Manager’s Conference (City Manager hosted event).

EXHIBIT A
20 Bob Murray & Associates Proposal for the City of Marina Page 13

REFERENCES

Clients and candidates are the best testament to our ability to conduct quality searches.

Clients for whom Bob Murray & Associates has recently conducted similar searches are listed below:

CLIENT: City of Folsom, CA
POSITION: City Manager
REFERENCE: MS. Allsion Garcia, Human Resources Director (916) 461-6050

CLIENT: City of Salinas, CA
POSITION: City Manager
POSITION: Chief of Police
REFERENCE: Ms. Marina Horta-Gallegos, Human Resources Director (831-758-7417)
Ms. Kimbley Craig, Former Mayor
(831) 758-7201

CLIENT: City of Aliso Viejo, CA
POSITION: City Manager
REFERENCE: Councilmember Tiffany Ackley
(949) 425-2510

CLIENT: City of Monterey, CA
POSITION: City Manager
REFERENCE : Mayor Tyller Williamson
(831) 760-5173

We appreciate the City of Marina’s consideration of our proposal and look forward to working with you.

EXHIBIT A
21 1

CITY OF MARINA

AGREEMENT FOR RECRUITMENT SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into on March 18, 2026, by and between the City of Marina, a California charter city, hereinafter referred to as the "City," and Bob Murray and Associates, an Executive Search Firm, hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor." City and Contractor are sometimes individually referred to as "party" and collectively as "parties" in this Agreement.

Recitals
A. City desires to retain contractor to provide recruitment services for the Fire Chief position, hereinafter referred to as the "Project."
B. Contractor represents and warrants that it has the qualifications, experience and personnel necessary to properly perform the services as set forth herein.

C. City desires to retain Contractor to provide such services.

Terms and Conditions
For of good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged and in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, City and Contractor agree to the following terms and conditions:

1. Scope of Work.
(a) Contractor is hereby hired and retained by the City to work in a cooperative manner with the City to fully and adequately perform those services set forth in Exhibit “A” attached hereto (“Scope of Work”) and by this reference made a part hereof. With prior written notice to Contractor, City may elect to delete certain tasks of the Scope of Work at its sole discretion.

Attached as Exhibit A.
(b) Contractor shall perform all such work with skill and diligence and pursuant to generally accepted standards of practice in effect at the time of performance. Contractor shall provide corrective services without charge to the City for work which fails to meet these standards and which is reported to Contractor in writing within sixty days of discovery. Should Contractor fail or refuse to perform promptly its obligations under this Agreement, the City may render or undertake the performance thereof and the Contractor shall be liable for any expenses thereby incurred.
(c) If services under this Agreement are to be performed by a design professional, as that term is defined in California Civil Code §2782.8(b)(2), design professional certifies that all design professional services shall be provided by a person or persons duly licensed by the State of California to provide the type of services described in Section 1(a). By delivery of completed work, design professional certifies that the work conforms to the requirements of this Agreement and all applicable federal, state and local laws, and the professional standard of care in California.

EXHIBIT B
22 2

(d) Contractor is responsible for making an independent evaluation and judgment of all relevant conditions affecting performance of the work, including without limitation site conditions, existing facilities, seismic, geologic, soils, hydrologic, geographic, climatic conditions, applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations and all other contingencies or considerations.

(e) City shall cooperate with Contractor and will furnish all information data, records and reports existing and available to City to enable Contractor to carry out work outlined in Exhibit “A." Contractor shall be entitled to reasonably rely on information, data, records and reports furnished by the City, however, the City makes no warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of any such information, data, records or reports available to it and provided to Contractor which were furnished to the City by a third party. Contractor shall have a duty to bring to the City's attention any deficiency or error it may discover in any information provided to the Contractor by the City or a third party.

2. Term of Agreement & Commencement of Work.

(a) Unless otherwise provided, the term of this Agreement shall begin on the date of its full execution and shall expire on December 31 , 2026, unless extended by amendment or terminated earlier as provided herein. The date of full execution is defined as the date when all of the following events have occurred:

(i) This Agreement has been approved by the City's Council or by the board, officer or employee authorized to give such approval; and

(ii) The office of the City Attorney has indicated in writing its approval of this Agreement as to form; and

(iii) This Agreement has been signed on behalf of Contractor by the person or persons authorized to bind the Contractor hereto; and.

(iv) This Agreement has been signed on behalf of the City by the person designated to so sign by the City's Council or by the officer or employee authorized to enter into this Contract and is attested to by the Marina City Clerk.

(b) Contractor shall commence work on the Project on or by March 20 , 2026. This Agreement may be extended upon written agreement of both parties. Contractor may be required to prepare a written schedule for the work to be performed, which schedule shall be approved by the City and made a part of Exhibit A, and to perform the work in accordance with the approved schedule.

3. Compensation.

(a) City liability for compensation to Contractor under this Agreement shall only be to the extent of the present appropriation to fund this Agreement. For services to be provided under this Agreement City shall compensate Contractor in an amount not to exceed thirty-three thousand dollars ($33,000.00) in accordance with the provisions of this Section.

(b) Invoice(s) in a format and on a schedule acceptable to the City shall be submitted to and be reviewed and verified by the Project Administrator (see Section 5(a)) and forwarded to the City's Finance Department for payment. City shall notify Contractor of exceptions or disputed items and their dollar value within fifteen days of receipt. Payment of the undisputed amount of the invoice will typically be made approximately thirty days after the invoice is submitted to the Finance Department.

EXHIBIT B
23 3

(c) Contractor will maintain clearly identifiable, complete and accurate records with respect to all costs incurred under this Agreement on an industry recognized accounting basis.

Contractor shall make available to the representative of City all such books and records related to this Agreement, and the right to examine, copy and audit the same during regular business hours upon 24-hour's notice for a period of four years from the date of final payment under this Agreement.

(d) Contractor shall not receive any compensation for Extra Work without the prior written authorization of City. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work that is determined by the City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project but which is not included within the Scope of Work and which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement.

(e) Expenses not otherwise addressed in the Scope of Services or the Fee Schedule incurred by Contractor in performing services under this Agreement shall be reviewed and approved in advance by the Project Administrator (Section 5(a)), be charged at cost and reimbursed to Contractor.

(f) There shall be no charge for transportation within Monterey, Santa Cruz and San Benito Counties required for the performance of the services under this Agreement; travel to other locations must be approved in writing and in advance by the City, mileage will be charged at the then current standard rate for business travel as set by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service for such approved travel.

4. Termination or Suspension.

(a) This Agreement may be terminated in whole or in part in writing by either party in the event of a substantial failure by the other party to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement through no fault of the terminating party, provided that no termination may be effected unless the other party is given (1) not less than ten days written notice of intent to terminate, and (2) provided an opportunity for consultation with the terminating party prior to termination.

(b) If termination for default is effected by the City, an equitable adjustment in the price provided for in this Agreement shall be made, but (1) no amount shall be allowed for anticipated profit on unperformed services or other work, and (2) any payment due the Contractor at the time of termination may be adjusted to cover any additional costs to the City because of the Contractor's default. If after the termination for failure of Contractor to fulfill its contractual obligations, it is determined that the Contractor had not failed to fulfill contractual obligations, the termination shall be deemed to have been for the convenience of the City.

(c) The City may terminate or suspend this Agreement at any time for its convenience upon not less than thirty days prior written notice to Contractor. Not later than the effective date of such termination or suspension, Contractor shall discontinue all affected work and deliver all work product and other documents, whether completed or in progress, to the City.

(d) If termination for default is effected by the Contractor or if termination for convenience is effected by the City, the equitable adjustment shall include a reasonable profit for services or other work performed. The equitable adjustment for termination shall provide for payment to the Contractor for services rendered and expenses incurred prior to the termination, in addition to termination settlement costs reasonably incurred by Contractor relating to written commitments that were executed prior to the termination.

EXHIBIT B
24 4

5. Project Administrator, Project Manager & Key Personnel.

(a) City designates as its Project Administrator Belinda Varela, Human Resources Director who shall have the authority to act for the City under this Agreement. The Project Administrator or his/her authorized representative shall represent the City in all matters pertaining to the work to be performed pursuant to this Agreement.

(b) Contractor designates Valerie Gaeta Phillips , Executive Recruiter, as its Project Manager who shall coordinate all phases of the Project. The Project manager shall be available to City at all reasonable times during the Agreement term.

(c) Contractor warrants that it will continuously furnish the necessary personnel to complete the Project on a timely basis as contemplated by this Agreement. Contractor, at the sole discretion of City, shall remove from the Project any of its personnel assigned to the performance of services upon written request of City. Contractor has represented to City that certain key personnel will perform and coordinate the work under this Agreement. Should one or more of such personnel become unavailable, Contractor may substitute other personnel of at least equal competence upon written approval of the City. In the event that City and Contractor cannot agree as to the substitution of key personnel, City shall be entitled to terminate this Agreement for cause.

6. Delegation of Work.

(a) If Contractor utilizes any subcontractors, consultants, persons, employees or firms having applicable expertise to assist Contractor in performing the services under this Agreement, Contractor shall obtain City's prior written approval to such employment.

Contractor's contract with any subcontractor shall contain a provision making the subcontract subject to all provisions of this Agreement. Contractor will be fully responsible and liable for payment for, administration, completion, presentation, and quality of all work performed. If such persons are utilized, they shall be charged at cost. City reserves its right to employ other contractors in connection with this Project.

(b) If the work hereunder is performed by a design professional, design professional shall be directly involved with performing the work or shall work through his, her or its employees. The design professional's responsibilities under this Agreement shall not be delegated. The design professional shall be responsible to the City for acts, errors or omissions of his, her or its subcontractors. Negligence of subcontractors or agents retained by the design professional is conclusively deemed to be the negligence of the design professional if not adequately corrected by the design professional. Use of the term subcontractor in any other provision of this Agreement shall not be construed to imply authorization for a design professional to use subcontractors for performance of any professional service under this Agreement.

(c) The City is an intended beneficiary of any work performed by a subcontractor for purposes of establishing a duty of care between the subcontractor and the City.

7. Skill of Employees . Contractor shall ensure that any employees or agents providing services under this Agreement possess the requisite skill, training and experience to properly perform such services.

EXHIBIT B
25 5

8. Confidential and Proprietary Information. In the course of performing services under this Agreement Contractor may obtain, receive, and review confidential or proprietary documents, information or materials that are and shall remain the exclusive property of the City.

Should Contractor undertake the work on behalf of other agencies, entities, firms or persons relating to the matters described in the Scope of Work, it is expressly agreed by Contractor that any such confidential or proprietary information or materials shall not be provided or disclosed in any manner to any of Contractor’s other clients, or to any other third party, without the City’s prior express written consent.

9. Ownership of Data . Unless otherwise provided for herein, all documents, material, data, drawings, plans, specifications, computer data files, basis for design calculations, engineering notes, and reports originated and prepared by Contractor, or any subcontractor of any tier, under this Agreement shall be and remain the property of the City for its use in any manner it deems appropriate. Contractor agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in the City and waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or intellectual property rights in favor of the City. Contractor shall provide two (2) sets of reproducible of the above -cited items, except for the computer data files which shall consist of one (1) set. Contractor shall use all reasonable efforts to ensure that any electronic files provided to the City will be compatible with the City's computer hardware and software. Contractor makes no representation as to long -term compatibility, usability or readability of the format resulting from the use of software application packages, operating systems or computer hardware differing from those in use by the City at the commencement of this Agreement. Contractor shall be permitted to maintain copies of all such data for its files.

City acknowledges that its use of the work product is limited to the purposes contemplated by the Scope of Work and, should City use these products or data in connection with additions to the work required under this Agreement or for new work without consultation with and without additional compensation to Contractor, Contractor makes no representation as to the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the Scope of Work and shall have no liability or responsibility whatsoever in connection with such use which shall be at the City's sole risk. Any and all liability arising out of changes made by the City to Contractor's deliverables is waived against Contractor unless City has given Contractor prior written notice of the changes and has received Contractor's written consent to such changes.

10. Conflict of Interest.

(a) Contractor covenants that neither it, nor any officer or principal of its firm has or shall acquire any interest, directly or indirectly, which would conflict in any manner with the interests of the City or which would in any way hinder Contractor’s performance of services under this Agreement. Contractor further covenants that in the performance of this Agreement, no person having any such interest shall be employed by it as an officer, employee, agent or subcontractor without the express written consent of the City Manager. Contractor agrees to at all times avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance of any conflicts of interest with the interests of the City in the performance of this Agreement. Contractor shall represent the interest of the City in any discussion or negotiation.

(b) City understands and acknowledges that Contractor may be, as of the date of commencement of services under this Agreement, independently involved in the performance of non-related services for other governmental agencies and private parties. Contractor is unaware of any stated position of the City relative to such projects. Any future position of the City on such projects may result in a conflict of interest for purposes of this section.

EXHIBIT B
26 6

11. Disclosure. Contractor may be subject to the appropriate disclosure requirements of the California Fair Political Practices Act, as determined by the City Manager.

12. Non-Discrimination.

(a) During the performance of this Agreement the Contractor and its subcontractors shall comply with the applicable laws of the United States of America, the State of California and the City prohibiting discrimination and harassment. In performing this Agreement, Contractor shall not discriminate, harass, or allow harassment, against any employee or applicant for employment because of gender, gender expression, gender identity, genetic characteristics, sex, race, color, ancestry, religious creed, national origin, physical disability (including HIV and AIDS), medical condition (including cancer), mental disability, age, marital status, denial of family and medical care leave and denial of pregnancy disability leave , sexual orientation, military/veteran status and any other characteristics protected by state or federal law.

Contractor shall give written notice of its obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which it has a collective bargaining or other agreement. (b) Contractor shall include the provisions of this Section 12(a) in all subcontracts related to this Agreement.

13. Indemnification.

(a) Other than in the performance of design professional services by a design professional, which shall be solely as addressed by subsection (b) below, and to the full extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify, immediately defend (with independent counsel reasonably acceptable to the City) and hold harmless the City, its Council, boards, commissions, employees, officials and agents (collectively "Indemnified Parties" or in the singular "Indemnified Party") from and against any claims, losses, damages, penalties, fines and judgments, associated investigation and administrative expenses, and defense costs including but not limited to reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, expert witness fees and costs of alternate dispute resolution (collectively "Liabilities“), where same arise out of the performance of this Agreement by Contractor, its officers, employees, agents and sub - contractors. The duty to defend is a separate and distinct obligation from the Contractor’s duty to indemnify and Contractor shall be obligated to defend in all legal, equitable, administrative or special proceedings upon tender to the Contractor of any claim in any form or at any stage of an action or proceeding, whether or not liability is established and the obligation extends through final judgment including exhaustion of any appeals.. The Contractor’s obligation to indemnify applies unless it is finally determined that the liability was caused by the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of an indemnified party. If it is finally determined that liability is caused by the comparative active negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party, the Contractor’s indemnification obligation shall be reduced in proportion to the established comparative liability of the indemnified party.

(b) To the fullest extent permitted by law (including without limitation California Civil Code Sections 2782.8), when the services to be provided under this Agreement are design professional services to be performed by a design professional, as that term is defined by said section 2782.8(c)(2) (“Design Professional”) Design Professional shall indemnify, protect and hold harmless any Indemnified Party for all Liabilities regardless of nature or type that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Design Professional, or such acts or omissions of an officer, employee, agent or subcontractor of the Design Professional. Design Professional shall not have an immediate duty to defend an Indemnified Party, however, Design Professional’s obligation to indemnify (including reimbursing the cost to defend) and hold the Indemnified Parties harmless applies unless it is finally determined that the liability was caused by the sole active negligence or sole willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. If it is finally determined that liability was caused by the

EXHIBIT B
27 7

comparative active negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party the Design Professional’s indemnification obligation shall be reduced in direct proportion to the indemnified party’s proportionate percentage of fault. Within 30 days following Design Professional’s receipt of a properly presented written invoice Design Profession al shall satisfy its indemnification obligations and reimburse the Indemnified Party for the cost of reasonable attorney’s fees and defense costs incurred by the Indemnified Party to the same extent of Design Professional’s indemnity obligation herein. In no event shall the cost to defend charged to the Design Professional exceed the Design Professional’s proportionate percentage of fault.

(c) The provisions of this Section are not limited by the provisions of sections relating to insurance including provisions of any worker's compensation act or similar act. Contractor expressly waives its statutory immunity under such statues or laws as to City, its employees and officials. An allegation or determination of comparative active negligence or willful misconduct by an Indemnified Party unrelated to design professional services does not relieve Contractor from its separate and distinct obligation to defend City. Contractor agrees to obtain executed indemnity agreements with provisions identical to those set forth here in this section from each and every subcontractor, sub tier contractor or any other person or entity involved by, for, with or on behalf of Contractor in the performance or subject matter of this Agreement. In the event Contractor fails to obtain such indemnity obligations from others as required here, Contractor agrees to be fully responsible according to the terms of this section. Failure of City to monitor compliance with these requirements imposes no additional obligations on City and will in no way act as a waiver of any rights hereunder.

(d) If any action or proceeding is brought against any Indemnified Party by reason of any of the matters against which the Contractor has agreed to provide an immediate defense to any Indemnified Party, as provided above, Contractor, upon notice from the City, shall defend the Indemnified Party at Contractor's expense by independent counsel reasonably acceptable to the City. Unless otherwise provided above, an Indemnified Party need not have first paid for any of the matters to which it is entitled to indemnification in order to be so defended. Contractor may submit a claim to the City for reasonable defense costs (including attorney’s and expert fees) incurred in providing a defense of any Indemnified Party to the extent such defense costs arise under principals of comparative fault from the Indemnified Party’s active negligence, recklessness or willful misconduct.

(e) This obligation to indemnify and defend, as set forth herein, is binding on the successors, assigns, or heirs of Contractor and shall survive the termination of this Agreement or this Section.

14. Insurance.

(a) As a condition precedent to the effectiveness of this Agreement and without limiting Contractor's indemnification of the City, Contractor agrees to obtain and maintain in full force and effect at its own expense the insurance policies set forth in Exhibit “C” “Insurance” attached hereto and made a part hereof. Contractor shall furnish the City with original certificates of insurance, executed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf, along with copies of all required endorsements. All certificates and endorsements must be received and approved by the City before any work commences. All insurance policies shall be subject to approval by the City Attorney and Risk Manager as to form and content. Specifically, such insurance shall: (1) be endorsed to protect City as an additional insured for commercial general and business auto liability; (2) provide City prior notice of cancellation ; and (3) be primary with respect to City's insurance program. Contractor's insurance is not expected to respond to claims that may arise from the acts or omissions of the City.

EXHIBIT B
28 8

(b) City reserves the right at any time during the term of this Agreement to change the amounts and types of insurance required herein by giving Contractor ninety days advance written notice of such change. If such change should result in substantial additional cost of the Contractor, City agrees to negotiate additional compensation proportional to the increased benefit to City.

(c) All required insurance must be submitted and approved the City Attorney and Risk Manager prior to the inception of any operations by Contractor.

(d) The required coverage and limits are subject to availability on the open market at reasonable cost as determined by the City. Non availability or non affordability must be documented by a letter from Contractor's insurance broker or agency indicating a good faith effort to place the required insurance and showing as a minimum the names of the insurance carriers and the declinations or quotations received from each. Within the foregoing constraints, Contractor's failure to procure or maintain required insurance during the entire term of this Agreement shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement under which City may immediately suspend or terminate this Agreement or, at its discretion, procure or renew such insurance to protect City's interests and pay any and all premium in connection therewith and recover all monies so paid from Contractor.

(e) By signing this Agreement, Contractor hereby certifies that it is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 et seq ., of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Workers' Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provision of that Code, and that it will comply with such provisions at all such times as they may apply during the performance of the work pursuant to this Contract. Unless otherwise agreed, a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City is required.

15. Independent Contractor . The parties agree that Contractor, its officers, employees and agents, if any, shall be independent contractors with regard to the providing of services under this Agreement, and that Contractor's employees or agents shall not be considered to be employees or agents of the City for any purpose and will not be entitled to any of the benefits City provides for its employees. City shall make no deductions for payroll taxes or Social Security from amounts due Contractor for work or services provided under this Agreement.

This Agreement shall not constitute, and it is not intended to constitute, either party as an employer, employee, agent, partner or legal representative of the other party for any purpose, or give either party any right to supervise or direct the functions of the other party. Except as specifically provided herein, n either party shall have authority to act for or obligate the other party in any way or to extend any representation on behalf of the other party. Each party agrees to perform under this Agreement solely as an independent contractor and neither party shall have any right, power, or authority, nor shall they represent themselves as having any authority to assume, create, or incur any expense, liability or obligation, express or implied, on behalf of the other party for any purpose. Each party agrees not to permit its employees or agents to do anything that might be construed or interpreted as acts of the other party.

16. Claims for Labor and Materials . Contractor shall promptly pay when due all amounts payable for labor and materials furnished in the performance of this Agreement, so as to prevent any lien or other claim under any provision of law from arising against any City property (including reports, documents, and other tangible matter produced by the Contractor hereunder), against the Contractor's rights to payments hereunder, or against the City, and shall pay all amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such labor.

17. Discounts. Contractor agrees to offer the City any discount terms that are offered to its best customers for the goods and services to be provided herein, and apply such discounts to payment made under this Agreement which meet the discount terms.

EXHIBIT B
29 9

18. Cooperation; Further Acts . The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another, and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement.

19. Dispute Resolution . If any dispute arises between the parties as to proper interpretation or application of this Agreement, the parties shall first meet and confer in a good faith attempt to resolve the matter between themselves. If the dispute is not resolved by meeting and conferring, the matter shall be submitted for formal mediation to a mediator selected mutually by the parties. The expenses of such mediation shall be shared equally between the parties. If the dispute is not or cannot be resolved by mediation, the parties may mutually agree (but only as to those issues of the matter not resolved by mediation) to submit their dispute to arbitration. Before commencement of the arbitration, the parties may elect to have the arbitration proceed on an informal basis; however, if the parties are unable so to agree, then the arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association. The decision of the arbitrator shall be binding, unless within thirty days after issuance of the arbitrator’s written decision, any party files an action in court. Venue and jurisdiction for any such action between the parties shall lie in the Superior Court for the County of Monterey.

20. Compliance with Laws.

(a) Each party's performance hereunder shall comply with all applicable laws of the United States of America, the State of California and the City including but not limited to laws regarding health and safety, labor and employment, wage and hours and licensing laws which affect employees. This Agreement shall be governed by, enforced and interpreted under the laws of the State of California. Contractor must be in good standing and registered with the California Department of Industrial Relations in accordance with California labor Code section 1725.5 and shall comply with new, amended or revised laws, regulations or procedures that apply to the performance of this Agreement.

(b) If the Project is a "public work," or prevailing wages are otherwise required, Contractor shall comply with all provision of California Labor Code section 1720 et seq. , as applicable, and laws dealing with prevailing wages, apprentices and hours of work.

(c) Contractor represents that it has obtained and presently holds all permits and licenses necessary for performance hereunder, including a Business License required by the City's Business License Ordinance (Title 5 of the Marina Municipal Code) for which a business license tax is prescribed and assessed at the rate of two -tenths percent of gross receipts, in accordance with the provisions therein. For the term covered by this Agreement, the Contractor shall maintain or obtain as necessary, such permits and licenses and shall not allow them to lapse, be revoked or suspended.

21. Assignment or Transfer. This Agreement or any interest herein may not be assigned, hypothecated or transferred, either directly or by operation of law, without the prior written consent of the City. Any attempt to do so shall be null and void, and any assignees, hypothecates or transferees shall acquire no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer.

22. Notices. All notices required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered, sent by facsimile ("fax") or certified mail, postage prepaid with return receipt requested, addressed as follows:

To City: City Manager
City of Marina City Hall

EXHIBIT B
30 10

211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, California 93933
Fax: (831) 384-9148

To Contractor: Bob Murray and Associates
1544 Eureka Road, Ste. 180
Roseville, CA 95661
(916) 784-9080
[email protected]

The parties my agree in writing to receive notice by email. Notice shall be deemed effective on the date personally delivered or transmitted by facsimile or, if mailed, three days after deposit in the custody of the U.S. Postal Service. A copy of any notice sent as provided herein shall also be delivered to the Project Administrator and Project Manager.

23. Amendments, Changes or Modifications . This Agreement is not subject to amendment, change or modification except by a writing signed by the authorized representatives of City and Contractor.

24. Force Majeure . Notwithstanding any other provisions hereof, neither Contractor nor City shall be held responsible or liable for failure to meet their respective obligations under this Agreement if such failure shall be due to causes beyond Contractor's or the City's control except that an economic downturn of any type shall not be a justifiable cause for the failure to meet their respective obligations under this Agreement . Such causes include but are not limited to:
strike, fire, flood, civil disorder, act of God or of the public enemy, act of the federal government, or any unit of state of local government in either sovereign or contractual capacity, epidemic, quarantine restriction, or delay in transportation to the extent that they are not caused by the party's willful or negligent acts or omissions, and to the extent that they are beyond the party's reasonable control.

25. Attorney's Fees . In the event of any controversy, claim or dispute relating to this Agreement, or the breach thereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party reasonable expenses, attorney's fees and costs.

26. Successors and Assigns. All of the terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement shall apply to and bind the respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of the parties. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to affect the limitation on assignment

27. Authority to Enter Agreement . Contractor has all requisite power and authority to conduct its business and to execute, deliver and perform the Agreement. Each party warrants that the individuals who have signed this Agreement have the legal power, right and authority to make this Agreement and bind each respective party.

28. Waiver. A waiver of a default of any term of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of any succeeding default or as a waiver of the provision itself. A party's performance after the other party's default shall not be construed as a waiver of that default.

29. Severability. Should any portion of this Agreement be determined to be void or unenforceable, such shall be severed from the whole and the Agreement will continue as modified.

30. Construction, References, Captions . Since the parties or their agents have participated fully in the preparation of this Agreement, the language of this Agreement shall be construed simply, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against any party. Any term referencing time, days or period for performance shall be deemed calendar days and not

EXHIBIT B
31 11

work days. The captions of the various sections are for convenience and ease of reference only, and do not define, limit, augment or describe the scope, content or intent of this Agreement.

31. Advice of Counsel. The parties agree that they are aware that they have the right to be advised by counsel with respect to the negotiations, terms and conditions of this Agreement, and that the decision of whether or not to seek the advice of counsel with respect to this Agreement is a decision which is the sole responsibility of each of the parties hereto. This Agreement shall not be construed in favor or against either party by reason of the extent to which each party participated in the drafting of this Agreement.

32. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original.

33. Time. Time is of the essence in this contract.

34. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the matters as set forth in this Agreement, and no other agreement, statement or promise made by or to any party or by or to any employee, officer or agent of any party, which is not contained in this Agreement shall be binding or valid.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF , Contractor and the City by their duly authorized representatives, have executed this Agreement, on the date first set forth above, at Marina, California.

CITY OF MARINA CONTRACTOR

By: By:

Layne Long Valrie Gaeta Phillips
City Manager President - Bob Murray and Associates
Date: _______________________ Date: ___________________

By:

City Clerk

Approved as to form:

By:

City Attorney

EXHIBIT B
32 EXHIBIT A

Section 1 (a)

- SCOPE OF WORK -

A-1

EXHIBIT B
33 EXHIBIT C - INSURANCE

Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by Contractor, its agents, representatives, or employees.

MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE

Coverage shall be at least as broad as:

1. Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury and personal & advertising injury with limits no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 or 25 04) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

2. Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covering, Code 1 (any auto), or if Contractor has no owned autos, Code 8 (hired) and 9 (non-owned), with limit no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. (Not required if Contractor provides written verification it has no employees)

4. Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions): Insurance appropriates to Contractor’s profession, with limit no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $2,000,000 aggregate.

If Contractor maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or the higher limits maintained by Contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.

Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

Additional Insured Status
City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of Contractor including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to Contractor’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 or if not available, through the addition of both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38; and CG 20 37 if a later edition is used).

Primary Coverage
For any claims related to this contract, Contractor’s insurance coverage shall be primary and non-contributory and at least as broad as ISO CG 20 01 04 13 as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. This requirement shall also apply to any Excess or Umbrella liability policies.

EXHIBIT B
34 Umbrella or Excess Policy
Contractor may use Umbrella or Excess Policies to provide the liability limits as required in this agreement. This form of insurance will be acceptable provided that all of the Primary and Umbrella or Excess Policies shall provide all of the insurance coverages herein required, including, but not limited to, primary and non-contributory, additional insured, Self-Insured Retentions (SIRs), indemnity, and defense requirements. The Umbrella or Excess policies shall be provided on a true “following form” or broader coverage basis, with coverage at least as broad as provided on the underlying Commercial General Liability insurance. No insurance policies maintained by the Additional Insureds, whether primary or excess, and which also apply to a loss covered hereunder, shall be called upon to contribute to a loss until Contractor’s primary and excess liability policies are exhausted.

Notice of Cancellation
Each insurance policy required above shall provide that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the City.

Waiver of Subrogation
Contractor hereby grants to City a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said Contractor may acquire against the City by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

Self-Insured Retentions
Self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. The City may require Contractor to purchase coverage with a lower retention or provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention. The policy language shall provide, or be endorsed to provide, that the self-insured retention may be satisfied by either the named insured or City. The CGL and any policies, including Excess liability policies, may not be subject to a self-insured retention (SIR) or deductible that exceeds $25,000 unless approved in writing by City. Any and all deductibles and SIRs shall be the sole responsibility of Contractor or subcontractor who procured such insurance and shall not apply to the Indemnified Additional Insured Parties. City may deduct from any amounts otherwise due Contractor to fund the SIR/deductible. Policies shall NOT contain any self-insured retention (SIR) provision that limits the satisfaction of the SIR to the City. The policy must also provide that Defense costs, including the Allocated Loss Adjustment Expenses, will satisfy the SIR or deductible. City reserves the right to obtain a copy of any policies and endorsements for verification.

Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers authorized to conduct business in the state with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.

Claims Made Policies
If any of the required policies provide claims-made coverage:

1. The Retroactive Date must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.

2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.

3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date, Contractor must

EXHIBIT B
35 purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of work.

Verification of Coverage
Contractor shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required by this clause and a copy of the Declarations and Endorsements Pages of the CGL and any Excess policies listing all policy endorsements. All certificates and endorsements and copies of the Declarations & Endorsements pages are to be received and approved by the City before work commences.

However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive Contractor’s obligation to provide them. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time. City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.

Subcontractors
Contractor shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and Contractor shall ensure that City is an additional insured on insurance required from subcontractors.

Duration of Coverage
CGL & Excess liability policies for any construction related work, including, but not limited to, maintenance, service, or repair work, shall continue coverage for a minimum of five (5) years for Completed Operations liability coverage. Such Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.

Special Risks or Circumstances
City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.

EXHIBIT B
36 March 12, 2026 Item No. 10j(1)
Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
of the Marina City Council of March 17, 2026
Chair and Board Members of Abrams B NPC Meeting
Abrams B Non-Profit Corporation (NPC) of March 17, 2026 Chair and Board Members of Preston Park SCNPC Meeting
Preston Park Sustainable Community Non-Profit Corporation (SCNPC) of March 17, 2026 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA; AND THE BOARD MEMBERS OF

THE ABRAMS B NON -PROFIT CORPORATION AND THE PRESTON PARK

SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY NON -PROFIT CORPORATION RECEIVE THE

ABRAMS PARK AND PRESTON PARK SECOND QUARTER
INFORMATIONAL REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26.

REQUEST:

It is requested that the City Council and Boards:

1. Consider receiving the Abrams Park and Preston Park Second Quarter Informational Report for Fiscal Year 2025-26, which represents the quarter ended December 31, 2025.

BACKGROUND:

At a prior City Council Meeting, there was interest expressed in receiving quarterly update reports on the Preston Park and Abrams Park operations. The attached report represents the first quarterly informational report for both housing units.

This report may be modified based on feedback from the City Council and Board Members .

Additional enhancements may be implemented once the new Assistant City Manager becomes more familiar with the properties. It is anticipated that these reports will be prepared on the same schedule as the City’s quarterly investment and budget reports.

ANALYSIS:

The attached report presents the second quarter activities for the Abrams Park and Preston Park housing units (EXHIBIT A).

Detailed information can be found in the attached report.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact. This report is for informational purposes.

CONCLUSION:

This report is submitted for City Council and Board Member consideration and possible action. __________________________
Tori Hannah
Finance Director
City of Marina
REVIEWED/CONCUR:

Layne Long
City Manager
City of Marina
1 CITY OF MARINA – PRESTON PARK / ABRAMS PARK
Second Quarter Informational Report: Fiscal Year 2025-26

1. Occupancy Overview
Occupancy & Leasing
The lease and occupancy rates provide details on the percentage of units within each property that are occupied and those that have active lease agreements. These amounts may vary based on the timing of make-ready improvements and the signing of new lease agreements.

Overall: Portfolio remained fully leased with near-zero availability throughout the quarter.

2. Renovation & Unit Status
Status Abrams Preston Notes
Units on Hold for Renovations 2 1 Units under renovation during the quarter.

Fire Damaged Units - 3
Units down due to 10/28/25 fire; insurance
process and design efforts for the damaged
units were underway at the end of the quarter.

98.5% 99.0%100.0% 99.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%
100.0%
120.0%
Abrams Preston
Quarterly Occupancy Overview
Average Units Occupied Average Units Leased

EXHIBIT A
2 CITY OF MARINA – PRESTON PARK / ABRAMS PARK

3. Risk Management, Administrative, and Legal Activities • The following table represents the number of actions taken by Greystar to prevent rental revenue loss.

Property Initiated In Process Resolved/Completed
Abrams 1 1 -
Preston 1 - 1
• Greystar has i mplemented a requirement for all new tenants to purchase renter’s insurance . A draft letter to initiate this same requirement for in-place tenants was provided to the City Manager for review.

• Nationwide Insurance estimated that the rental loss from the three fire-damaged units at Preston Park is $79,809. Greystar and City staff agree that this estimate represents the estimated loss and offsetting expenses through October 30, 2026. These payments are expected to commence in the third quarter. Nationwide has also provided a preliminary estimate of $523,000 for building repairs. Greystar is in the process of receiving competitive proposals from local contractors. This information will be submitted to Nationwide for further review and consideration.

4. Preventive Maintenance (PM) & Inspections
PM Projects (FY 25/26 – Ongoing all quarter)
• Tree trimming
• Roof preventative planned maintenance (PPM)
• Termite inspections
• Dryer vent cleaning
• Gutter cleaning (scheduled in Nov/Dec)
Unit-by-Unit Inspections
• Abrams Park: 2025 cycle complete; 2026 cycle begins March 1 2026. • Preston Park: 2025 cycle complete; 2026 cycle begins March 1 2026.

SB721 Balcony Inspections
• Completed for Abrams Park through 2029; no issues (all months)

EXHIBIT A
3 CITY OF MARINA – PRESTON PARK / ABRAMS PARK

5. Capital Projects
Completed
• Abrams Park Exterior Painting – Completed by October 2025 • Concrete Walkways & Driveways – Completed by December 2025 In Progress
• HVAC replacements (ongoing)
• Irrigation Valve & routine replacements (ongoing)
• Project Capital Needs Assessment (PCNA): Sub-panel replacement discussions, pending further research and next steps.

6. Fiscal Information
Abrams Park
The year-to-date operating revenues for Abrams Park were $2.0 million, which represents 49.1% of the budgeted amount. An additional one-time transfer of $1.1 million from capital reserves is anticipated to occur later in the year to align with final capital improvement costs. The operating revenues were $27,643 or 1.4% greater than the prior year. These revenues are trending just below the percentage of the year elapsed due to an unanticipated vacancy loss during the period. In Fiscal Year 2025-26, overall expenses were $2.3 million or

53.5% of the annual budgeted amount. The annual increase in expenses of approximately $523,000 can largely be attributed to $424,000 in additional capital/renovation projects; a planned increase in insurance costs of $54,000; and $45,000 associated with various other operating expenses, including make-ready/redecorating costs for unit turnovers.
$1.8
$2.3
$2.0
$2.0
$0.0 $1.0 $2.0 $3.0 $4.0 $5.0 $6.0
FY 24/25 Expenses
FY 25/26 Expenses
FY 24/25 Revenues
FY 25/26 Revenues
Millions
Abrams Park Revenues and Expenditures
(Through Second Quarter)
Remaining Budget

EXHIBIT A
4 CITY OF MARINA – PRESTON PARK / ABRAMS PARK

Preston Park
The year-to-date revenues for Preston Park were $4.3 million or 50.2% of the budgeted amount. Rental income increased by approximately $143,000 or 3.7% when compared to the prior year; however, this was offset by a reduction in investment earnings due to lower interest rates. In Fiscal Year 2025-26, overall expenses were $3.4 million or 49.2% of the annual budgeted amount. This included a $1 million ownership distribution to the City. The planned annual increase in expenses of approximately $ 252,000 can largely be attributed to $177,000 in additional capital/renovation projects; and $75,000 in increased vehicle maintenance and repair work; and rising utility and insurance costs.

6. Community Engagement
Community engagement momentum continues with seasonal events and strong participation.

Events Held
• October: Halloween treats at Leasing Office (10/31)
• December: Toys for Tots Toy Drive (12/5) with Coffee and Pastries at the Community Center Upcoming
• 2026 event planning began in December.
$3.1
$3.4
$4.2
$4.3
$0.0 $2.0 $4.0 $6.0 $8.0 $10.0
FY 24/25 Expenses
FY 25/26 Expenses
FY 24/25 Revenues
FY 25/26 Revenues
Millions
Preston Park Revenues and Expenses
(Through Second Quarter)
Remaining Budget

EXHIBIT A
5 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-02

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA,
ACT

ING IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF CITY OF
MARINA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2026-1 (MARINA

STATION) AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAX ES WITHIN
IMPROVEMENT AREA NO. 1
WHEREAS, on January 21, 2026 , the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Marina (the “City”) adopted Resolution No. 2026-09 declaring its intention to form City of Marina Community Facilities District No. 2026-1 (Marina Station) (the “Community Facilities District”) and Improvement Area No. 1 therein, and designate territory proposed for annexation to the Community Facilities District in the future (the “Future Annexation Area”) as a part of Improvement Area No. 1 or one or more future improvement areas (“Future Improvement Area(s)”) pursuant to 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”) , and adopted Resolution No. 2026-10 declaring its intention to incur bonded indebtedness of the Community Facilities District; and
WHEREAS, on March 3, 2026, after providing all notice required by the Act, the City Council opened a public hearing required by the Act relative to the formation of the Community Facilities District and Improvement Area No. 1 therein , and designat ion of the Future Annexation Area pursuant to the Act, the proposed levy of special taxes within the Community Facilities District to finance certain public improvements and services described in Resolution No. 2026-09 and to secure the payment of any bonded indebtedness of the Community F acilities District, and with respect to Improvement Area No. 1 in a maximum aggregate principal amount of $7,600,000 of bonded indebtedness; and
WHEREAS, at the public hearing, all persons desiring to be heard on all matters pertaining to the formation of the Community Facilities District , the designation of Improvement Area No. 1 and the designation of the Future Annexation Area , the proposed levy of the special tax es within Improvement Area No. 1 to finance the improvements and services described in Resolution No. 2026-09 and the proposed issuanc e of bonded indebtedness of the Community Facilities District for Improvement Area No. 1 were heard and a full and fair hearing was held; and WHEREAS, on March 3, 2026 , following the close of the public hearing, the City Council adopted a resolution establishing the Community Facilities District and designating Improvement Area No. 1 and the Future Annexation Area (the “Resolution of Formation”) and a resolution determining the necessity to incur bonded indebtedness of the Community Facilities District and Improvement Area No. 1 (the “Resolution to Incur Bonded Indebtedness”) each of which called a consolidated special election on March 3, 2026 within Improvement Area No. 1 on three propositions relating to the levying of special taxes, the incurring of bonded indebtedness and the establishment of an appropriations limit for Improvement Area No. 1; and WHEREAS, on March 3, 2026 , a special election was held within the Community Facilities District at which the qualified electors approved Propositions A, B and C by two-thirds or more of the vote, authorizing the levy of special tax es within Improvement Area No. 1 for the purposes described in the Resolution of Formation, authorizing and the issuance of bonded indebtedness for Improvement Area No. 1 as described in the Resolution to Incur Bonded Indebtedness , and establishing an appropriations limit for Improvement Area No. 1.

Agenda Item:10L(1)
City Council Meeting of
March 17, 2026
1 Ordinance No. 2026-
Page Two

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA ACTING IN

ITS CAPACITY AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF CITY OF MARINA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2026-1 (MARINA STATION), ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The above recitals are all true and correct.

Section 2. By the passage of this Ordinance, the City Council authorizes the levy of special taxes within Improvement Area No. 1 at the maximum rates and in accordance with the rates and method of apportionment set forth in Exhibit C to the Resolution No. 2026-09, which rate and method of apportionment is incorporated by reference herein (the “Rate and Method”).

Section 3. The Finance Director of the City is hereby further authorized and directed each fiscal year, on or before August 10 of each year, or such later date as is permitted by law, to determine the specific special tax rates and amounts to be levied for the next ensuing fiscal year for each parcel of real property within Improvement Area No. 1 pursuant to the Rate and Method.

The special tax rates to be levied pursuant to the Rate and Method shall not exceed the applicable maximum rates set forth therein, but the special taxes may be levied at a lower rate.

Section 4. Properties or entities of the state, federal or other local governments shall be exempt from the special tax es, except as otherwise provided in Sections 53317.3 and 53317.5 of the Act, the Rate and Method , and the boundary map for the Community Facilities District . No other properties or entities are exempt from the special tax es unless the properties or entities are expressly exempted in the Rate and Method , or in a resolution of consideration to levy a new special tax or special taxes or to alter the Rate or Method of an existing special tax as provided in Section 53334 of the Act.

Section 5. All of the collections of the special taxes pursuant to the Rate and Method shall be used as provided for in the Act and the Resolution of Formation. The special tax es shall be levied within Improvement Area No. 1 only so long as needed for the purposes described in the Resolution of Formation.

Section 6. The special taxes levied pursuant to the Rate and Method shall be collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes are collected and shall be subject to the same penalties and the same procedure, sale and lien priority in case of delinquency as is provided for ad valorem taxes (which such procedures include the exercise of all rights and remedies permitted by law to make corrections, including, but not limited to, the issuance of amended or supplemental tax bills), as such procedure may be modified by law or by this City Council from time to time.

Section 7. As a cumulative remedy, if any amount levied as a special tax for payment of the interest or principal of any bonded indebtedness of the Community Facilities District, together with any penalties and other charges accruing under this Ordinance, are not paid when due, the City Council may, not later than four years after the due date of the last installment of principal on the Bonds, order that the same be collected by an action brought in the superior court to foreclose the lien of such special tax.

Section 8. This Ordinance relating to the levy of the special tax es within the Community Facilities District shall take effect 30 days following its final passage, and the specific authorization for adoption is pursuant to the provisions of Section 53340 of the Act. 2 Ordinance No. 2026-
Page Three

Section 9. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to perform all acts which are required by the Act, this Ordinance or by law in order to accomplish the purposes of this Ordinance.

This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Marina, held on the 3rd day of March 2026, and given its first reading at said meeting. Said Ordinance was given a second reading at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 17th day of March 2026, and after such reading, Councilmember ___ ____________________ who moved its adoption, seconded by Councilmember _______________________, said Ordinance was thereupon adopted by the following vote:

AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN, COUNCIL MEMBERS:

APPROVED:

___________________________
Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor

ATTEST:

___________________________
Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

3 March 11, 2026 Item No. 11a

Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
of the Marina City Council of March 17, 2026

CITY COUNCIL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING, TAKE TESTIMONY
FROM THE PUBLIC AND CONSIDER INTRODUCING ORDINANCE NO.
2026-, AMENDING THE MARINA MUNICIPAL CODE (MMC) SECTION

17.42.170 (SHORT-TERM RENTALS). THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS

EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO
SECTION 15061(b)(3) OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Open a public hearing, take testimony from the public and consider introducing Ordinance No. 2026 -, adopting the proposed amendments to Section 17.42.170 Short-Term Rentals (STR) of the Marina Municipal Code.

2. Find that adoption of the ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.

BACKGROUND
On November 5, 2019, City Council adopted Ordinance 2019-02 amending the Zoning Ordinance to include Section 17.42.170, entitled “Short-term rentals,” which establishes a permitting process and appropriate standards for whole dwelling units or portions of the same for a period of 29 consecutive days or less, along with associated regulations to mitigate negative impacts.

On August 6, 2025, City Council initiated a discussion on strengthening the City’s Short -Term Rental Program to better protect neighborhood integrity. City Council directed staff to identify ordinance amendments that would improve the effectiveness of the program.

October 23, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting
On October 23, 2025, the Marina Planning Commission held a public hearing at which staff presented and received input from the Commission on the proposed amendments to Title 17, Article 4, Section 17.42.170. The Planning Commission provided constructive feedback, recommending removing proposed language that would:

1. Prohibit properties with accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units from operating a short-term rental.

2. Limit short-term rentals to only in single-family residential zones; and

3. Restrict short-term rentals to properties with only one kitchen.

Following discussion, the Planning Commission directed staff to return the item for a study session.

December 18, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting
On December 18, 2025, the Marina Planning Commission held a public hearing at which staff presented a study session for short -term rentals and received input from the Commission on the proposed amendments. The Commission recommended:
1 1. Requiring additional documentation to verify residency for short -term rental permit holders;

2. Establishing that advertising an unpermitted short -term rental would constitute a code violation;

3. Revising parking standards that establish maximum number of vehicles for both on -site and off-site parking not to exceed the number of bedrooms;

4. Enhancing permit application procedures requiring more detailed operational and site information to ensure compliance with the Municipal Code.

5. Requiring review of the ordinance by the Planning Commission and City Council three years after adoption;

6. Directing staff to prepare an analysis of short -term rental activity over the past five years and projected near-term City revenue; and

7. Evaluating the establishment of a 55-foot separation requirement between permit holders.

February 12, 2026, Planning Commission Meeting
On February 12, 2026, the Marina Planning Commission held a public hearing at which staff presented the proposed amendments and received Commission input. The Commission also recommended:

1. Adding a requirement for a nuisance plan and decibel monitoring device as part of permit process.

2. Requiring submission of updated floor plans within seventy -two hours of updating STR platform listings; and

3. Prohibiting short-term rentals in accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units. Accessory dwelling units built prior to 2020 could continue to be rented, as prior to 2020, the City’s ADU/JADU permitting process did not require the owner to execute a deed restriction prohibiting use of the ADU/JADU as an STR.

ANALYSIS
Through the examination of Title 17 of the Marina Municipal Code (MMC), Planning staff identified opportunities for zoning updates to strengthen the City’s Short -Term Rental (STR) Program and protect neighborhood integrity. Key provisions of the draft ordinance include:

1. Additional Documentation. The definition of “Primary Residence” has been amended to clarify acceptable forms of documentation demonstrating that a property owner resides at the property.

2. Advertising. A definition of “Advertising” has been added to include all forms of representation, such as signage, print media, digital communications, and mobile applications. This amendment establishes clearer parameters for enforcement and reduces ambiguity regardin g promotional activity for STRs. The amendment also prohibits advertising of unpermitted STR units.

3. Parking. The revised ordinance establishes parking requirements consistent with capacity of the property.

4. Permit Application. Application requirements have been clarified to ensure that plot plans and floor plans are submitted in a timely manner and that permit numbers are displayed on all STR listing platforms.
2 5. Senate Bill SB 346. The amendment implements SB 346 by requiring STR facilitators (i.e., hosting platforms such as AirB&B) to submit quarterly reporting information, including local license and tax certification numbers on listings, and comply with City enforcement measures.

6. Property Agents. Enforcement provisions have been added to hold owners, agents, property managers, and other responsible parties accountable for violations, including the issuance of daily infractions and escalating civil penalties.

7. Two Year Waiting Period. The ordinance establishes a two-year period of ineligibility for STR operations if a permit holder is found to be in violation of the ordinance. Similar provisions have been implemented in neighboring jurisdictions, such as the City of Seaside, and have served as an effective compliance incentive.

8. 55 Foot Exclusion Zone . The amendments establish a 55 -foot zone of exclusion for new STR permits, measured from parcel boundaries. This exclusion will not be implemented for existing permit holders until June 30, 2027, to afford property owners a reasonable transition timeframe.

9. Nuisance/Decibel Monitoring . The ordinance requires the preparation of a nuisance response plan and the installation of decibel monitoring devices to provide proactive tools for managing noise and neighborhood compatibility concerns.

10. Planning Commission Review. The ordinance requires a review of the STR program three years after adoption. Staff will prepare an evaluation of implementation and present a report to the Planning Commission to assess effectiveness and consider potential amendments.

Collectively, these amendments enhance regulatory clarity, strengthen enforcement, and help ensure that STR operations remain consistent with the City’s broader policy goals and neighborhood protection standards.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines. Staff has determined that the exemption applies in this case because the proposed procedural changes would not resul t in a direct or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and the proposed ordinance is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have potential for causing significant effect on the environment. Therefore, the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from CEQA, and no further environmental review is necessary.

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

Respectfully submitted,

Brian Kim
Assistant Planner
City of Marina
3 REVIEWED/CONCUR:
________________________
Guido Persicone, AICP
Community Development Director
City of Marina
____________________________
Layne Long
City Manager
City of Marina
Attachments:

Exhibit A: Draft Ordinance
4 ORDINANCE NO. 2026-

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MARINA MUNICIPAL CODE (MMC),
CHAPTER 17, ARTICLE 4, BY AMENDING SECTION 17.42.170 SHORT - TERM RENTALS. THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO SECTION 15061(b)(3) OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES.
-oOo-
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MARINA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

1. On November 5, 2019, the City Council of the City of Marina (City) adopted Ordinance 2019-02 amending to the Zoning Ordinance to include 17.42.170 entitled “Short -term rentals” which establishes a permitting process and appropriate standards for whole dwelling units or portions of the same for a period of 29 consecutive days or less, along with associated regulations to mitigate negative impacts.

2. On August 6, 2025, the City Council initiated a discussion on strengthening the City’s Short-Term Rental Program to better protect neighborhood integrity and directed Community Development Dept. (CDD) to identify ordinance amendments that would improve the effectiveness of the program.

3. On October 23, 2025, the Marina Planning Commission held a public hearing at which staff presented and received input from the Commission on the proposed amendments to Title 17, Article 4, by amending Section 17.42.170 Short-term rentals.

4. On December 18, 2025, the Marina Planning Commission held a public hearing at which staff presented a study session for short-term rentals and received input from the Commission on the proposed amendments.

5. On February 12, 2026, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended approval of the draft Ordinance with changes that have been incorporated below.

6. The proposed amendments include:
a. Clarifying acceptable forms of documentation demonstrating that a property owner resides at the property to verify “Primary Residence”;
b. Defining “Advertising” to include all forms of representation, such as signage, print media, digital communications, and mobile applications, and prohibiting the advertising of unpermitted short-term rental units;

EXHIBIT A
5 c. Establishing parking requirements consistent with the capacity of the property; d. Clarifying permit application requirements to ensure that plot plans and floor plans are submitted in a timely manner and that permit numbers are displayed on all short -term rental listing platforms.
e. Implementing the requirements of Senate Bill 346 by requiring short -term rental facilitators to submit quarterly reporting information, including local license and tax certification numbers on listings, and to comply with City enforcement measures; f. Establishing enforcement provisions to hold owners, agents, property managers, and other responsible parties accountable for violations, including the issuance of daily infractions and escalating civil penalties;
g. Establishing a two -year period of ineligibility for short -term rental operations if a permit holder is found to be in violation of the ordinance; h. Establishing a 55 -foot separation requirement for new short -term rental permits, measured from parcel boundaries, with implementation for existing permit holders beginning June 30, 2027;
i. Requiring the preparation of a nuisance response plan and the installation of decibel monitoring devices to address noise and neighborhood compatibility concerns; and j. Requiring review of the short-term rental program three years after adoption, including a staff evaluation and report to the Planning Commission to assess effectiveness and consider potential amendments.

7. The proposed amendments to Chapter 17 of the MMC are consistent with Section 17.72 (Amendments) in that the amendments are consistent with public necessity and convenience and the general welfare requires such amendments.

8. Environmental. The proposed Ordinance amendments are not subject to environmental review pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Article 5, Section 15061(b)(3) because the proposed procedural changes would not resul t in a direct or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and the proposed ordinance is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have potential for causing significant effect on the environment. There fore, the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from CEQA, and no further environmental review is necessary. 6 9. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect on thirty (30) days after its final passage and adoption.

10. Severability. If any portion of this Ordinance is found to be unconstitutional or invalid the City Council hereby declares that it would have enacted the remainder of this Ordinance regardless of the absence of any such invalid part.

11. Posting of Ordinance. Within fifteen (15) days after the passage of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause it to be posted in the three (3) public places designated by resolution of the City Council.

The foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Marina duly held on the 17th day of Marina, 2026, and was passed and adopted at a regular meeting duly held on the _____ day of April 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor

ATTEST:

Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk

7 Exhibit A
(New text is indicated with underlining, and deleted text is indicated with strikethrough ) …
Chapter 17.42.170

SHORT-TERM RENTALS
Sections:
…

17.42.170 Short-term rentals.
…

17.42.170 Short-term rentals.

A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish a permitting process and appropriate standards for the short-term rental of a whole dwelling unit, or portion of the same, for a period of twenty-nine consecutive days or less.

B. Definitions. For the purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:

1. “Hosting platform” means a marketplace in whatever form or format which facilitates home- sharing or vacation rental, through advertising or other means, using any medium of facilitation, and from which the operator of the housing platform derives revenues, including booking fees or advertising revenues, from providing or maintaining the marketplace.

2. “Primary residence” means an owner’s permanent residence or usual place of return for housing as documented by evidence of a Monterey County Assessor’s Homeowners Exemption and at least two forms of identification in the owner's name: motor vehicle registration, driver's license, state and federal tax returns, a bank account statement, voter registration, or a utility bill from within the past sixty (60) days. An owner may only have one (1) primary residence at any given time. A primary residence may be a duplex or dwelling as defined in Section 17.04.260, 17.04.265, 17.04.270, 17.04.280, or 17.04.290.

3. “Registry” or “city registry” is the list of STR permits issued in a calendar year. The city shall bear responsibility for keeping the registry up to date with current permits.

4. “STR guest(s)” or “guest(s)” means any person or group of persons staying at an STR for no more than twenty-nine consecutive days.

5. “STR owner” or “owner” means the person, or persons, individually, jointly, in common, or a living trust whereby the trustor and trustee are the same person whereby such property is under single or unified control holding fee title which rents a dwelling operated and used as an STR.

6. “Short-term rental” or “STR” means a primary residence, or any portion thereof, rented for occupancy for lodging or sleeping purposes for a period of twenty-nine consecutive days or less. 8 7. “Transient occupancy tax” or “TOT” means local transient tax as set forth in Chapter 3.12.

The tax is paid by the guest when paying for their rental. The collected TOT is then remitted to the city.

8. “Advertising” means signs, circulars, cards, telephone books, newspapers, magazines, posters, email, mobile applications, television, radio, or any other representation implying or stating the property is available for short-term rental use.

C. Short-Term Rental Requirements and Conditions.

1. Compliance with Applicable Laws. The owner must comply with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations pertaining to the use and occupancy of the STR.

2. Short-Term Rental Permit Required. A permit from the city (hereinafter referred to as an “STR permit”) is required for all STRs. No person shall rent, offer to rent, or advertise for rent any STR for a term shorter than twenty-nine consecutive days. without a valid STR permit, which may be issued by the city in the manner provided for by this section.

3. Validity Period. An STR permit shall expire on June 30th of each calendar year and may be renewed upon reissuance of a business license and proof of timely payment of transient occupancy tax (TOT) during the time period of operation of the STR. An STR permit is only valid for up to one year, subject to renewal, and does not run with the land. Therefore, the issuance of an STR permit for a period of up to one year does not create a fundamentally vested right. As such, the city reserves the right to deny renewal of an STR permit for any reason, without the applicant having a right to hearing or other due process rights. During the application renewal submission, the owner must resubmit proof of “primary residence” as listed in section (B)(2) of this section.

4. Change in Ownership. The STR permit shall be invalidated by a change in owner of an STR, except when a spouse or domestic partner is added to the title of the property or the property’s ownership is converted to a trust, which property is principally under the same ownership. If the STR permit is invalidated by a change in ownership, the owner must complete the reapplication process within forty days or the right to the STR permit will be lost.

5. Noise and Disturbances. Guests are subject to the requirements of Chapter 9.24, Noise Regulations.

6. Revocation of STR Permit. An STR permit may be revoked by the city due to the failure to meet the requirements set forth in this code and state law, subject to the discretion of the city.

Any applicant or permit holder whose request for permit has been denied, or whose permit has been revoked, shall be ineligible for a two-year period from applying for a new permit. Such period shall run from the date of any final determination of denial or revocation. No person whose permit has been revoked shall continue to engage in, or carry on, the activity for which the permit was granted unless and until such permit has been reinstated or reissued.

7. Appeal Process. Revocation of an STR permit may be appealed pursuant to Section 17.70.020. The appeal shall be accompanied by a filing fee, if any, as established by city council resolution.
9 8. Good Neighbor Brochure. A good neighbor brochure, the contents of which shall be set by resolution of the planning commission, shall be required on the premises of any STR.

9. Occupancy Limitations. The maximum number of guests permitted in an STR is two per bedroom, plus two additional guests per unit (as shown in the following table). No more than twelve guests shall be permitted to stay in an STR.

Number of Bedrooms Number of Guests Allowed
0 (studio) 2
1 4
2 6
3 8
4 10
5+ 12

10. Transient Occupancy Tax. Transient occupancy tax (TOT) shall be collected on all short- term rentals. STR owners are solely responsible for the collection of all applicable TOT and remittance of the collected tax to the city on a monthly basis. If a hosting platform collects payment for short-term rentals, then it and the STR owner shall both have legal responsibility for the collection and remittance of TOT to the city.

11. Advertising STR without STR permit. No owner, owner representative, tenant, person acting as agent, real estate broker, real estate sales agent, property manager, reservation service or otherwise shall post, publish, circulate, broadcast or maintain any advertisement of an STR property if that property does not operate pursuant to a valid STR permit.

12. Parking. Each designated on-site parking space at a transient use site shall be made available for use by overnight occupants of that site and any on-site driveway must be available for the use of the guests of the site. Each private contract or tenancy shall specify what the maximum number of tenant vehicles to be parked at or in proximity to a transient use site (whether on street or off street), which shall not exceed the number of bedrooms included in the contract or tenancy.

13. Specific prohibitions. The owner is responsible for ensuring the property does not become a nuisance due to any short-term rental occupant activities. The activities prohibited for short-term rentals are examples that include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. Senior housing units and below market rate units may not be used for short-term rental purposes.
b. An owner may not have a short-term rental permit on more than one (1) parcel for short-term rental use in the city's jurisdiction. In addition, the parcel listed on the permit must be the owner's primary residence.
c. Commercial or assembly uses, such as weddings, corporate events, and parties, are prohibited in short-term rentals.
10 d. Short-term rental to unaccompanied minors is prohibited. e. Short-term rentals are prohibited in Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs). ADUs and JADUs built prior to 2020 are exempt from this prohibition.

14. Density limits. Upon the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter, all new STR permits shall be subject to a 55-foot zone of exclusion. The 55-foot zone of exclusion shall be drawn from the STR parcel boundary. A property shall be ineligible to hold an STR license if any part of its parcel boundary is within the 55-foot zone of exclusion of an existing STR. Subject to the city manager or his/her designee’s discretion, a property may be eligible for an STR permit if its parcel boundary is outside the zone of exclusion but an associated legal easement is within the 55-foot range (i.e., a reverse ingress or egress easement creates a flag lot). Implementation of this section for existing permit holders will be deferred until June 30, 2027, and will take effect upon issuance of an STR permit during the renewal process. STR permit holders within a 55-foot zone of exclusion will not be allowed to operate a STR after June 30, 2027.

D. Permit Application Procedures. An application for an STR permit shall be filed with the community development department upon forms, the content of which shall be set by resolution of the planning commission and shall, at a minimum, request:

1. The name, address, assessor’s parcel number (APN) for the STR owner’s property, and telephone number of the owner of the STR for which the STR permit is to be issued.

2. A statement of the anticipated daily rental charge for the STR and written acknowledgment of the responsibility to pay TOT associated with the rental of the STR.

3. A valid business license issued by the city for the STR, with the stipulation that the actual business license number must be included in any solicitation for an STR.

4. An STR permit application non-refundable fee. The fee will cover the estimated costs of reviewing the application.

5. Plans, which do not need to be drawn up by a professional, but drawn to scale including the following:
(a) Plot plan showing location of all property lines, location of all existing buildings, and location of dimensioned on-site parking spaces.
(b) Floor plan showing all rooms with each room labeled as to room type. Floor plan modifications must be submitted within seventy-two hours of updating STR platform listings.

6. The rental/lease agreement to be used, or house rules/requirements, which shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following:
(a) Number of guests allowed, which shall not exceed two per legal bedroom plus two additional guests.
(b) Number of vehicles a guest is allowed to park on site and off site per Section

17.42.170(C)(12).
(c) A nuisance management plan that includes maintaining a decibel reader on-site at all times to monitor noise levels.
11 7. Once the STR permit is issued, the STR permit number must be listed on all platform listing headlines and the platform weblinks provided to the City.

E. Hosting Platform Requirements.

1. Hosting platforms together with STR owners shall be responsible for collecting all applicable TOTs and remitting the same to the city. The hosting platform shall be considered an agent of the owner for purposes of TOT collections and remittance responsibilities as set forth in Chapter 3.12.

2. Subject to applicable laws, hosting platforms shall disclose to the city on a regular basis each home-sharing and vacation rental listing located in the city, the names of the persons responsible for each such listing, the address of each such listing, the length of stay for each such listing, and the price paid for each stay. Hosting platforms that fail to comply will be subject to fines and penalties pursuant to Section 1.12.080.

3. Hosting platforms shall not complete any booking transaction for any residential property or unit unless it is listed on the city’s registry at the time the hosting platform receives a fee for the booking transaction.

4. A hosting platform operating exclusively on the internet, which operates in compliance with subsections (E)(1), (2), and (3) of this section, shall be presumed to be in compliance with this section, except that the hosting platform remains responsible for compliance with the administrative subpoena provisions of this code.

5. The provisions of this section shall be interpreted in accordance with otherwise applicable state and federal laws and will not apply if determined by the city to be in violation of, or preempted by, any such laws. (Ord. 2019-02 § 1 (Exh. A), 2019)

6. Pursuant to the City’s adoption of SB 346 (Durazo, 2025), short-term rental facilitators shall report the physical address, including the 9-digit ZIP Code, of each short-term rental located within the City every three months. Failure to submit the required report may result in administrative fines, penalties, or an audit initiated by the City. Facilitators shall provide additional information requested by the City, as authorized by SB 346, if the City deems such information necessary to identify a specific short-term rental. Short-term rental facilitators shall include in each listing any applicable local business license number and transient occupancy tax certification issued by the City.

F. Liability and Enforcement.

1. Any owner, owner representative, tenant, person acting as agent for owner, real estate broker, real estate sales agent, property manager, reservation service or otherwise who uses, arranges, or negotiates for the use of residential property in violation of the provisions of this section is guilty of an infraction for each violation, and for each day in which such residential property is used, or allowed to be used, in violation of this chapter.

2. Violations of this chapter may be prosecuted pursuant to Section 1.12.080 and issued a civil penalty not exceeding the amounts set forth in California Government Code Section 36900(d).

G. Review of Ordinance
12 1. This ordinance shall be reviewed three years after its adoption. At that time, City staff shall evaluate the implementation of the Short-Term Rental (STR) ordinance and present their findings to the Planning Commission.

2019270.2
13 March 3, 2026 Item No. 13a

Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Marina City Council of March 17, 2026

CITY COUNCIL TO RECEIVE A PRESENTATION ON THE

COMPREHENSIVE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM (LCP) UPDATE AND

PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF ON THE DRAFT LAND USE PLAN
(LUP). THE PREPARATION OF LCP AMENDMENTS IS EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PER PRC SECTION 21080.9 AND
SECTION 15265(a)(1) OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES.

REQUEST:

Staff Requests that the City Council:

1. Receive a presentation on the comprehensive Local Coastal Program (LCP) update; and

2. Provide directions to staff on the draft Land Use Plan (LUP) prepared after the November 13, 2025, Planning Commission hearing.

BACKGROUND:

The California Coastal Act of 1976 requires that local governments lying within the Coastal Zone prepare a Local Coastal Program (LCP). The LCP is a comprehensive land use planning document that establishes allowable land uses for properties located in the City’s portions of the Coastal Zone and includes resource protection policies for coastal resources such as sensitive habitats, public access, and coastal views. The LCP contains a Land Use Plan (LUP) and an Implementation Plan (IP). The LUP functions similarly to a City’s General Plan, outlying the broad framework and development policies for the area; while the IP contains the regulations that would implement the LUP, such as zoning designations, developments standards, and permitting procedures.

Marina’s portion of the Coastal Zone is approximately 1.5 square miles and represents a relatively small area of the City. Existing uses primarily consist of open space and/or public facilities such as Locke Paddon Park, Marina State Beach, and Marina Dunes Preserve. The vacant developable land in the Coastal Zone is primarily concentrated in the Marina Landing Shopping Center.

The City of Marina’s current LCP (including an LUP1 and IP2) was adopted by the City Council and certified by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) i n 1982, and has been periodically amended through 2013. Since the LCP’s original certification in 1982 the development needs of the City, State laws, and the regulatory setting within the Coastal Zone have changed significantly.

In October of 2023, the City was awarded a CCC grant to undertake a comprehensive update to our LCP. Given the need to update the 1982 LCP, staff and the consultants chose to not only update specific policies to make them consistent with current Coastal Commission guidance, practice, and science; but also to replace the old document with an entirely new layout and format that is easier to read and use for both the public and staff. City staff and consultants discussed this with CCC staff who were very supportive of this methodology.

1 Current LUP: https://marinalcpupdate.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Marina_LUP_Jan2024.pdf 2 Current IP: https://marinalcpupdate.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Marina_IP_Jan2024.pdf 1 The City was awarded a separate grant in 2017 to prepare a Coastal Hazards/Sea Level Rise (Hazards) amendment to our existing LCP. This work was undertaken apart from the comprehensive update. The City Council approved this amendment with modifications from the CCC on December 2, 2025 , and it was transmitted to the CCC for final certification, which occurred on February 4, 2026. The recently adopted Hazards portion of the LCP would be a chapter folded into the LCP once the comprehensive update is complete.

The Planning Commission considered the comprehensive LUP amendment on November 13, 2025 and recommended approval subject to modifications (EXHIBIT A, PC Resolution 2025-16). Key issues that the Planning Commission discussed were the allowable uses within the Open Space and General Commercial (which encompasses the Marina Landing shopping center) land use designations. The commission recommended that active recreation be removed from the open space designation, and that mixed residential and commercial use be allowed within the General Commercial designation. The Planning Commission also discussed a few minor edits including correcting typos and clarifying where dunes are visible from the City. After the Planning Commission recommendation, staff and the consultant prepared a revised draft. All text updates made since the Public Review Draft which was presented to the Planning Commission are reflected in track changes (EXHIBIT B). Additionally, Figures 5-7 and 10 have been updated. Figure 5 was updated to add a proposed public access point at the CEMEX site, Figures 6 and 7 were updated to remove closed cone cypress from the potential sensitive habitat areas, and Figure 10 was revised to update the land use designation of the Sanctuary Beach Resort so that the Visitor Serving designation on the site matches the existing approved development.

There are a few key issues that staff are seeking direction in the LUP draft, particularly whether mixed use should be permitted in the General Commercial district, whether active recreation uses should be removed from the Open Space designation entirely, and whether the prohibition on drive-thru uses in the General Commercial land use designation of the draft LUP should be carried forward. After receiving policy direction on the LUP, the next step in the process would be for staff and our consultants to update the draft LUP based on the Council’s direction and commence preparation of an Implementation Plan (IP) with regulations based on the policies of the LUP .

After a revised IP is drafted, a public review draft of it would be released. Then the entire LCP package (including the LUP and IP) would go to the Planning Commission and City Council for consideration. After approval of the comprehensive LCP package, staff would submit it to the CCC for certification. The updated LCP would not go into effect until the CCC certifies it as consistent with the Coastal Act.

DISCUSSION:

As previously mentioned, the LUP functions similarly to a City’s General Plan, outlying the broad framework and development policies for the area. The draft LUP includes the following sections:

1. Introduction and Framework

2. Public Access and Recreation (PAR)

3. Biological Resources and ESHA (BIO)

4. Marine Resources and Water Quality (MWQ)

5. Coastal Hazards (HAZ) – note that is a placeholder for the Hazards LUP chapter, which has already been certified

6. Land Use and Development (LUD)

7. Scenic and Visual Resources (VIS)

8. Tribal, Cultural and Historic Resources (TCH)

9. Environmental Justice (EJ)

2 Given the length and complexity of the draft LUP, discussion will focus on several ke y issues rather than going through each chapter or section individually. These include the Open Space land use designation , Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas, the General Commercial land use designation (Marina Landing Shopping Center), Mixed Use, and Outreach and Engagement.

Open Space Land Use Designation
As indicated on the draft Land Use Map (Fig. 10) the vast majority of lands within the Coastal Zone are proposed to have a land use designation of Open Space. This includes the “North Dunes” property and the majority of Locke -Paddon Park (LPP). The draft plan presented to the Planning Commission principally allowed “ passive” recreational uses and conditionally allowed “ active” recreational uses in the Open Space land use designation . Conditionally allowable uses are those that are allowable only through a c onditional use permit and subject to a higher level of discretionary review and consideration. Active and passive recreation were specifically defined as follows:
• “Active Recreation: moderate-intensity recreational uses that are typically offered in a City park, including but not limited to park buildings, community centers, bicycle paths, campgrounds and ancillary uses supporting public agencies.” • “Passive Recreation: low intensity recreational uses such as walking trails, hiking trails, boardwalks, picnic areas, interpretive signage, interpretive centers, botanical gardens, community gardens, and nature observation decks.”

These definitions would be applicable throughout the Open Space designation in the City’s Coastal Zone. Community and botanical gardens are also included in the passive recreation definition, and therefore would be allowable regardless of whether active recreation is included as an allowable use. After deliberation the Planning Commission recommended that “Active Recreation” be removed as an allowable use from the Open Space land use designation while expanding the definition of passive recreation to “Low intensity recreational uses such as walking trails, hiking trails, boardwalks, picnic areas, interpretive signage, interpretive centers, botanical gardens, community gardens, and nature observation decks and other uses that will not result in impacts to wildlife and do not create noise impacts .” (additions underlined). The reasoning behind this change was two -fold. The commission was concerned that the broadness of the original active recreation definition could result in proposed uses in that were incompatible with the intent of open space, and that the conditional use permit process would not be an adequate safeguard against such incompatible uses. The commission also sought to create a definition that was more outcome based rather than attempting to create an exhaustive list of allowable uses.

Staff support the approach of trying to make the definitions more outcome-based and require uses to protect habitat and the peaceful enjoyment of the City’s coastal areas and have made the corresponding changes in the draft LUP ( EXHIBIT B). However, removing active recreation entirely may overcorrect for this issue , precluding uses that would typically be considered along the coastline and support public access and recreation, such as campgrounds. Therefore, staff are seeking input from the City Council on whether to c arry forward the Planning Commission’s recommendation regarding removal of active recreation entirely or draft an alternative more limited definition of active recreation that addresses the Planning Commission’s substantive concerns.

Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area
The Coastal Act defines Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs) as “any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special 3 nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments” . In Marina these include wetland areas and coastal dune habitats.

Figures 6 and 7 on pages 3-4 and 3-6 show potential ESHA areas in the City’s Coastal Zone. While these maps are a helpful illustrative tool, BIO-1 specifies that it is the actual presence of sensitive habitat that constitutes ESHA. In accordance with BIO -1 and BIO -5, individual developments would be required to submit a biological report to identify the presence and extent of any ESHA.

Per Coastal Act section 30107.5 and draft policy BIO -2, only uses which are dependent on the resource (e.g. habitat restoration, low-intensity public access and recreation, etc.) are permissible within ESHA. The strong protection of ESHA and restriction on developing in it are one of the ways that the Coastal Act protects these rare ecosystems.

The draft LUP considered by the Planning Commission identified closed -cone cypress areas as a potential ESHA. However, within the City of Marina, closed -cone cypress is limited to planted Monterey cypress strands. After the Planning Commission hearing, it was requested that this issue be clarified. Staff coordinated with our consultant biologist at EMC, and we believe that while ESHA determinations are made on a project by project basis, it would be inappropriate to broadly characterize this habitat area as ESHA. While widely planted and naturalized along the central coast, Monterey cypress are not native to Marina.

Nevertheless, many of the trees are large and contribute to the scenic value of the City’s coastal areas, and its urban forest. Therefore, staff recommend that the closed -cone cypress be removed from potential ESHA in the LUP, but that Monterey cypress trees be included in the definition of “Major Vegetation” that would require a Coastal Development Permit to remove . This would ensure that these trees are not inappropriately characterized as ESHA, while still requiring proposed tree removals go through a Coastal Development Permit process. This permit process allows an additional layer of consideration be given to the impacts of removing any of these trees.

General Commercial Land Use Designation – Mixed Use in Commercial Designations The approximately 5.5 acre vacant property in the northeast corner of the Marina Landing Shopping Center located at the intersection of Del Monte Blvd and Beach Road is currently planned General Commercial (GC) in the City’s 1982 LCP. The owners of the pro perty, Terry Tallen (Monterey Bay Investments, LLC) and the Indiana University Foundation (IUF) have requested that this land use designation be changed to one that allows high -density multi-family housing and/or mixed uses development. The General Commerc ial land use does not allow housing including that associated with a commercial development. The owners have contended that there is a lack of interest in the location by commercial developers, resulting in the site being vacant for decades. However, t he City commissioned a Real Estate Market Analysis & Site Assessment (HdL Companies, April 2025) which studied this site specifically and found that it should be able to support the type of commercial development allowed in the GC designation.

The question of whether housing should be an allowable use at the Marina Landing Shopping center been discussed by the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), at public workshops relating to both the General Plan update (GP2045) and this LCP update, and City Council at their review of the preferred land use alternatives for the GP2045 in January of 2025. At these public venues, the preference has been to keep this location planned and zoned for commercial use. The City has a certified 6th Cycle housing element, and throughout the City a significant number of all types of housing have been recently constructed, are under development, or are subject to approved entitlements. This includes 1,237 units in the Dunes specific plan, 1,050 units in the Sea Haven Specific Plan, and 1,360 units in the Marina Station specific plan.

4 Staff believe retaining a commercial land use designation and encouraging commercial uses in this area is appropriate as:

1. The community outreach performed to date has indicated a desire that the property be retained for commercial use.

2. The market analysis the City has available indicates that commercial could be a feasible use.

3. The specific plans mentioned above were all planned between 2003 and 2008. The City’s land use needs have started to shift over the last twenty years. With all of the residential development occurring throughout the City, commercial areas will be increasin gly important to ensure local access to services and create a balanced integrated distribution of land uses in the City. The Marina Landing sites are some of the few vacant infill commercial sites in this area.

4. To ensure that the continued maintenance of roads and other community services for all the housing units being developed throughout the City, Marina needs revenue through sales tax and/or Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) that would be provided by commercial use.

However, the Planning Commission considered the length of time the site has been vacant and the owners/their representatives oral and written comments, and recommended that mixed use be allowed on the site. The property owner has also separately submitted a preliminary application for a fully residential townhome development on the 5.5 acre site. In their application they affirmed their commitment to work with the City on a mixed use designation, but also contend that a fully residential project would be al lowable under current state law, specifically Assembly Bill (AB) 2011, as amended by AB 2243. This law ministerially allows certain residential projects in commercial zones provided they meet certain prescribed standards. Staff have not provided a determination as to whether their preliminary application meets the substantive requirements of AB 20113.

A designation that allows mixed use while requiring a portion of any development be commercial is a potential approach to balance these different policy considerations. Should the council desire, it could carry forward the Planning Commission’s recommendation, in which case staff would recommend modifying both the General Commercial land use designation and LUD -19 on Pg 6- 14 of the plan to allow mixed use developments.

Should the City Council provide direction to carry forward the Planning Commission’s recommendation to allow mixed use in the LUP in General Commercial designation, there are several detailed parameters on what mixed use would allowable that staff and our consultant would need to research. Th ese include 1) whether the mixed use would be allowable on all General Commercial sites or only ones with specific characteristics (e.g. parcel size, location, etc.); 2) the allowable density of residential development; 3) where the residential and commercial uses could be located within a development; and 4) the appropriate portion of residential to commercial development. Staff will come back with recommendations to address these issues in the IP.

General Commercial Land Use Designation - Other Policy Considerations The draft of the LUP considered at the Planning Commission prohibited drive thru uses in both the Visitor Serving Commercial and Coastal General Commercial land use designations, Chapter

6.0 Land Use and Development (LUD). This prohibition was intended to be consistent with the

3 The AB 2011 law is repealed by its own provisions in 2033 5 policy direction of the Downtown Specific Plan, which prohibits them in the Core, Mixed -use Node, and Multi -family residential districts as part of creating a pedestrian friendly downtown environment.

Staff met with the property owners of Marina Landing on January 8, 2026. They had serious concerns regarding this prohibition, and we advised that they provide a comment articulating those concerns so they could be communicated to City Council when they co nsidered the LUP. Staff also received a letter from Rob Riedel, another property owner in the Marina Landing shopping center requesting this draft language be removed (EXHIBIT C). The letter notes that drive-thrus can be beneficial to families and people w ith mobility challenges. The context of the Marina Landing shopping center is also different than the downtown core. The shopping center bounded on three sides by arterial roadways . currently consists of primarily auto -oriented uses, and this prohibition would render the recently constructed Quick Quack carwash a legal non -conforming use.

Considering the public comments received and the geographic context of the Marina Landing shopping center, staff are recommending that the City Council consider allowing drive -thru uses in the General Commercial land use designation. This approach would be similar to our downtown Transition district, which conditionally allows drive-thrus. To make this change, the final sentence of the general commercial designation on pg. 6 -14 “Drive-thru uses are not allowed ,” would be struck from the draft LUP.

Another area of potential interest is Policy LUD-20, which states that “General Commercial uses are a low priority use in the coastal zone and shall be sited to have no impact on sensitive coastal resources.” Much of the discussion on the Marina Landing sites including through the LCP and GP 2045 update has been focused on how this area could serve as a regional retail or visitor serving gateway. However, ultimately the more restrictive resource protection poli cies of the LCP would govern, and the policy is written extremely broadly. Staff recommend that the council consider modifications to LUD -20 that require development to be consistent with coastal resource protection policies, but not have the blanket “no impacts” statement. Example language is included below:
• LUD-20: General Commercial uses are considered a lower priority use within the coastal zone and shall be sited and designed to be consistent with the resource protection policies of this LCP to have no impact on sensitive coastal resources.

Outreach and Engagement
The City conducted extensive outreach to the community to try to ascertain residents’ desires for the future of the City’s Coastal zone. Our consultants prepared an LCP Update Engagement Plan and follow-up summary. In addition to reaching people through online surveys (145 responses), workshops (58 attendees), and tabling at City events, staff conducted formal Senate Bill (SB) 18 Tribal consultation with the Ohlone Costanoan Esselen Nation (OCEN) which resulted in the acknowledgement that all of the Coastal zone is potentiall y sensitive in terms of Tribal and/or Archaeological Resources and has been mapped accordingly. These outreach efforts were made in accordance with Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 30503 and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 13515.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

The preparation of or amendment to an existing certified LCP is not subject to environmental review per PRC Section 21080.9 and Section 15265(a)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines.

6 CONCLUSION:

Respectfully submitted,

_________________________
Phil Angelo
Senior Planner, Community Development Dept.

City of Marina

REVIEWED/CONCUR:

_________________________
Guido Persicone, AICP
Director, Community Development Dept.

City of Marina

Layne Long
City Manager
City of Marina

Exhibits:

Exhibit A – Planning Commission Resolution 2025-16
Exhibit B – Draft Post Planning Commission LUP dated February 23, 2026 Exhibit C – Public Comments

7 EXHIBIT A
8 EXHIBIT A
9 EXHIBIT A
10 Exhibit B
Post Planning Commission Land Use Plan (LUP) Draft dated February 23, 2026 A copy of this document will be made available upon request or can be viewed on the City’s website:
https://marinalcpupdate.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Land-Use-Plan-Post-Planning- Commission-Draft_022326.pdf

11 To: Anita Shepherd Smith – City Clerk of Marina, California; [email protected] My name is Rob Riedel, and I am writing on behalf of the owners of Pad C at the Marina Landing Shopping Center on Beach Road. Our family has owned this vacant parcel for more than ten years, and we recently learned that the City is contemplating a no–drive-thru policy for new development on this site. We believe such a policy would be ill-advised, would significantly diminish the value of our land, and—more importantly—would be a detriment to the Marina community.

The current and longstanding zoning designation is to allow drive-thru and ties in with the Visitor Service Uses. A drive-thru is in absolute total alignment with the property’s well established zoning designation. The zoning was what my family relied upon when we invested and became a stakeholder in this community.

Drive-thrus are not a relic of outdated, car-centric planning. They are a modern, adaptive response to how people live, work, and move today. Cities that ban them risk undermining economic vitality, ignoring clear consumer behavior trends, and missing opportunities to shape better, more efficient, and more community-friendly designs.

Marina’s drive-thru policy should reflect the lived realities of its residents. Drive-thrus provide essential access for seniors, families, workers, and people with mobility challenges. When designed responsibly, they strengthen local businesses, reduce commercial vacancies, and support the community’s daily needs. A pro-community approach ensures that Marina’s land-use decisions respond to these realities rather than adopting a one-size-fits-all ban.

Marina is a growing, diverse, working-class coastal city where:
• Many residents commute long distances and rely on quick, reliable food access • Seniors and disabled residents benefit from the ability to remain in their vehicles • Families with young children need safe, convenient service options • Fast-food restaurants often serve as informal “third places” for youth, seniors, and working-class families
• Vacant commercial spaces undermine corridor vitality and public safety • Additional tax revenue is needed to support community services For these reasons, drive-thrus should be permitted in existing commercial corridors, especially in areas anchored by major tenants such as Walmart, where additional retail activity is beneficial.

Drive-thrus should be discouraged only in small-parcel, pedestrian-oriented village centers. This targeted approach protects walkability where it matters while preserving access where residents actually need it.

There are also numerous design standards that can address concerns associated with drive-thrus, including:
• High-efficiency layouts that prevent queue spillover
• Lighting and visibility standards
Received February 12, 2026
12 EXHIBIT C
• Shielded speaker systems
• Modern circulation plans that prioritize pedestrian safety From an economic standpoint, a drive-thru is the only viable retail option for this site.

Restaurants with drive-thrus saw only a 4% sales decline from 2019 to 2022, while those without drive-thrus suffered a 50% drop. A dine-in restaurant or small retailer is simply not feasible at this location given current market conditions.

For all these reasons, we respectfully urge the City to support well-designed, community-serving drive-thrus that enhance accessibility, strengthen local businesses, and contribute to safe, vibrant commercial corridors.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely, Rob Riedel
cc:

Terrance Tallen – [email protected]
Daniel Dokhanian – [email protected]
Patrick McAleer – [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

13 EXHIBIT C
From: McAleer, Patrick
To: Anita Shepherd-Sharp
Cc: Terry Tallen; Daniel Dokhanian; Jon Stansbury; Guido Persicone; Philip Angelo Subject: Support for Mixed-Use LCP Amendment – Parcel 1 at Marina Landing (March 3, 2026 - Vote) Date: Friday, February 20, 2026 6:35:04 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

February 20, 2026
Marina City Council
City of Marina
211
Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, CA 93933
Re: Support for Mixed-Use LCP Amendment – Parcel 1 at Marina Landing Dear Members of the Marina City Council,
I am writing to respectfully request your support at the March 3rd meeting for the adoption of the proposed Local Coastal Program (LCP) land use amendment to allow mixed-use development, including medium and high-density housing by right, on Parcel 1 at Marina Landing.

Indiana University Foundation, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, whose sole purpose is to raise funds to support scholarships and other charitable activities at Indiana University is interested in maximizing the property’s value. We believe that this land use amendment will not only accomplish that outcome, but it will also positively benefit the residents of Marina.

As you know, the Marina Planning Commission carefully reviewed this matter and voted 6–1 in favor of recommending this additional usage. Their strong support reflects a practical and forward-looking approach to addressing both longstanding vacancy and Marina’s pressing housing needs.

For more than twenty years, Parcel 1 has remained stagnant while waiting for a retail user that has never materialized. Continuing to rely solely on a retail-only designation—particularly considering potential restrictions on drive-thru uses—will further diminish or eliminate the parcel’s market value. The result would be continued inactivity at one of the primary, and most visible, entry points to the city.

Economic reality tells us that what has not worked for two decades is unlikely to succeed without change. By contrast, allowing medium- and high-density housing—including much- needed affordable apartments—creates a viable path forward. Residential development would activate the site, improve aesthetics at this key gateway location, generate tax revenue, and support the need for local housing.

Importantly, housing can catalyze future neighborhood-serving retail. Once a residential base is established, retail (including drive-thru uses where appropriate) becomes far more feasible.

It is clear, retail will not precede housing under current conditions.

This proposal represents a practical, community-oriented solution that benefits Marina’s residents, strengthens the tax base, and aligns with the community’s broader housing 14 EXHIBIT C
priorities.

I respectfully ask for your support in approving this LCP land use amendment on March 3rd. I will be attending the meeting and welcome any opportunity to answer questions in advance or provide additional information which may be needed for your supporting vote.

Thank you for your time, consideration, and service to the Marina community. Please include this letter in the March 3, 2026 packet for distribution.

Sincerely,
Patrick K. McAleer
Indiana University Foundation, Inc.

Associate Vice President – Real Estate + Property
812-855-0204 (Office)

This e-mail message, including all attachments, is private and may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not use, disseminate, disclose, or copy this information. Please notify the sender by reply e-mail and immediately delete this message.

15 EXHIBIT C

February 25, 2026

Marina City Council Members
Via Anita Shepherd Sharp Via Email
City Of Marina
Deputy City Clerk

Guido Persicone
Economic Developer Director Via Email
City of Marina
Planning and Economic Development Department
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, CA 93933

RE: Terry Tallen Property Marina Landing Shopping Center Mixed-Use Residential, Restaurant & Retail Overview
Retail Leasing Overview/History, 170 Beach Road Marina, CA

Dear City of Marina Team,

We are writing to provide candid feedback on the retail leasing challenges we continue to face at the Marina Landing project.

Retail leasing is our sole focus. Our firm represents national and regional tenants across California, including brands such as Chick-fil-A and Dutch Bros Coffee.

Our firm is deeply embedded in the retail real estate market and represent many of the top retail landlords and retailers, restaurants in northern, CA. We attend every major ICSC conference (ICSC formerly known as the Internation Council of Shopping Centers and currently known as Innovating Commerce Serving Communities) , the longstanding primary trade organization for retail real estate with 70,000 members in over 100 countries and actively track tenant requirements, site selection trends, and capital flows across the West Coast. We as well as Terry Tallen are longstanding ICSC members and we understand that Terry, a current member and has also been a member for nearly 40-years. We control one of the largest shares of active retail listings and tenant representation assignments in the Bay Area, which gives us constant, real-time feedback from retailers making location decisions today. The market feedback we are sharing is not theoretical or isolated. It reflects consistent input from a broad cross-section of national, regional, and emerging retail tenants we work with daily.

Despite extensive outreach, retail tenant response to Marina Landing has been consistently hesitant, and the feedback has been remarkably uniform.

16 EXHIBIT C

The primary challenge is the project’s location relative to Highway 1. The site sits far enough off the highway that it lacks the visibility and immediacy most retail tenants require, particularly those dependent on drive-by exposure and impulse traffic. From the tenant perspective, the site does not read as a natural retail stop for motorists or visitors unfamiliar with the area. This is why a mix of uses as we see at the Dunes and Marina Station is critical to bring this highly regarded mixed-use site into service.

On-site residents will be the catalyst to new site down and quick serve restaurants coming to Marina Landing and once the mixed-use residential can be announced we at Econic plan to provide a robust market presentation to our client, Chick-Fil-A to bring them back to the site Letter of Intents were previously negotiated on the site and the current state of the site caused Chick-Fil-A to pause. Concerns included lack of street visibility on the east side of the site, insufficient traffic counts, blighted conditions on the large portion of vacant land, graffiti on the leasing signs and concerns over Walmart’s long-term commitment to the market given the significant amount of retailer competition at the Dunes

Visibility within the trade area is also limited. Retail tenants rely on clear sightlines, strong signage presence, and obvious access points to justify the investment required to enter a new or unproven market. At Marina Landing, those fundamentals are difficult to demonstrate in a way that aligns with current underwriting standards.

We want to be very clear that this feedback is not for lack of effort. We have gone out broadly and repeatedly. At this time, most retailers we speak with are simply not comfortable committing to this location given the combination of visibility constraints, access considerations, lack of on-site housing stock and on-site residents to bolster daily retail and restaurant sales and distance from Highway 1.

Our goal in sharing this feedback is to be transparent and constructive.

If Marina Landing is to succeed as a retail destination, it will require additional support from on-site residential. This all being said the prospects for new sit-down and quick-serve restaurants with drive thru’s on the site would soar with a residential community on site whereas the resident can walk to the restaurants and have a true sense of community on the site. The combination of the fundamental for the Marina Landing are strong, however, the product type has to be in accordance with the market has demonstrated across the country. The retailers and restaurants want a “mix of uses” to allow for their best opportunities to derive strong sales volumes. Drive thru’s for restaurants are critical as historically drive thru’s add an additional 40%-70% in incremental gross sales vs a non-drive thru operation by virtue of the speed and convenience. Also, drive thru’s are key importance as they allow the restaurants to continue to operate during pandemics as we all recently experienced with the Covid-19 outbreak. Drive thru’s are critical to the eventual lease up and operations of the site once the residential component is open and operating.

We understand that the Marina Planning Commission wisely approved the mixed-use designation in November on a 6-1 vote for mixed-use and this common-sense approach should allow for the 17 EXHIBIT C

development of this key property. We will be in town with Terry and his team marketing the site to the attendees at the upcoming Monterey, CA ICSC conference at the Portola Plaza March 23-25, 2026.

We remain committed to working toward a successful outcome and are happy to engage further with the City to discuss realistic paths forward based on what the retail market is communicating today.

Regards,

Mike Conroy
Nicole Lyon
Executive Director

Mobile: (408) 458-0629
CalDRE License #02046912

www.theeconiccompany.com

18 EXHIBIT C
From: Terrence Tallen
To: Guido Persicone; Philip Angelo
Cc: Daniel Dokhanian; McAleer, Patrick; Kellen Clancy
Subject: FW: Marina Landing Tallen & Adjacent Parcel -Mixed Use Zoning - Follow Up Date: Wednesday, February 25, 2026 9:17:19 AM
Attachments: image002.png
CCC LCP Amendment 3.06.23 .pdf
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Good morning Guido,
Hope all is well and following back up with you.

We hear that you plan to go to the City Council without any specific recommendation but instead with three (3) potential options for the LCP Amendment.

We enthusiastically urge you and city leadership to go to the Council with the Planning Commission’s specific approved and recommended plan for mixed-use that recently received a 6-1 vote by the Marina Planning Commission. There is no need for three options and the plan under Task-4 is what is needed to provide the much-needed housing stock for not only the
public at large, Joby’s thriving employment base but also and very importantly our teaches, workers, seniors and other for the pending AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT of our project. Naturally, with the inclusion of housing then we believe that we can bring Chick-Fil-A with a drive thru back to the site as well as to bring popular sit-down restaurant to the property once there is housing to support the sale for Marina Landing on-site restaurants.

As the Planning Commission’s was very positive vote, we believe that it is most practical and in the best interests of all parties to focus the vote on Task-4 under the LPC and as conceived and drafted for the Coastal Commission and LCP (attached for reference) by the you, Alyson
Hunter and possibly other members of City of Marina’s Planning Department and the City Manager at the time.

Task 4 – Site Rezoning / LCP IP/ LUP
Task 4.1 Analyze sites for potential zoning and land use amendments Three sites have been identified that could benefit from an LCP Amendment to update their zoning to better match the potential and intent of the sites. The first site is the Brown Bulb Ranch site (APN 033-111-035,029). It is an infill site located on 19 EXHIBIT C
the corner of Beach Road and Del Monte Boulevard and adjacent to Walmart (Marina Landing Shopping Center) and Locke Paddon Park. The site is currently zoned Planned Commercial. The City “envisions" mixed-use development here, including a commercial and high-density residential mixed-use project, which would require a zoning designation change to allow for a high-density residential overlay.

Increasing density within the City Center will help the City achieve their housing needs in a more compact sustainable manner that avoids hazardous areas.

As this was our expectation and was duly reinforced by the Planning Commission’s wise vote, there is no need for any further options and it may just confuse the situation. As you are aware, Housing Stock is a key objective of Governor Newson’s agenda and increased housing stock in California much needed especially for teachers, the work force and our seniors and veterans.

We also formally propose that the city trades the dead uses that are allowed and promoted under the exiting “behind the times and primitive zoning codes ” currently in pace on the site
and trade out the following uses and replace them with what is desperately needed for location:

We proposed that you trade out and extinguish the following uses outlined below and Trade
Out the Old for the New by the city for the City Council Hearing including:

REMOVE AND TRADE OUT DEAD USES FROM THE LCP:

Jazzercise.

Millinery Shops. (Hat stores).

Radio Sales Shops
REPLACE AND ADD MODERN USES TO THE LCP AMENDMENT:

Town Homes.

Multifamily Units.

Condominiums.

Apartments.

Affordable Teacher Housing.

Affordable Veteran/Seniot Housing.

Affordable Work Force Housing, etc.

The Dunes and Marina Station are thriving while we are suffering and remain in a blighted condition due to antiquated and yesterday-year zoning regulations. As the Planning Commission understood in the most common sensical way possible, Marina Landing should have the same zoning and development rights as the Dunes and Marina Station. The above suggested removals and replacement can make this happen. Just trade them out to a brighter 20 EXHIBIT C
future for Marina.

The mix of uses at those two sites has allowed for their success and the lack of modern zoning on our site has directly led to and is the culprit establishing and maintaining the blight, homelessness and property crimes. We just nee the same zoning rights as our good neighbors.

Proper zoning
= smart growth and removal of blight.

Clearly the market, planning commission, City leadership (per the attached) and the stakeholders have spooked in this regard, we respectfully request that you pare the LCP recommendation down to Task-4 for the City Council hearing. This is clearly the best path forward for all parties for a brightened future in north Marina.

We look forward to working with hand in hand with you and City Leadership to finally make this a great project and that will benefit and be an amenity to the residents and visitors of Marina alike.

Happy to discuss
Please advise.

All the best,
Terry
Terrence Tallen
Founder & CEO
Tallen Capital Partners, LLC
President

Monterey Bay Investments, LLC
203 Flamingo Road
#362
Mill Valley, CA 94941
(415)-286-0712
www.tallencapital.com

21 EXHIBIT C

1 March 2, 2026

Mayor Bruce Delgado and members of the City Council
City of Marina
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, CA 93933

Submitted via email to: Philip Angelo, Senior Planner [email protected]

Submitted by: Monterey Bay CNPS, P.O. Box 221303, Carmel, CA 93922 Nicole Nedeff, [email protected] on behalf of CNPS-MB

Re: March 4, 2024 City Council Meeting Agenda Item 13d
Local Coastal Program -Land Use Plan Update

Dear Mayor Delgado and members of the City Council:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Agenda Item 13d regarding the February 23, 2026 version of the Local Coastal Program-Land Use Plan update (LCP-LUP), which contains proposed minor revisions to the October 6, 2025 Draft Public Review version.

The following remarks are submitted on behalf of the California Native Plant Society (CNPS), a non-profit environmental organization with over 12,500 members in 35 Chapters across California and Baja California, Mexico. The Mission of CNPS is the protection California’s native plant heritage and its preservation for future generations through the application of science, research, education, and conservation. CNPS works closely with decision-makers, scientists, and local planners to advocate for well-informed policies, regulations, and land management practices.

The Monterey Bay Chapter of CNPS (CNPS-MB) has a long history of advocating for the conservation and restoration of unique coastal habitats throughout the Monterey Bay region.

The Coastal Zone habitats in the Marina Dunes Complex are very high priority protection and stewardship areas. Coastal ecosystems in the city’s Coastal Zone support a suite of uncommon plants, birds and wildlife species, many of which are extremely rare and protected by the state and federal Endangered Species Acts.

Please consider the following comments during your discussion of proposed Draft LCP-LUP revisions:

• CNPS-MB concurs with the Planning Commission’s recommendation that Active Recreation be removed as an allowable use from the Open Space land use designation, while expanding the definition of passive recreation to “Low intensity recreational uses such as walking trails, 22 EXHIBIT C

CNPS Monterey Bay Chapter Comments – Marina LCP-LUP Update

2 hiking trails, boardwalks, picnic areas, interpretive signage, interpretive centers, botanical gardens, community gardens, and nature observation decks and other uses that will not result in impacts to wildlife and do not create noise impacts”.

• CNPS-MB concurs with the recommendation that the City Council carry forward the Planning Commission’s proposal regarding removal of active recreation entirely as an allowable land use within the Open Space land use designation.

• CNPS-MB concurs with the staff recommendation that Closed-cone Cypress be removed from potential ESHA in the LUP. Thus, we agree with the changes to the LUP between the 10/6/25 and 2/23/26 versions, whereby cypress was removed from the ESHA maps (Figure 6 and Figure 7) and the text descriptions of ESHA habitat.

• CNPS-MB recommends that a figure be added to the Draft LCP-LUP that depicts all of the element occurrences of special status species mapped by the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) within the city’s Coastal Zone. Note that CNDDB documentation directly applies to section 3.3 Land Use Policies – BIO, particularly BIO-1, which references CNDDB records and the list of “fully protected species” or “species of concern”.

A CNDDB map is included in Appendix B - Biological Resources Memo (EMC Planning Group, 2025), however it should also be incorporated into the final LCP-LUP amendment to identify the widespread distribution of protected plants and animals present in the Coastal Zone. Most of the sensitive status taxa documented by CNDDB within Marina’s Coastal Zone currently do not have designated Critical Habitat and it is important to identify the concentration of these species in Marina’s ESHA areas.

• CNPS-MB recommends that the scientific names for Monterey spineflower and Western Snowy Plover be incorporated into the text describing these species on Page 3-10 of the Draft Public Review Document dated October 2025.

• Please give consideration to adding the following to the list of routine maintenance activities noted in BIO-20 for wetlands: (1) “removal of sediment that has accumulated above the pre-European grade”, (2) “removal of trash”, (3) “implementation of approved restoration activities”.

• CNPS-MB recommends that any omitted wetlands in the Coastal Zone be added to Figure 6, Figure 7, Figure 8, and Table 3-1 with the appropriate wetland designation. These include: the wetlands in the CalTrans right-of-way just west of the aptly named “Cypress Lakes Ct” (a fragment of one of the original natural vernal pools of Marina), and the wetland in the CalTrans right-of-way just west of Glorya Jean Tate Park (possibly created during construction of Highway 1).

• CNPS-MB recommends that Central Maritime Chaparral (CMC) be added and described in 23 EXHIBIT C

CNPS Monterey Bay Chapter Comments – Marina LCP-LUP Update

3 the list of ESHA types that starts on Page 3-2 in Appendix B (Biological Resources Memo), and in any other places in the LUP or appendices where non-wetland ESHA habitat types are listed, described, or mapped. Patches of CMC persist within the Coastal Zone in the Cal Trans and TAMC rights-of-way west of Marina High School and are likely relicts of a more extensive distribution that was destroyed by the Army in what is now Fort Ord Dunes State Park and that is gradually becoming re-established. In these areas, CMC is characterized by the presence of chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), sandmat manzanita (Arctostaphylos pumila), woolly leaf manzanita (Arctostaphylos tomentosa ssp. tomentosa), Monterey ceanothus (Ceanothus rigidus), sand scrub ceanothus (Ceanothus dentatus), and coast silk-tassel (Garrya elliptica).

These taxa grow in small but dense and often relatively intact patches in the Coastal Zone particularly east of the highway, but also in the TAMC right-of-way and in Fort Ord Dunes State Park. The northern limit of the most substantial patches is roughly level with the location of the high school. One patch is approximately 1.5 acres and another further south is approximately

0.75 acres. Maritime Chaparral communities are sensitive natural communities that have experienced substantial decline, and every attempt should be made to recognize and restore them where they occur or historically occurred within planning jurisdictions such as the city’s LCP. This will help assure that future projects and the biologists working for them will recognize CMC when they see evidence for it.

• CNPS-MB recommends that references to Scirpus be changed to Schoenoplectus, as appropriate, to reflect changes in taxonomic nomenclature.

• CNPS-MB recommends that in policy VIS-11, the word “California” be replaced with the word “Marina”. Dune landscapes in Monterey County are already adversely impacted by planted “California” natives (e.g. Eriogonum fasciculatum and Eriogonum giganteum) escaping and invading into dune areas where they compete with the true natives (e.g. Eriogonum parvifolium). True Marina natives from local genetic sources should be used in landscaping within the city’s Coastal Zone to avoid exacerbating this problem further.

Thank you for your continued efforts to restore and conserve our precious coastal resources.

Sincerely,

Patrick Regan, CNPS Monterey Bay Chapter President

CC: CNPS-MB Board of Directors
24 EXHIBIT C
25 EXHIBIT C
26 EXHIBIT C
March 13, 2026 Item No: 13b
Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting
of the Marina City Council of March 17, 2026

CITY COUNCIL TO RECEIVE A PRESENTATION REGARDING THE
STATUS OF THE CITY’S FORT ORD HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN

COMPLIANCE PROJECT AND CITY-WIDE INCIDENTAL TAKE

PERMIT FOR MONTEREY GILIA PROJECT FROM DENISE DUFFY
AND ASSOCIATES, INC., AND PROVIDE INPUT ON THE

CONCEPTUAL MITIGATION STRATEGY FOR MONTEREY GILIA
FOR THE CITY-WIDE ITP.

REQUEST:

It is requested that the City Council consider:

1. Receiving a presentation regarding the status of the City’s Fort Ord Habitat Management Plan Compliance Project and City-Wide Incidental Take Permit (ITP) for Monterey Gilia Project.

2. Providing input on the Conceptual Mitigation Strategy for Monterey Gilia for the City- Wide ITP.

BACKGROUND:

Fort Ord Habitat Management Plan Compliance
The U.S. Army’s decision to close and dispose of the Fort Ord military base was considered a major federal action that could affect listed species under the federal Endangered Species Act (“ESA”). In 1993, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ( “USFWS” or the “Service” ) issued a Biological Opinion (“BO”) on the disposal and reuse of former Fort Ord requiring that a Habitat Management Plan be developed and implemented to reduce the incidental take of listed species and loss of habitat that supports these species. As a result, the U.S. Army prepared the Installation-Wide Multispecies Habitat Management Plan for Former Fort Ord, California (“HMP”) in 1997. The Fort Ord Reuse Authority ( “FORA”) was in the process of preparing a Fort Ord Habitat Conservation Plan (“HCP”) to support the issuance of base-wide incidental take permits, which incorporated the habitat requirements of the HMP. However, the base -wide permitting effort was discontinued, and the Fort Ord HCP is no longer proposed. As a result, the Service requested that the local jurisdictions initiate the steps necessary to comply with the approved HMP. The City is responsible for four Habitat Management Areas ( “HMAs”), including the Salinas River, Airport, Northwest Corner, and Landfill HMAs “EXHIBIT A.” In accordance with the requirements described in the HMP and the deed restrictions for the parcels, a Resource Management Plan (“RMP”) must be prepared and implemented.

On December 15, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020 -157 approving an Agreement with Denise Duffy & Associates , Inc. (“DD&A”) to provide biological consulting services to develop the RMP. The RMP will bring the City into compliance with deed restrictions and federal agency requirements to manage the City’s HMAs to mitigate for development on former Fort Ord.
1 On April 6, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021 -26 approving Amendment No. 1 to the DD&A Agreement, which provided for focused botanical surveys within the four habitat management areas to better inform management recommendations from the initial scope of work.

At the City Council meeting on December 17, 2024, DD&A presented an update on the status of this project, including an updated timeline for completion.

At the City Council meeting on May 20, 2025, DD&A presented an update on the status of this project, including an updated timeline for completion.

At the City Council meeting on June 3, 2025, the Council approved a new contract with DD&A to continue providing biological consulting services to the City for this project.

At the City Council meeting on November 18, 2025, the Council received an update on the status of this project, including an updated timeline and the coordination efforts with the 2045 General Plan Update. The City Council requested that the Salinas River HMA be evaluated for public access.

City-Wide Incidental Take Permit for Monterey Gilia
The City currently owns a number of parcels in the former Fort Ord that were deeded to the City by the U.S. Army as economic conveyances following the closure of the former base that allow for development for commercial/residential purposes, which are known or have the potential to support occurrences of Monterey gilia ( Gilia tenuiflora spp. arenaria). Monterey gilia is a threatened species listed under the California Endangered Species Act ( “CESA”) and an endangered species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act ( “ESA”). Impacts to this plant species from potential future development activities on these parcels would require an Incidental Take Permit (“ITP”) in accordance with Section 2081(b) of the CESA.

Therefore, on December 15, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020 -157 approving an agreement with DD&A to provide biological consulting services to assist the City in acquiring a City-Wide ITP from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to authorize the incidental take of Monterey gilia that may result from the implementation of future planned development on City lands in the former Fort Ord.

On April 6, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021 -26 approving Amendment No. 1 to the DD&A Agreement, which provided for additional surveys for this species.

On December 7, 2021, the City Council held an informational and public input session regarding the prioritization of conservation and development areas to inform the mitigation strategy for the City-Wide ITP for Monterey gilia. The City Council requested that options be prepared and brought back to the council and public for discussion. In response to that request, City staff and DD&A held an in -person community workshop presenting the data and various options to the public and held a study session at a special City Council meeting on December 11 and 13, 2022, respectively. The public and City Council supported focusing development opportunities within the Airport Business Park Area , Future Cypress Knolls Development Area, and Marina Northwest Corner HMA for the Del Monte Boulevard Extension , and focusing conservation within the remaining study areas, as shown in “EXHIBIT B.”

At the City Council meeting on December 17, 2024, DD&A presented an update on the status of this project, including recent input from the resource agencies and an updated timeline for completion.
2 At the City Council meeting on May 20, 2025, DD&A presented an update on the status of this project, and received input on a conceptual realignment of the proposed Del Monte Boulevard/2nd Avenue Extension.

At the City Council meeting on June 3, 2025, the Council approved a new contract with DD&A to continue providing biological consulting services to the City for this project.

At the City Council meeting on November 18, 2025, the Council received an update on the status of this project and staff requested input on the Conceptual Mitigation Strategy for Monterey gilia (“Conceptual Mitigation Strategy”), which is conceptually depicted in “EXHIBIT C.”

Specifically, staff solicited Council input on “joining mitigation strategies” with the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (“TAMC”) to mit igate for their impacts to Monterey gilia that would occur as a result of the construction of the proposed California Avenue Segment of the Fort Ord Regional Trail and Greenway (“FORTAG”) project (“proposed FORTAG project”), which is located on City land . The “joining mitigation strategies” approach involves aligning the mitigation measures, timelines, and conservation objectives of these three permitting efforts.

Under the “joining mitigation strategies” approach with TAMC, a portion of the 8 th Street Area would be set aside to mitigate for the proposed FORTAG project, which is conceptually depicted in “ EXHIBIT D.” The balance of the 8 th Street Area would contribute to the proposed conceptual mitigation strategy for Monterey gilia under the City -Wide ITP. At the request of the City, CDFW would be willing to provide written assurance that the City would be able to incorporate the remaining balance of the parcel for the City -Wide ITP. The City would provide for the permanent protection and management of the 8 th Street Area under a conservation easement and long -term management plan, combining or coordinating the respective mitigation measures so that habitat preservation, enhancement, and monitoring requirements function cohesively.

The City recognizes the significance and community benefits of the proposed FORTAG project and greatly values its longstanding partnerships and agreements with TAMC , specifically the FORTAG Master Agreement. As a result, the City Council supported the “joining mitigation strategies” approach with TAMC as part of the City -Wide ITP mitigation strategy. As a result, City staff is coordinating with TAMC on the specific terms of this approach and complet ing certain permit lands package requirements . City staff will return to City Council to request approval of the agreement, record the conservation easement, and other related items in the coming months.

On March 27, 2025, CDFW issued a Notice of Violation ( “NOV”) to the Dadwal Management Group (“Dadwal”) for the unauthorized take of Monterey gilia associated with the construction of the Home2Suites project in the City of Marina. The NOV requires that Dadwal submit an ITP application for the impacted Monterey gilia. To fully mitigate for the take of Monterey gilia, CDFW may require compensatory mitigation in the form of acquisition and perpetual management of habitat management lands; a 3:1 mitigation ratio has been required for similar projects in previous ITPs issued by CDFW. Because the City was currently undergoing the City - Wide ITP process, CDFW recommended that Dadwal coordinate with the City to determine the feasibility of including mitigation for the unauthorized take as part of the City -Wide ITP. As a result, City staff also solicited input from Council on incorporating the mitigation required to mitigate for the unauthorized take of Monterey gilia associated with the construction of the Home2Suites project in the City.
3 However, the City Council ha d questions about incorporating the Home2Suites mitigation into the City -Wide ITP , specifically requesting a better understanding of the City’s role as a fiduciary, and requested additional information on several other items, as identified below. The Council requested this information be presented before providing any additional input and City staff agreed to return to Council with the requested information.

ANALYSIS:

Fort Ord Habitat Management Plan Compliance
As described above, the City is required to develop a RMP to identify the habitat management activities required in the four HMAs with in the City’s jurisdiction. The City continues to coordinate with DD&A and the resource agencies to complete the administrative draft. The City and DD&A are collaborating closely to ensure that the City -Wide ITP and 2045 General Plan Update projects both inform and complement the RMP . An updated project timeline is included in the presentation.

At the November 18, 2025, City Council meeting, the public and City Council acknowledged that the Salinas River HMA is a unique area that warrants evaluation for potential public use.

Under the HMP, this area is designated as a “Habitat Reserve,” a land use category intended to protect biologically important habitat for HMP target species. Lands designated as Habitat Reserves are set aside from development, and the primary management objective for this category is the conservation and enhancement of threatened and endangered species. With the exception of the Oak Oval HMA owned by the County of Monterey, new development is not allowed within designated Habitat Reserves, including the construction of new roads or trails.

However, public access may be permitted within the Salinas River HMA provided that the goals and objectives of the HMP, and the RMP currently under development, continue to be met. Any such access would be required on existing roads and trails unless an amendment to the HMP is approved by the USFWS.

The Draft RMP will describe the existing and potential future uses within the Salina River HMA and i dentify habitat management and monitoring measures , and associated costs, to ensure activities within the HMA remain consistent with the goals and objectives of the HMP and RMP.

The public and Council will have the opportunity to review and provide comments on the proposed uses and management measures, and associated costs, during the public review period for the Draft RMP, anticipated in fall 2026.

City-Wide Incidental Take Permit for Monterey Gilia
As summarized above, the Council raised questions and requested additional information regarding the City -Wide ITP Conceptual Mitigation Strategy, including clarification on incorporating the Dadwal NOV into the City -Wide ITP and a better understanding of the City’s role as a fiduciary. The Council also requested additional information on several other items related to the Conceptual Mitigation Strategy as follows:

• The potential implications for the City -Wide ITP associated with retaining or closing the existing equestrian trails through the 8th Street Area; • Changing the land use designation of the southwestern portion of the Northwest Corner HMA to Conservation instead of existing designation of Habitat Preserve & Other Open Space and proposed designation under the 2045 General Plan as Regional Retail; • Detailed traffic study for the conceptual Del Monte Extension that also allows the FORTAG connection and Evaluate the placement of a trail similar to the FORTAG concept from 2 nd Avenue to Del Monte Boulevard within the Northwest Corner HMA; and
4 • Explore the possibility of mitigation sites outside of the City limits and/or not owned by the City that would provide sufficient lands to mitigate impacts to the southern polygon in Cypress Knolls.

The City is requesting Council input on the following discussion items to finalize the Conceptual Mitigation Strategy for Monterey gilia for inclusion in the ITP application.

Dadwal NOV and City-Wide ITP

As stated above, t he NOV requires that Dadwal submit an ITP application for the impact s to Monterey gilia that resulted from the construction of the Home2Suites hotel in the University Villages Specific Plan area. To fully mitigate for the take of Monterey gilia, CDFW may require compensatory mitigation in the form of acquisition and perpetual management of habitat management lands; a 3:1 mitigation ratio has been required for similar projects in previous ITPs issued by CDFW but mitigation ratios are determined on a project-by-project basis.

The NOV did not specify the amount of take that occurred during construction of the Home2Suites project. The University Villages Specific Plan EIR estimated that there were approximately 0.2 acres of occupied Monterey gilia habitat containing approximately 789 individuals within the entire 420-acre University Villages Specific P lan area. Based on the data collected for the University Villages Specific Plan EIR and GIS analysis, it is estimated that approximately 0.02 acre s (871.2 square feet [ sf]) of occupied Monterey gilia habitat containing approximately 59 individuals were impacted during construction of the Home2Suites. Assuming a 3:1 mitigation ratio , Dadwal may be required to acquire , restore, manage, and preserve 0.06 acres (2,613.6 sf) of compensatory mitigation lands. Given the limited availability of mitigation lands for Monterey gilia , scale of the impact, and the City is undergoing the City -Wide ITP process, CDFW recommended that Dadwal coordinate with the City to determine the feasibility of including mitigation for the unauthorized take as part of the City-Wide ITP.

Because the City is already proposing conservation of the 8 th Street Area as part of the City - Wide ITP Conceptual Mitigation Strategy , City staff identified a 0. 36-acre area within that conservation area where mitigation for the impacts from the Home2Suites project could occur, as shown in “EXHIBIT D.” This 0.36-acre area was identified due to the presence of suitable soils and open, sandy areas that could provide opportunities for planting of Monterey gilia. The ITP requirements to remedy the unauthorized take of Monterey gilia by Dadwal are not known at this time. However, based on DD&A’s experience, restoration of Monterey gilia habitat at a 3:1 ratio for the area impacted (i.e., 0.06 acres) may be considered an appropriate remedy by CDFW.

Identifying a larger restoration allows restoration activities to occur at densities and distributions appropriate for Monterey gilia.

As the City is already proposing to conserve the 8 th Street Area as part of the City -Wide ITP, incorporating mitigation for the Dadwal NOV into this conservation area can be accomplished without significant additional effort or resource commitment by the City. In addition, incorporating mitigation for the Dadwal NOV into the City -Wide ITP would not necessitate an increase in the amount of mitigation land included in the overall Conceptual Mitigation Strategy or reduce the area proposed for future development. Under the City -Wide ITP, the City will be required to manage and preserve the 8th Street Area in perpetuity. Once the ITP is issued this will include, among other requirements, the preparation and implementation of a Long -Term Management Plan (LTMP) and the establishment of an endowment to fund the management in perpetuity.

5 If mitigation for the Dadwal NOV is incorporated into the City-Wide ITP, the specific mitigation requirements would be identified in the LTMP, and the endowment would identify the associated costs to implement these requirements over the long term. The City could request reimbursement from Dadwal for these costs, in addition to costs incurred for processing the ITP and completing the lands package. The City could enter into an agreement with Dadwal to define the respective roles and responsibilities, including funding obligations for the mitigation, once ITP requirements are finalized. Such an agreement would ensure that Dadwal is responsible for his share of the costs associated with mitigation for incidental take related to the NOV.

If the City chooses not to incorporate the mitigation required by the Dadwal NOV, Dadwal will be required to obtain a project-specific ITP independently.

It would likely be necessary to engage a qualified consultant to assist in obtaining and implementing the ITP. Given the limited availability of mitigation land, the size of a suitable parcel for managing and preserving the required Montere y gilia habitat is uncertain. Assuming a minimum 3:1 ratio, Dadwal would need at least 0.06 acres of mitigation land in the project vicinity. Given that it may be likely that the 0.06 acres needs to be rounded up to 0.5 acre due to the practical difficulty of locating mitigation land that exactly matches the minimum required acreage, total costs to obtain and implement the ITP independently for 0.5 acres of mitigation land, including the consultant services, could range from $500,000 to $850,000.

Potential implications for the City -Wide ITP associated with retaining or closing the existing equestrian trails through the 8th Street Area

The City is proposing a City -Wide, or regional, approach to mitigat e for impacts to Monterey gilia populations from future development. This approach results in a holistic , landscape-scale strategy rather than a project-by-project, piecemeal approach to mitigation. As a result, CDFW is evaluating the Conceptual Mitigation Strategy at a regional scale, considering overall habitat quality, rather than prescribing a specific mitigation ratio as is typically required at a project level.

Therefore, retaining the 1.1 acres equestrian trails and allowing access through the 8 th Street Area would not necessitate an increase in the amount of mitigation land included in the overall Conceptual Mitigation Strategy. Potential implications for retaining these trails may include trail maintenance, installation and maintenance of fencing and signage along the trails, and monitoring to ensure that fence conditions are maintained and that trail use does not adversely affect adjacent habitat areas. These requirements would be identified in the LTMP, and costs would be included in the endowment.

Potential implications of closing the equestrian trails may include installing and maintenance of access control features and signage to deter trespassing, monitoring for unauthorized use, restoration, and inspections to ensure that new informal trails do not develop. These requirements would be identified in the LTMP, and costs would be included in the endowment.

Based on these assumptions, it is anticipated that the costs associated with retaining and closing the trails would be similar in magnitude under the City-Wide ITP.

Changing the land use designation in the southwestern portion of the Northwest Corner HMA to Conservation instead of existing designation of Habitat Preserve & Other Open Space and the proposed designation under the 2045 General Plan as Regional Retail

6 This request from City Council would involve changing the land use designation for the southwestern portion of the Northwest Corner HMA to a Conservation designation, rather than retaining the existing designation of Habitat Preserve & Other Open Space or the proposed Regional Retail designation identified in the Draft Land Use Plan prepared for the City’s 2045 General Plan Update.

The City is currently preparing the 2045 General Plan Update. On January 9, 2025, the City Council identified its preferred land use alternative for the General Plan. The alternative is currently being analyzed in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) , which is anticipated to be released in Summer 2026. Modifying this designation at this stage would represent a significant and costly change and would delay the release of the Draft EIR. As such, modifying the land use designation represents a planning and policy decision that should be considered through the established planning and environmental review process associated with the 2045 General Plan Update.

Detailed traffic study for the conceptual Del Monte Extension that also allows the FORTAG connection; Evaluate the placement of a trail similar to the FORTAG concept from 2 nd Avenue to Del Monte Boulevard within the Northwest Corner HMA

The City Council requested the City staff come back with a detailed traffic study for the conceptual Del Monte Extension that also allows for the FORTAG connection. In addition, Council requested that staff evaluate the placement of a trail similar to the FORTAG concept (e.g., Class 1 Trail) that would extend from 2 nd Avenue to Del Monte Boulevard within the Northwest Corner HMA.

CDFW advised the City that it may be difficult to identify sufficient conservation land within the City to mitigate for the impacts to Monterey gilia that would result from constructing the 2 nd Avenue/Del Monte Extension project. The USFWS had similar concerns regarding impacts to Smith’s blue butterfly. The resource agencies strongly encouraged that the City evaluate alternative alignments for the proposed roadway that would not bi -sect populations of these species. As discussed above, at the May 20, 2025, City Council meeting, City Council supported a conceptual realignment of the proposed Del Monte Boulevard/2 nd Avenue Extension to avoid impacts to potential federally Endangered Smith’s blue butterfly habitat and reduce impacts to Monterey gilia within the Northwest Corner HMA, per the recommendations of the USFWS and CDFW.

The conceptual realignment would be located east of the originally proposed alignment, and while the 2 nd Avenue Extension would not connect directly to Del Monte Boulevard, it would connect to Patton Parkway and extend west to connect directly to Del Monte Boulevard (“EXHIBIT E”). Thus, the realignment would meet the safety and connective goals of the project.

City staff requested that Kimley -Horn evaluate the placement of a Class 1 trail within the Northwest Corner HMA; two potential alignments were evaluated: Alignment-A and Alignment- B (“EXHIBIT F”). As shown as in “EXHIBIT F,” the trail would either need to be located on the far western or eastern boundary of the parcel in order to avoid and/or reduce impacts to Monterey gilia and Smith’s blue butterfly.

As shown as in “EXHIBIT G,” the existing grades along Alignment -A would exceed accessibility design standards and the creation of cut and fill sections to flatten grades would impact the existing Caltrans right -of-way and Monterey gilia and Smith’s blue butterfly populations. In addition, this alignment may encroach into the coastal zone. Construction of this 7 alignment would likely require an encroachment permit from Caltrans, a Coastal Development Permit, and additional conservation land or a reduction in areas proposed for future development to mitigate impacts to Monterey gilia and Smith’s blue butterfly under the City -Wide ITP. As a result, Kimley-Horn determined Alignment-A would be infeasible.

As shown as in “EXHIBIT H,” there is the potential that the existing grades along Alignment -B would be within accessibility design standards and the cut and fill sections may potentially avoid the Monterey gilia and Smith’s blue butterfly populations. However, this alignment would encroach into property owned by the Monterey Peninsula Unified School District ( “MPUSD”) in order to avoid the large population of Monterey gilia, which would require an easement from the MPUSD. The City contacted MPUSD to inquire about the potential for an easement, but MPUSD indicated it could conflict with planned field improvements. Those improvements have since been constructed, leaving insufficient space to accommodate Alignment -B without encroaching on the large population of Monterey gilia. Therefore, this alignment is not feasible without providing additional conservation land or reducing areas proposed for future development to offset impacts to Monterey gilia and Smith’s blue butterfly under the City -Wide ITP.

Therefore, there is no feasible alignment for a Class 1 Trail along the eastern or western boundaries of the Northwest Corner HMA that would avoid significant impacts to Monterey gilia or Smith’s blue butterfly. Construction of either alignment would require the addition of conservation land or a reduction in areas proposed for future development to offset impacts to these species under the City -Wide ITP. As noted above, identifying additional conservation land within the City, and potentially outside the City, may not be feasible.

A detailed traffic study will be completed for the proposed 2 nd Avenue/Del Monte Boulevard Extension project as part of the project’s planning and environmental review process ; the requested study is not required for the City-Wide ITP process.

For the purposes of the City -Wide ITP process, City staff recommend including the conceptual realignment shown in “EXHIBIT E ” as a future development project in the City -Wide ITP Conceptual Mitigation Strategy.

Explore the possibility of mitigation sites outside of the City limits and/or not owned by the City that would provide sufficient lands to mitigate impacts to the southern polygon in Cypress Knolls

City Council requested that City staff explore potential mitigation land opportunities outside of City limits and /or not owned by the City. As discussed above, CDFW is evaluating the Conceptual Mitigation Strategy at a regional scale, considering overall habitat quality, rather than prescribing a specific mitigation ratio as is typically required at a project level. Therefore, at this early stage in the permitting process, it is not yet known whether impact s to the southern polygon in Cypress Knolls would require additional mitigation land. Dr. Fred Watson of CSUMB has expressed that the two large polygons containing populations of Monterey gilia within the Cypress Knolls area represent historically important populations. In response, City staff have proposed protecting these areas as part of the planning process for the Cypress Knolls Specific Plan area. Future development proposals in this area will require focused botanical surveys as part of the biological resources analysis, which will further inform the conservation strategy.

Based on these consideration s, City staff recommends continuing to propose protection of the two polygons as shown in “EXHIBIT H.” If additional mitigation land is ultimately required as a result, City staff will return to Council for further direction. 8 FISCAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impacts of the discussion items above are identified by subject below:
• Allowing public access within the Salinas River HMA
o The Draft RMP will describe the existing and potential future uses within the Salina River HMA and identify habitat management and monitoring measures, and associated costs, to ensure activities within the HMA remain consistent with the goals and objectives of the HMP and RMP. The public and Council will have the opportunity to review and provide comments on the proposed uses and management measures, and associated costs, during the public review period for the Draft RMP, anticipated in fall 2026.
• Dadwal NOV and City-Wide ITP
o If incorporated into the City -Wide ITP, t he City could enter into an agreement with Dadwal to define the respective roles and responsibilities, including funding obligations for the mitigation, once ITP requirements are finalized. Such an agreement would ensure that Dadwal is responsible for his share of the costs associated with mitigation for incidental take related to the NOV. • The potential implications for the City -Wide ITP associated with retaining or closing the existing equestrian trails through the 8th Street Area
o Based on the assumptions provided, it is anticipated that the costs associated with retaining and closing the trails would be similar in magnitude. • Changing the land use designation of the southwestern portion of the Northwest Corner HMA to Conservation instead of existing designation of Habitat Preserve & Other Open Space and proposed designation under the 2045 General Plan as Regional Retail o Modifying the land use designation for this portion of the Northwest Corner HMA would represent a significant and costly change and would delay the release of the Draft EIR. This change is best evaluated through the broader policy framework of the General Plan and its accompanying environmental review. • Detailed traffic study for the conceptual Del Monte Extension that also allows the FORTAG connection and Evaluate the placement of a trail similar to the FORTAG concept from 2nd Avenue to Del Monte Boulevard within the Northwest Corner HMA o A detailed traffic study will be completed for the proposed 2 nd Avenue/Del Monte Boulevard Extension project as part of the project’s planning and environmental review process with the cost to be determined at a future date; the requested study is not needed for the City -Wide ITP process . For the purposes of the City -Wide ITP process, City staff recommend including the conceptual realignment shown in “EXHIBIT E” as a future development project in the City-Wide ITP Conceptual Mitigation Strategy with no additional cost anticipated at this time. • Explore the possibility of mitigation sites outside of the City limits and/or not owned by the City that would provide sufficient lands to mitigate impacts to the southern polygon in Cypress Knolls.
o No additional cost anticipated at this time as this exploration would occur if needed as part of the existing budget.

9 CONCLUSION:

City staff have provided responses to City Council information requests and are requesting input on the proposed Conceptual Mitigation Strategy for the City-Wide ITP to support the preparation of the application.

Respectfully submitted,

_____________________________
Guido Persicone, AICP
Community Development Director
City of Marina

REVIEWED/CONCUR:

___________________________
Layne Long
City Manager
City of Marina

2037445.1
10 C it y o f M a r ina C it y- Wid e M o nt e r e y G il ia I T P H a b it a t M a na g e m e nt A r e a s 1 in = 3 , 0 0 0 f t
X
1 1 / 1 2 / 2 0 2 5
¯
P a t h : C : \ G I S \ G I S _ P r o je c t s \ 2 0 2 1 - 0 3 C it y o f M a r ina I T P \ M a p P r o d u c t s \ 2 0 2 5 m a ps \ F ig X - H a b it a t M a na g e m e nt A r e a s . m x d S c a l e
D a t e F ig u r e
0 0 . 2 50 . 5m i
Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc.
P l a nning a nd E nv ir o nm e nt a l C o ns u l t ing F o r m e r F o r t O r d B o u nd a r y C it y o f M a r ina L im it s
C it y o f S e a s id e L im it s H a b it a t M a na g e m e nt A r e a ( H M A ) Marina
Northwest
Corner
HMA
Marina
Airport
HMA
Salinas River
HMA
Landfill HMA
ReservationRd
Inter-GarrisonRd
|ÿ1 BlancoRd
!
C I T Y O F M A R I N A
C O U N T Y O F M O N T E R E Y
!
!
C I T Y O F M A R I N A
C I T Y O F S E A S I D E
!
ImjinPkwy

EXHIBIT A
·|}þ1
I m j i n P kw y
I nte r - G a r r i son R d
R e se r v a ti on R d
B l a nc o R d
A b r a m s D r
C oope r R d
D e l M onte B l v d
B e a c h R d
C a l i for ni a A v e
C a r m e l A v e
D e F or e st R d
M onte r e y G i l i a O c c u r r e nc e s w i th i n P ote nti a l F u tu r e D e v e l opm e nt A r e a s A i r por t a nd D e l M onte B ou l e v a r d E x te nsi on D e v e l opm e nt S c e na r i o 1 i n = 2 , 0 0 0 ft 2 c
8 / 1 8 / 2 0 2 2
¯
P ath : D : \ GI S \ G I S _ P r oj e c ts\ 2 0 2 1 - 0 3 C i ty of Mari na I T P \ Map P r od u c ts\ F i g 2 c - Monte re y Gi l i a A i rport D MB D e v e l opm e nt S c e nari o 8 - 1 8 - 2 2 . m x d S c al e
D ate
Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc.
P l a nni ng a nd E nv i r onm e nta l C onsu l ti ng F i g u r e
0 0 . 5 10 . 2 5 M i l eF or m e r F or t O r d B ou nd a r y C i ty of M a r i na L i m i ts
H a b i ta t M a na g e m e nt A r e a ( H M A ) A r m y P a r c e l s
Monterey Gilia Occurrences in HMAs and
Potential Future Development Areas
2006-2021 DD&A Survey Results
!( Monte re y Gi l i a I nd i v i d u al s Monte re y Gi l i a P opu l ati ons 2017-2021 F. Watson Lab Survey Results
!( Monte re y Gi l i a I nd i v i d u al s 5 0 ft B u ffe r of Monte re y Gi l i a Oc c u rre nc e s P ote nti al D e v e l opm e nt E nv e l ope s ( 3 4 6 . 5 a c ) Potential Future Development Areas
8 th S tr e e t N or th A r e a
8 th S tr e e t S ou th A r e a
A i r por t B u si ne ss P a r k A r e a F u tu r e C y pr e ss K nol l s D e v e l opm e nt A r e a P r e ston P a r k A r e a
S a l i na s/ R e se r v a ti on R oa d A r e a A i r por t M a ste r P l a n A r e a L a nd fi l l H M AL a nd fi l l H M A S a l i na s R i v e rS a l i na s R i v e r H M AH M A
M a r i na A i r por tM a r i na A i r por t H M AH M A
M a r i naM a r i na
N or th w e stN or th w e st
C or ne r H M AC or ne r H M A
1 6 2 . 8 a c
3 0 9 pl a nts
1 1 . 2 a c
0 pl a nts 9 . 1 a c
4 1 pl a nts
9 . 4 a c
2 pl a nts
1 1 . 6 a c
0 pl a nts
9 9 . 3 a c
2 8 2 4 pl a nts
1 0 . 7 a c
5 1 pl a nts
7 . 0 a c
2 1 pl a nts
2 5 . 5 a c
1 2 0 0 pl a nts

EXHIBIT B
City of Marina City-Wide Monterey Gilia ITP
Conceptual Mitigation Strategy w/ Proposed FORTAG Alignment 1 in = 2,000 ft
2 11/6/2025
¯
Path: C:\GIS\GIS_Projects\2021-03 City of Marina ITP\Map Products\2025 maps\Fig 2 - Conceptual Mitigation Strategy w FORTAG.mxd Scale
Date Figure
0 1,000 2,000 Feet
Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc.

Planning and Environmental Consulting
Former Fort Ord Boundary
City of Marina Limits
Landfill Cap
Existing/Potential Development Areas
Potential Development Envelopes
Potential Preservation Envelopes
Yadon's Piperia (50 ft Buffer)
Proposed FORTAG Alignment
Monterey Gilia (56.2 ac)
Proposed Impact (19.6 ac)
Proposed Preservation (33.8 ac)
Proposed Preserved by FORTAG (1.2 ac)
Retained by the Army (1.6 ac)
Marina Northwest
Corner HMA
Home2Suites
8th St
Reservation Rd
Airport
Business Park
Conceptual
Del Monte Extension
Alternative Alignment
Preston Park
Landfill HMA
8th St
Reservation Rd
Imjin Pkwy
Inter-Garrison Rd
|ÿ1
Cypress Knolls
Abrams Dr

EXHIBIT C
8th Street
Conceptual Mitigation Strategy 1 in = 300 ft
6 3/13/2026
¯
Path: C:\GIS\GIS_Projects\2021-03 City of Marina ITP\Map Products\2026 maps\Fig 6 - 8th Street 1-5-26.mxd Scale
Date Figure
0 150 300 Feet
Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc.

Planning and Environmental Consulting
8th Street Area (47.5 ac)
Assessor's Parcel 031101055000 (28.5 ac)
Potential Development Envelopes (13.5 ac)
Potential Preservation Envelopes (34.0 ac)
Proposed FORTAG Preservation Area (4.8 ac)
Proposed Home2Suites Preservation Area (0.36 ac)
Potential Restoration Area (City) (1.3 ac)
Potential Restoration Area (Home2Suites) (0.36 ac)
Proposed Equestrian Allowable Use (1.1 ac)
Existing Equestrian Trails
Proposed FORTAG Alignment
Monterey Gilia (3.6 ac)
Proposed Impact (0.2 ac)
Proposed Preservation (2.2 ac)
Proposed Preserved by FORTAG (1.2 ac)
ImjinPkwy
Imjin Rd
8th St
9th St
California
Dr

EXHIBIT D
B5-B8 Fields
LEGEND

CYPRESS KNOLLS SP AREA

DUNES SP AREA

SENSITIVE HABITAT AREAS

COUNTY GIS PARCELS

POTENTIAL ROUNDABOUT
CITY OF MARINA - 2ND & 3RD AVENUE ALIGNMENT STUDY

CONCEPT LAYOUT FOR
PLANNING PURPOSES.

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
NORTH
ROADWAY ALIGNMENTS - ALTERNATIVE 1B
STATE ROUTE 1 INTERCHANGE CONCEPT
JUNE 2025 097789139

EXHIBIT E
LEGEND

CYPRESS KNOLLS SP AREA

SENSITIVE HABITAT AREAS

COUNTY GIS PARCELS
CITY OF MARINA - 2ND & 3RD AVENUE ALIGNMENT STUDY

CONCEPT LAYOUT FOR
PLANNING PURPOSES.

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
NORTH

CLASS I TRAIL FEASBILITY
POTENTIAL ALIGNMENTS - ALTERNATIVE 1B
JUNE 2025 097789139

EXHIBIT F
CITY OF MARINA - 2ND & 3RD AVENUE ALIGNMENT STUDY

CONCEPT LAYOUT FOR
PLANNING PURPOSES.

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
NORT+

CLASS I TRAIL FEASIBILITY

ALIGNMENT-A
JUNE 2025 097789139
STATE ROUTE 1

OFF-RAMP TO DEL MONTE BLVD

PATTON PKWY

EXHIBIT G
CITY OF MARINA - 2ND & 3RD AVENUE ALIGNMENT STUDY

CONCEPT LAYOUT FOR
PLANNING PURPOSES.

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
NORT+

CLASS I TRAIL FEASIBILITY

ALIGNMENT-B
JUNE 2025 097789139
2ND AVE

PATTON PKWY

EXHIBIT H

Marina City CouncilMarch 17, 2026

Marina City Council
March 17, 2026