Agenda packet — Monterey City Council, July 19, 2022

Council Chamber, 580 Pacific
St., and Zoom Teleconference
Monterey, California
City Council Agenda
Council Regular Meeting
Tuesday, July 19, 2022
4:00 PM – 5:30 PM
7:00 PM – 11:00 PM
City Council
Clyde Roberson, Mayor
Dan Albert, Councilmember
Alan Haffa, Councilmember
Ed Smith, Councilmember
Tyller Williamson, Councilmember
City Manager
Hans Uslar
IMPORTANT NOTICE: Pursuant to California Government Code section 54953(e)(1)(A) and (C) and the Monterey City Council’s resolution authorizing virtual participation in public meetings given the COVID-19 pandemic, meetings of the Monterey City Council and its Boards, Commissions, and Committees are being conducted with a hybrid format providing both inperson and virtual (electronic) participation in order to promote social distancing and protect the health and safety of attendees.

Details for public participation in this City Council meeting:
 BEFORE THIS MEETING, members of the public may submit comment(s) to [email protected] until ½ hour before the start of the meeting. These messages will not be read aloud during the meeting but are made available to the Council and public at monterey.org/submitted-comments and in the City Manager’s Office at 580 Pacific St., Room 1, Monterey, CA 93940 during regular business hours. All comments received become part of the record.
 DURING THIS MEETING, members of the public may attend and participate:
o In-person (location listed above), with masks strongly recommended for all, regardless of vaccination status, except those who are younger than two years old or have a medical condition that prevents wearing a mask.  Online via ZoomGov Webinar live (no time delay):
 Join on a computer or smartphone: https://montereyorg.zoomgov.com/j/1607729333 An up-to-date version of the Zoom software must be used.
 Or join by telephone: Dial 833-568-8864 (Toll Free), 669-254-5252 (Campbell, Calif.) or 646-828-7666 (New York, NY). If one number doesn’t work, please try another.
 Enter Webinar ID: 160 772 9333 #
 If prompted to enter a participant ID, press #
 To “raise your hand” dial *9. Once called upon, dial *6 to unmute.  Need more help using or updating Zoom? Read our ZoomGov Meeting Instructions.
o This meeting will also stream live for viewing only on youtube.com/cityofmonterey (10 second delay) and on Comcast Channel 25 (up to 90 second delay). ***Afternoon Session Agenda ***
4:00 - 5:30 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER

PRESENTATIONS

1. Recognize July as Parks and Recreation Month (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) 7/19/2022 4:00:00 PM
2 2. Recognition of Rick Johnson on his Retirement as the Executive Director of the Old Monterey Business Association (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

3. Recognize City Employees for Milestone Anniversaries and Retirements for 2nd Quarter 2022 (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

PUBLIC COMMENTS
PUBLIC COMMENTS allows you, the public, to speak for a maximum of three minutes on any subject which is within the jurisdiction of the Monterey City Council and which is not on the agenda. Any person or group desiring to bring an item to the attention of the City Council may do so by addressing the Council during Public Comments or by addressing a letter of explanation to: City Clerk, City Hall, Monterey, CA 93940. The appropriate staff person will contact the sender concerning the details. NOTE: Public Comments are taken during the afternoon session and continued at the evening session.

Individuals may choose to speak once for up to three minutes at either session, but not both.

CONSENT ITEMS
CONSENT AGENDA consists of those items which are routine and for which a staff recommendation has been prepared. A member of the public or a Councilmember may request that an item be placed on the regular agenda for further discussion.

Approval of Minutes

4. June 7, 2022 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Award of Construction Contracts

5. Award a Construction Contract in the Amount of $336,916.00 to Total Online Protection for the CR-USASA B18301 RPL A-Bank Batteries and CR-USASA B18301 RPL B-Bank Batteries (POM 21-033 and POM 21-057) Project, Presidio Municipal Services Agency***PMSA*** (Categorically Excluded from NEPA 32 CFR; Not a Project under CEQA per Pub. Resource Code, § 21080) Ordinances
ORDINANCES are legislative acts by the Council, are the most permanent and binding type of Council action as they modify the City Code, and may be replaced only by a subsequent ordinance. An ordinance requires legal advertisement when introduced, and two readings at separate Council meetings. An ordinance is considered "passed to print" when approved for a second reading, and is "passed and adopted" when given final approval by the Council.

6. 2nd Reading of an Omnibus Ordinance to Make Clerical/Technical Updates to the City Code (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
7/19/2022 4:00:00 PM
3 Resolutions
RESOLUTIONS are passed to express the policy of the Council on certain items or programs, or are passed to direct certain types of administrative action. A resolution may be changed by adoption of a subsequent resolution. Resolutions only require one reading and are approved when "passed and adopted."

7. Authorize Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Boards, Commissions, and Committees for the Period July 22, 2022 through August 19, 2022 Pursuant to AB361 Ralph M. Brown Act Provisions (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)

8. Authorize the Purchase of a Combination (Jet/Vac) Truck from Vac-Con, Inc. in the Amount of $558,137.07 (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

9. Appropriate $150,000 in California Housing and Community Development (HCD) Local Early Action Planning (LEAP) Grant Funds and Appropriate $369,940 from the General Fund Balances Designated for General Plan Updates to include the 6th Cycle Housing Element, Safety Element, and Land Use Element Update (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

10. Award a Professional Services Agreement in the Amount of $174,770 to COAR Design Group for the Monterey Public Safety Facility Feasibility Study (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

11. Appropriate $50,000 from the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Ending Balance Account to the Mar Vista Reconstruction Design Project Account ***NCIP*** (Further CEQA Review Required)

12. Adoption of the 2022 Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

13. Authorize the City Manager to Enter into an Easement Deed and Agreement for Sewer Purposes over a Portion of the Land at 675 and 681 Van Buren Street (APN 001-512-008-000 and APN 001-512-009-000), and for the Mayor to Sign the Certificate Accepting the Easement (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

14. Amend Resolution 21-106 to Change the Salary Schedule for the Engineering Assistant II, Senior Engineer, and Assistant City Attorney Positions (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

15. Amend and Restate Resolution 22-087 Calling a General Municipal Election for November 8, 2022 and Proposing a General Business License Tax on Commercial Cannabis Activity to Revise the Ballot Measure Question (Exempt from CEQA pursuant to Pub. Resources Code 21065, CEQA Guidelines 15378(b)(4), 15061(b)(3) and Pub. Resources Code 21080, subd. (b)(8); CEQA Guidelines 15273(a)(4).))
7/19/2022 4:00:00 PM
4 16. Award Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan Update Professional Services Contract ***CIP*** (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

17. Authorize Purchase of ePlus Technology Inc. Backup Hardware and Services for $84,986.38 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
*** End of Consent Agenda ***

PUBLIC HEARING
PUBLIC HEARINGS are held to receive public comment on certain items pending Council action. You are welcome to offer your comments after being recognized by the Mayor. The Council may limit the time allocated to each speaker. NOTICE CONCERNING YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS: If you challenge the City Council’s zoning, planning, or land use decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing on the matter, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at the time of or prior to the close of the public hearing. (Government Code section 65009(b).)

18. Confirm Alvarado Street Maintenance District 85-1 Area and Assessment Proposed in Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2022/2023 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

19. Confirm Calle Principal Maintenance District 00-1 Area and Assessment Proposed in Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2022/2023 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

PUBLIC APPEARANCE
PUBLIC APPEARANCE items are reports on non-routine issues that might stimulate public discussion, but that do not require formal noticing as public hearings. You are welcome to offer your comments after being recognized by the Mayor. The Council may limit the time each speaker is allocated.

20. 2nd Reading - Amend Chapter 19 of the Monterey City Code (Licenses, Fees, and Charges) to Prohibit the Sale of all Flavored Tobacco Products Except for Flavored Shisha Tobacco Products and to Prohibit Single Use Electronic Smoking Devices (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

21. Adopt a Resolution Establishing Compensation and Benefits Packages for Unrepresented Employees (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
*** Adjourn to Closed Session (See additional agenda) *** Council will adjourn to closed session no later than 5:00 p.m.

RECESS 5:30 p.m.

RECONVENE
*** Evening Session Agenda ***
7:00 - 11:00 p.m.

No discussion of a new item will be started after 10:30 p.m. 7/19/2022 4:00:00 PM
5 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS
PUBLIC COMMENTS allows you, the public, to speak for a maximum of three minutes on any subject that is within the jurisdiction of the Monterey City Council and that is not on the agenda. Any person or group desiring to bring an item to the attention of the City Council may do so by addressing the Council during Public Comments or by addressing a letter of explanation to: City Clerk, City Hall, Monterey, CA 93940. The appropriate staff person will contact the sender concerning the details. NOTE: Public Comments are taken during the afternoon session and continued at the evening session. Individuals may choose to speak once for up to three minutes at either session, but not both.

ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CLOSED SESSION

CONSENT ITEMS (EVE)
CONSENT AGENDA consists of those items which are routine and for which a staff recommendation has been prepared. A member of the public or a Councilmember may request that an item be placed on the regular agenda for further discussion.

22. Adopt Resolution Certifying Compliance with State Law with Respect to Levying Assessments and Special Taxes (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
*** End of Consent Agenda ***

PUBLIC APPEARANCE (EVE)
PUBLIC APPEARANCE items are reports on non-routine issues that might stimulate public discussion, but that do not require formal noticing as public hearings. You are welcome to offer your comments after being recognized by the Mayor. The Council may limit the time each speaker is allocated.

23. Authorize the City Manager to Enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with First Community Housing for Development of Affordable Housing at 442 Adams Street (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

24. Authorize the City Manager to Enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with MidPen Housing for Development of Affordable Housing at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street, 424 and 450 Madison Street (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmembers may ask a question for clarification or make a brief announcement or make a brief report on his or her activities. In addition, Council may provide a referral to staff or other resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the body at a subsequent meeting concerning any City matter (G.C. 54954.2).

CITY MANAGER REPORTS
The City Manager may make a brief report on his activities or a brief announcement. He may also ask for clarification or direction regarding scheduling of Council meetings and study sessions.

ADJOURNMENT
7/19/2022 4:00:00 PM
6 Members of the public have the right to address the City Council on any item on the Agenda, before or during its consideration [G.C. §54954.3(a)]. The Mayor will formally open the floor for public comment on items such as "Public Appearance" and "Public Hearings." Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on these matters within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, are available at: monterey.org/submitted-comments and in the City Manager’s Office at 580 Pacific St., Room 1, Monterey, CA 93940 during regular business hours.

Information distributed to the Council at the Council meeting becomes part of the public record. A copy of written material, pictures, etc. should be provided for this purpose.

City Council Meetings are cable cast live and recorded for replay on Monterey's Government Access Channel 25 by Access Media Productions (AMP).

CITY OF MONTEREY'S 24-HOUR SUGGESTION HOTLINES:

Voicemail: (831) 646-3799
Fax: (831) 646-3793
Email: [email protected]
WebPage: http://www.monterey.org
INTERPRETATION: The Monterey City Council invites and encourages public participation at its meetings. Requests for language interpretation may be made by contacting the City Clerk at [email protected] or 831-646-3935. The City Clerk will make every effort to accommodate requests for interpreter assistance. Requests should be made as soon as possible in advance of any meeting of the City Council. The City is committed to addressing language interpretation requests swiftly in order to maximize public participation.

ACCESSIBILITY: The City of Monterey is committed to including the disabled in all of its services, programs and activities. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at [email protected] or (831) 646-3935. Notification 30 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting [28 CFR 35.102-

35.104 ADA Title II]. Later requests will be accommodated to the extent feasible. For communicationrelated assistance, dial 711 to use the California Relay Service (CRS) to speak to City offices. CRS offers free text-to-speech, speech-to-speech, and Spanish-language services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. If you require a hearing amplification device to attend a meeting, dial 711 to use CRS to talk to the City Clerk's Office at (831) 646-3935 to coordinate use of a device.

Upcoming city meetings are listed at http://isearchmonterey.org More information is available by calling (831) 646-3935 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Karen Larson, Parks and Recreation Director
SUBJECT: Recognize July as Parks and Recreation Month (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council recognize the month of July as Parks and Recreation Month in the City of Monterey and celebrate the value of parks and recreation in our community.

VALUE DRIVERS:

In collaboration with our community partners, work to improve the quality of life of all of our community members by fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion; championing equitable access to affordable housing; and maintaining a safe environment.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

No new policy implications are associated with this proclamation.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

None.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose to not recognize the month of July at Parks and Recreation Month in the City of Monterey.

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 1.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 1., Item Page 1, Packet Page 7 DISCUSSION:

For Parks and Recreation Month, many states, provinces, cities/towns and municipalities from across the nation come together to celebrate with official government proclamations in honor of the contributions Parks and Recreation makes to their communities.

Since 1985, Americans have celebrated Parks and Recreation during the month of July to promote the important role parks and recreation has in health and well-being, conservation and social equity. The services that parks and recreation professionals provide are vital for our communities - from protecting open space and natural resources, to promoting health and wellness, and providing activities and resources for all people. Every day, in communities across the country, the people of parks and recreation are providing essential services and making their communities better places to live, work and visit.

Local parks and recreation agencies are uniquely suited to serve as community wellness hubs, connecting all members of the community to programs and services that advance health equity, improve health outcomes and enhance quality of life. The National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) announced “We Rise Up for Parks and Recreation!” as the theme for 2022.

The slogan helps celebrate all the ways communities are stronger, more vibrant and more resilient because of parks and recreation.

For over 80 years, the citizens of Monterey have supported Parks and Recreation programs.

Generations of park, playground, ballfield, camp and activity users have benefitted from the City Council’s focus on recreational activities. Thousands of people of all ages, each day, enjoy the City’s multitude of parks, including ball fields, playgrounds, tennis, pickleball and basketball courts, beach areas, recreation trail, dog park, skate park and campground, and a wide variety of classes each week at our three community centers, Sports Center and summer camps.

Thanks to City funds, user fees and generous support from the Neighborhood Community and Improvement Program (NCIP), and private donors, we are able to provide recreational opportunities for seniors, children, teens, families, students, military, and all members of our community.

The leadership of City Council, interest and oversight of our Parks and Recreation Commission, dedication of our City employees, and support of the community has created a model City recreation and parks program that is recognized not only across the County, but across California. It is fitting to reflect on the exponential value parks and recreational professionals bring to communities and to celebrate these accomplishments with Council recognition during Parks and Recreation Month.

KL
Attachments: 1. Proclamation
e: Parks and Recreation Commission
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 1., Item Page 2, Packet Page 8 Office of the Mayor
Monterey, California 93940
Proclamation Recognizing
July as Parks and Recreation Month
Clyde Roberson
WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation recognizes the importance of access to local parks, recreation, trails, open space, andfacilitiesfor all citizens;
WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation promotes physical, emotional and mental health and wellness through organized and self-directed fitness, play, and activity; WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation supports the economic vitality of communities by providing front line jobs, partnering with local businesses and non-profits, and offering events for resident's engagement;
WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation fosters social cohesiveness in communities by celebrating diversity, providing spaces to come together peacefully, modeling compassion, promoting social equity, connecting social networks, and ensuring all people have access to its benefits; WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation supports human development and endless learning opportunities that foster social, intellectual, physical and emotional growth in people of all ages and abilities; WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation strengthens community identity by providingfacilities and services that reflect and celebrate community character, heritage, culture, history, aesthetics and landscape; WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation facilitates community problem and issue resolution by providing safe spaces to come together peacefully and facilitating conversations and services in order that our communities may heal both physically and emotionally;
WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation sustains and stewards our natural resources by protecting habitats and open space, connecting people to nature, and promoting the ecological function of parkland; WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation remains versatile and innovative in providing vital services to communities through local, national, or global emergencies, all while adhering to guidelines set forth by governing agencies; and
WHEREAS, Parks and Recreation supports safe, vibrant, attractive, progressive communities that make life better through positive alternatives offered in their recreational opportunities.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED THAT I, Clyde Roberson, Mayor of the City of Monterey, on behalf of the City Council and citizens, do hereby recognize the month of July as Parks and Recreation Month in the City of Monterey.

Dated: July 19, 2022

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 1., Item Page 3, Packet Page 9 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Hans Uslar, City Manager
Prepared by: Laurie Huelga, Administrative Analyst
SUBJECT: Recognition of Rick Johnson on his Retirement as the Executive Director of the Old Monterey Business Association (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) VALUE DRIVER:

DESCRIPTION:

Rick Johnson is retiring after more than twenty years as the Executive Director of the Old Monterey Business Association (OMBA). As a key business district in Monterey, the OMBA has benefited greatly under Rick Johnson’s executive leadership. Likewise, both residents and visitors have enjoyed all the work Rick and his team have done to make Downtown Monterey a thriving, unique, fun place to visit for shopping, dining, and entertainment.

Rick’s positive can-do attitude and pleasant demeanor, along with his ability to connect people and solve problems, are just some of the features that made his career such a success. The City of Monterey is grateful and appreciative of Rick’s work and passion for the Birthplace of California.

The Mayor and City Council will recognize Rick Johnson on his retirement at the Council Meeting on July 19, 2022:

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 2.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 2., Item Page 1, Packet Page 10 Attachment: 1. Proclamation
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 2., Item Page 2, Packet Page 11 Office of the Mayor
Monterey, California 93940
\.
�·
Clyde Roberson
' The Mayor and City Council take great pride in recognizing Rick Johnson
Executive Director of the Old Monterey Business Association on the occasion of his Retirement
WHEREAS, Rick Johnson, Executive Director of the Old Monterey Business Association, has been an integral part of the Downtown Monterey conmnmihJ for over twenti1-two years, from 2000 to 2022. During Rick's tenure, he established himself as an avid listener, steadfast mentor, creative problem solver, communihJ builder, "bridger" of competing perspectives, cheerleader extraordinaire, thoughtful speaker, rouser of enthusiasm; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Johnson displayed a positive and happy demeanor, even when he had to say "no"; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Johnson made an appealing, inviting, clean and safe downtown a priorihJ, including lining Alvarado Street and the Alvarado Mall with custom celebratonJ banners; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Johnson had an incredibilihJ keen abilihJ to accurately assess the size of a crowd at events; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Johnson attended CihJ Council Meetings to provide praise and encouragement to Mayor, Councils and staff alike; and,
WHEREAS, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic f
r
om March 2020 to today, Mr. Johnson supported the
Downtown businesses and helped them adapt with outdoor seating and adding online purchasing options; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Johnson helped lead and promote the revitalization of the "It's Happening Now" campaign of Oldtown Monterey during his two decade term, and helped establish the Old Monterey Foundation in 2011; and, WHEREAS, Mr, Johnson was instrumental in the success of many holiday and other special events sponsored by the CihJ of Monterey, the Old Monterey Business Association, the Old Monterey Foundation, First Night Monterey, Big Sur Marathon Foundation, and many others; and,
WHEREAS, Mr. Johnson streamlined the Old Monterey Farmers' Market and Marketplace process both for merchants and visitors, making it a local favorite; and,
WHEREAS, he worked closely as a legendan; liaison between the Monterey Conference Center and local businesses to create a successful experience for visitors;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, tlwt I, Clyde Roberson, Mayor of the CihJ of Monterey, on behalf of the CihJ Council, and the entire CihJ of Monterey, thank Rick Johnson for his dedication and genuine commitment to our comnwnihJ, We wish him much happiness in his retirement.

July 19, 2022 ��
Clyde Roberson, Mayor

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 2., Item Page 3, Packet Page 12 Council
Agenda Report
HFROM: Hans Uslar, City Manager
Prepared by: Ashley Sanks, Administrative Clerk
SUBJECT: Recognize City Employees for Milestone Anniversaries and Retirements for 2nd Quarter 2022 (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council recognize City employees for their milestone anniversaries and retirements for the second quarter of 2022.

VALUE DRIVER:

Recognizing City employees supports the value driver to “provide sufficient resources and support to develop, retain, and recruit a high-quality city workforce.” POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Recognizing employees of the City at City Council meetings is consistent with City policy.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

All funding associated with recognizing City employees for their milestone anniversaries and retirements has been budgeted as part of the FY 2022/23 budget.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 3.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 3., Item Page 1, Packet Page 13 DISCUSSION:

The City of Monterey is fortunate to have many retirees and staff who are career employees and have served the community for decades. The Mayor and City Council will recognize City employees who have retired with 20 years of service or greater, in addition to employees who have reached their work anniversary with 20 or 25 years of service.

RETIREMENTS IN 2022 3rd Quarter:

Gundy Rettke, Senior Admin Analyst, Fire
Department 26.1 years of service
ANNIVERSARIES IN 2022 3rd Quarter:

Hans Uslar, City Manager, City Manager’s Office 25 years of service All individuals listed on this agenda report will be recognized as guests at the Monterey City Council meeting on July 19, 2022.

Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 3., Item Page 2, Packet Page 14

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Tuesday, June 7, 2022
4:00 PM 7:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 580 PACIFIC ST., AND ZOOM TELECONFERENCE

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers

Present: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson

Absent: None
City Staff

Present:

City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Community Development Director, Public Works Director, Parks and Recreation Director, Finance Director, Fire Chief, Library Director, City Clerk, Property Manager, Human Resources Director, Lieutenant, Recreation Manager, Senior Engineer
***Afternoon Session Agenda ***
This meeting was held with a combination of in-person and teleconference attendance, pursuant to the Ralph M. Brown Act, Calif. Government Code section 54953(e)(1)(C) and Resolution No. 22-052 C.S.

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Roberson called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.

City Clerk Klein explained to the public how to participate in the meeting virtually and the safety rules for in-person attendance. She called the roll with the full Council present by teleconference.

PRESENTATIONS

1. Receive a Presentation Regarding the Status of the Waterfront Parking Lot Resurface/Stripe Project Phase 2 - Marina Lot (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061
Action: Received presentation
Public Works Director Wittry gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was received from Wendy Brickman, Fisherman's Wharf Association, and Mike Bekker, Surfside Enterprise, and Lorna Moffat, who all asked questions about the project, which were answered by Public Works Director Wittry. He clarified that improving the bay runoff is one of the goals of the project.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from Jhonrico Carr and Lorna Moffat.

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 4.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 4., Item Page 1, Packet Page 15 City Council Minutes June 7, 2022
2 CONSENT ITEMS
Public comment on the Consent Items was not received. On question on Item 8, Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira stated that there are not sufficient alternatives at this time to the proposed Police SUVs.

On a motion by Councilmember Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Smith, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council approved the Consent Items:

2. May 17, 2022 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Action: Approved minutes

3. May 25, 2022 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Action: Approved minutes
Ordinances

4. 1st Reading by Title Only to Add Monterey City Code Section 22-26.6 to Prohibit Sitting or Lying Down on the Floor Inside Public Restrooms (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Passed ordinance to print
Resolutions

5. Authorize Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Boards, Commissions, and Committees for the Period June 18, 2022 through July 8, 2022 Pursuant to AB361 Ralph M.

Brown Act Provisions (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 22-063 C.S.

6. Award a Contract to Hope Services in an Amount Not to Exceed $25,000 to Maintain Trash Cans and Abate Litter and Appropriate $11,000 for the Service (Not a Project Under CEQA Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 22-064 C.S.

7. Amend Resolution 20-012, the Construction Contract with Cosco Fire Protection, Inc., for the Wharf II Fire Suppression Replacement Project by Increasing the Contract Amount from to $1,920,000 to $3,674,000 (Exempt from CEQA Requirements per Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1, and Section 15331, Class 31) ***CIP***
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 22-065 C.S.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 4., Item Page 2, Packet Page 16 City Council Minutes June 7, 2022
3 8. Adopt a Resolution to Authorize the Purchase of Four (4) 2022 Ford Police SUV Interceptors in the Amount of $209,442.36 (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 22-066 C.S.

9. Amend Resolution 21-061, the Construction Contract with Granite Construction Company for the USAG POM Pavement Repair 2018 Project for Presidio Municipal Services Agency Projects, by Increasing the Contract Amount from $4,043,713.20 to $4,193,713.20 (Categorically Excluded from NEPA 32 CFR; Not a Project under CEQA per Pub. Resource Code, § 21080) ***PMSA***
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 22-067 C.S.

10. Establish the 2022-23 Appropriation Limit (Gann Initiative) (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 22-068 C.S.

11. Amend and Restate Resolution 22-010, the Schedule of Hourly Rates for Temporary / Seasonal Part-Time Positions, to Modify Hourly Rates for the Support Analyst Position (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 22-069 C.S.

Other

12. Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 380 Alvarado Street, Suites 101 and 201; Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Mia Cruz (Bliss Boutique); Under Negotiation: Terms and Conditions for Lease Amendment (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Appointed real property negotiators Cole and Aldrete

13. Appoint Agency Labor Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 for Labor Negotiations with General Employees of Monterey (GEM), Management Employees' Association (MEA), Monterey Police Association (MPA), Police Lieutenants' Management Association (PLMA), Monterey Fire Fighters' Association (MFFA), Monterey Fire Chief Officers' Association (MFCOA), Monterey Executive Management Employees' Association (MEMEA) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Appointed labor negotiators Neal and Russo

14. Receive Mayor’s Recommendations and Make Appointments to the Board of Library Trustees, Disabled Access Appeals Board, and Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Committee (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 19, Section 15061)
Action: Reappointed Marsha Moroh to Board of Library Trustees for a term expiring June 30, 2026; Appointed Patriciaann Booth to the Disabled Access Appeals Board for a term expiring June 30, 2026; and appointed John Mera to the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) Committee to fill a vacated term (Skyline neighborhood alternate) expiring June 30, 2024
*** End of Consent Agenda ***
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 4., Item Page 3, Packet Page 17 City Council Minutes June 7, 2022
4 PUBLIC HEARING

15. Levy Assessment to Fund the North Fremont, New Monterey, and Cannery Row Business Improvement Districts (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution Nos. 22-070, 22-071 and 22-072 CS.

Community Development Director Cole gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment on the matter was received from Rick Johnson, New Monterey Business Assocation, who spoke about the New Monterey Business Improvement District's history and financial situation.

On a motion by Mayor Roberson, seconded by Councilmember Albert, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos. 22- 070, 22-071, and 22-072 C.S. to Levy Assessment to Fund the North Fremont, New Monterey, and Cannery Row Business Improvement Districts:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)

PUBLIC APPEARANCE

16. Recognize June 2022 as LGBTQ Pride Month and Authorize Pride Flag Display at City Hall for the Month of June 2022 (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 22-073 C.S.

City Manager Uslar made a short verbal presentation.

Public comment was not received.

The Council discussed the matter. It was stressed that the current political climate shows that there is still much to be done for queer rights. It was stated, in reference to the City budget, that LGBTQ services could use greater support.

On a motion by Councilmember Haffa, seconded by Councilmember Albert, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 22- 073 to Recognize June 2022 as LGBTQ Pride Month and Authorize Pride Flag Display at City Hall for the Month of June 2022:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 4., Item Page 4, Packet Page 18 City Council Minutes June 7, 2022
5 17. Authorize the Mayor to Sign an Open Letter to Congress for Sensible Federal Legislation to Curb Gun Violence (Not a Project Under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Authorized letter
Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions. On question, he said that staff is currently researching what action can be taken in Monterey specifically.

Public comment was not received.

A motion was introduced by Councilmember Smith, and seconded by Councilmember Albert, to authorize the Mayor to Sign an Open Letter to Congress for Sensible Federal Legislation to Curb Gun Violence.

Council discussed the matter. It was suggested that the City call for the formation of a national commission to move on many of the suggestions, especially a red flag system, data gathering, and 30-day background check. It was noted that the City's action is symbolic but will send a message with other cities that Congress needs to take bipartisan, common-sense action.

The motion carried by the following roll-call vote:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
*** Adjourn to Closed Session (See additional agenda) *** Public comment on the closed session was not received. The Council adjourned to closed session at 5:14 p.m.

RECESS

RECONVENE
The Council reconvened at 7:00 p.m. City Clerk Klein explained to the public how to participate in the meeting virtually and the safety rules for in-person attendance. She called the roll with the full Council present by teleconference.
*** Evening Session Agenda ***

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Roberson led the Pledge.

CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS
Public comment on non-agendized matters was not received.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 4., Item Page 5, Packet Page 19 City Council Minutes June 7, 2022
6 ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CLOSED SESSION
cs1. Closed Session Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 380 Alvarado Street, Suites 101 and 201
Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete
Negotiating Parties: Mia Cruz (Bliss Boutique)
Under Negotiation: Terms and Conditions for Lease Amendment (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: On a unaninimous roll call vote, the Council gave confidential direction to their real property negotiatiors

PUBLIC APPEARANCE (EVE)

18. Presentation on the Preliminary FY2022/23 Operating Budget (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Received presentation, discussed, provided feedback to staff Mayor Roberson introduced the item and spoke about the "new normal" that is due to circumstances and challenges outside of the City's control. City Manager Uslar and Finance Director King gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

The Council recessed at 8:53 p.m. and reconvened at 9:06 p.m.

Public comment was received from:

Jeannie Ferrara, Jean Rasch, Rick Heuer, Curt Tipton,Tom Rowley, Mike Brassfield, Dwayne Peterson, Esther Malkin, Dennis Duke, Tammy Jennings, and Kala Fossum, who spoke in opposition to the City's allocating NCIP funds to the capital projects like the Monterey Sports Center ("MSC"). Alternative suggestions made by these speakers included delaying putting money aside into reserves, considering selling the Monterey Sports Center, and taking the needed funding from the Parking Fund). It was stated that the NCIP is a chance to build better neighborhoods and that the 4/5 vote was proposed for fiscal emergencies; Wendy Brickman, Lance Kohler, Christina Riddoch, Barry Riddoch, and Rick Johnson, who spoke in favor of funding the business districts. Statements made by these speakers included assertions that the districts are revenue generators for the City and that the public benefits from these districts;
Richard Ruccello, who stated that deficits must be prioritized first, and infrastructure second and said that the City needs to reevaluate how it is marketed; and Mike Sovereign, Bill Wojtkowski, and John Castagna, all members of the Museums and Cultural Arts Commission, who expressed concern about proposed staffing of the City's museums.

With no further requests to speak, Mayor Roberson closed public comments.

Council discussed the structural deficit and the "new normal." Regarding the Monterey Sports Center ("MSC"), it was stated that the Council was not interested in taking money from the NCIP, and that it would be fair to come in with specific projects such as the dehumidifier rather than one large sum. It was acknowledged that NCIP has been helpful with MSC and other community-wide projects and proposed to encourage the Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 4., Item Page 6, Packet Page 20 City Council Minutes June 7, 2022
7 NCIP to allocate $2M of NCIP funds toward MSC projects. It was stated it would be in the best interest to the purpose of the NCIP to keep its scope within neighborhoods and the projects that the neighborhoods choose, and it was stated that the City needs to find another way to fund the MSC.

It was stated that everyone is ready for COVID-19 to be over but it's not over yet. Concern was expressed that conferences and MSC users are not coming back at pre-COVID-19 rates. It was observed that the Monterey Conference Center ("MCC") is at the beginning of its facilities life post-renovation and stated that a reserve for its maintenance should be started. It was stated that the City can't keep every program and facility and "kick the can further down the road," and maybe it is time to reduce programs.

Regarding funding for business districts, it was stated that financially supporting businesses is not the role of governmen and that if businesses believe the districts are a good return on their investment, they can choose to fund it and make up the difference. It was proposed that the City could reduce the amount by 50% this year as a middle step to eliminating funding.

Regarding staffing levels, it was stated that staff's recommendations were good, as long as the City is careful. It was questioned how the City would pay for these positions and for infrastructure and pension liability without touching NCIP funds or business districts. It was questioned whether the City should freeze new hires except those that will pay for themselves.

It was questioned how much it would cost to bring the positions back.

Regarding increasing the Council's stipend, it was stated that there was no interest. On the other hand it was noted that increasing it would be a way to encourage and recruit more people to be able to serve.

City Manager Uslar stated that staff would reach out to NCIP regarding specific projects and come back to Council with requested information.

COUNCIL COMMENTS
None made.

CITY MANAGER REPORTS
None made.

ADJOURNMENT
The Council adjourned at 10:54 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Clyde Roberson
City Clerk Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 4., Item Page 7, Packet Page 21 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Andrea Renny, Interim Public Works Director
Prepared By: Richard Llantero, P.E., Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Award a Construction Contract in the Amount of $336,916.00 to Total Online Protection for the CR-USASA B18301 RPL A-Bank Batteries and CR-USASA B18301 RPL B-Bank Batteries (POM 21-033 and POM 21-057) Project, Presidio Municipal Services Agency***PMSA*** (Categorically Excluded from NEPA 32 CFR; Not a Project under CEQA per Pub. Resource Code, § 21080) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the attached resolution:

1. Approving the plans and specifications for the CR-USASA B18301 RPL A-Bank Batteries and CR-USASA B18301 RPL B-Bank Batteries (POM 21-033 and POM 21- 057) Project, and granting the Public Works Director, or her designee, the authority to approve all amendments and addenda thereto as necessitated by conditions in the field;

2. Accepting all responsive, responsible bids;

3. Rejecting all non-responsive bids;

4. Awarding a construction contract to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder Total Online Protection, in the amount of $336,916.00 for the total base bid;

5. Authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute the contract upon the receipt of information required by the project plans and specifications; and,

6. Authorizing staff to expend up to an additional 10% for unforeseen construction contingencies for timely completion of the project.

VALUE DRIVERS:

Serve as stewards of the City’s financial resources through sound economic vitality efforts, streamlining operations, reasonable revenue enhancements, visionary long-term planning, fiscal transparency, and community partnerships.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action is consistent with the City’s policy to provide services to the U.S. Department of the Army through the Presidio Municipal Services Agency (PMSA) per the Intergovernmental Support Agreement (IGSA) between the City of Monterey and the Federal Government.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

On May 10, 2022, the Finance Department received and opened bids as follows:

Bidder Base Bid
Total Online Protection $336,916.00
Innovative Power, LLC Non-Responsive
Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 5.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 5., Item Page 1, Packet Page 22 Note: The project expenditures listed below follow staff recommendation to award the Base Bid for a Total Bid amount of $336,916.00
Estimated Construction Cost for Base Bid:

Lowest Base Bid $336,916.00
Construction Contingency (10%) $ 33,691.00
Total Construction Cost (This Authorization) $370,607.00 Construction Management (City Staff & Indirect Cost) $ 16,845.00 Quality Control and Certification $ 3,000.00
Total Estimated Cost to Complete the Project $389,452.00 Funding Available:

CR-USASA B18301 RPL A-Bank Batteries and CR-USASA B18301 RPL B-Bank Batteries (POM 21-033 and POM 21-057) Project has $530,337.22 as of June 13, 2022. Sufficient IJO funding is available in the project account for the construction of the Total Base Bid. Execution of this project is fully funded by the Department of the US Army through the IGSA.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The proposed action has been reviewed in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and determined to qualify for a Categorical Exclusion (CX). The proposed action is categorically excluded under NEPA Record of Environmental Consideration 21061 and the provisions set forth in “Part II Department of Defense, Department of the Army, 32 CFR Part 651 Environmental Analysis of Army Actions; (29 March 2002 Edition) Appendix B to Part 651- Categorical Exclusions” as follows:

Section II(g)(1) Routine repair and maintenance of buildings, airfields, grounds, equipment, and other facilities. Examples include, but are not limited to: removal and disposal of asbestoscontaining material (for example, roof material and floor tile) or lead-based paint in accordance with applicable regulations; removal of dead, diseased, or damaged trees; and repair of roofs, doors, windows, or fixtures (REC required for removal and disposal of ACM and LBP or work on historic structures).

CEQA applies to discretionary projects. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21080, subd. (a).) CEQA does not apply to ministerial projects. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21080, subd. (b)(1).). There is a recognized policy consideration underlying the distinction between ministerial and discretionary projects. The purpose of CEQA is to minimize the adverse effects of new construction on the environment. To trigger CEQA compliance, the discretion must be of a certain kind; it must provide the agency with the ability and authority to mitigate environmental damage to some degree. Unless a public agency can shape the project in a way that would respond to concerns raised in an EIR, or its functional equivalent, environmental review would be a meaningless exercise.

Here, the City does not have the power to deny or condition the permit, or otherwise modify the project in ways which would mitigate environmental problems an environmental impact report might conceivably have identified. The City does not have the authority to dictate changes to the Army’s project’s design or location in response to any impacts that an environmental review Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 5., Item Page 2, Packet Page 23 might reveal, the City’s authority under CEQA is essentially ministerial and therefore no further environmental review is required by the City.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Council could choose to reject all bids and direct staff to re-advertise the project. However, this project supports critical electrical components for the reliable and continued operation of the mission at the U.S. Army Signal Activity (USASA)- Camp Roberts.

DISCUSSION:

Overview
Under an Intergovernmental Support Agreement (IGSA), the City of Monterey provides services to the Department of the U.S. Army, which are fully reimbursed by the federal government. The City coordinates a variety of projects on the Presidio of Monterey, Ord Military Community, and USASA - Camp Roberts, including this project to replace the backup battery grids at USASA Camp Roberts.

Project
This project to replace 192 batteries in the A-Bank and another 192 batteries in the backup BBank was awarded by the Army on August 31, 2021. The existing batteries have met or exceeded their life cycle and are due for replacement. These battery grids provide the uninterrupted backup power supply at USASA Camp Roberts to ensure continuous power supply to mission-critical components in the event of commercial power outages.

On May 10, 2022, the City received two bids for furnishing and installing the backup batteries at USASA Camp Roberts. The basis of the award to determine the lowest bid was the Total Base Bid. The bid from Innovative Power, Inc was deemed non-responsive due to failure to submit a bid bond. The lowest responsive, responsible bid was submitted by Total Online Protection, from Temecula, in the amount of $336,916.00.

Total Online Protection has performed and successfully completed this kind of work for other municipal agencies within the State of California. In addition, they have submitted references for their work product. Staff has checked the firm’s references and are comfortable with the ability of the contractor to perform the work successfully.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution:

2. Accepting all responsive, responsible bids;

3. Rejecting all non-responsive bids;

4. Awarding a construction contract to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder Total Online Protection, in the amount of $336,916.00 for the total base bid;

5. Authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to execute the contract upon the receipt of information required by the project plans and specifications; and,

6. Authorizing staff to expend up to an additional 10% for unforeseen construction contingencies for timely completion of the project.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 5., Item Page 3, Packet Page 24 AR/fv
Attachments: 1. Resolution
e: Total Online Protection
John Hansen, Senior Administrative Analyst
Billy Garcia, IGSA Manager
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 5., Item Page 4, Packet Page 25 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/22
AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $336,916.00 TO TOTAL ONLINE PROTECTION FOR THE CR-USASA B18301 RPL A-BANK BATTERIES AND CRUSASA B18301 RPL B-BANK BATTERIES (POM 21-033 AND POM 21-057) PROJECT, PRESIDIO MUNICIPAL SERVICES AGENCY***PMSA***
WHEREAS, on the 10th day of May 22, at 2:00 p.m. the City of Monterey Finance Director’s designee received two (2) electronic bids through the City’s e-Procurement Portal, ProcureNow for the CR-USASA B18301 RPL B-Bank Batteries (POM 21-033 and POM 21-057) (“Project”);
WHEREAS, the basis of award for the project was the Total Base Bid; WHEREAS, Innovative Power, LLC of Sterling, VA, submitted a bid and was deemed non-responsive;
WHEREAS, Total Online Protection, Inc., submitted the lowest responsible, responsive Base Bid in the amount of $336,916.00;
WHEREAS, the project is fully funded by the Department of the Army through the Intergovernmental Support Agreement (IGSA) and sufficient funding is available in the project account number POM 21-033 and POM 21-057; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed action has been reviewed in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and determined to qualify for a Categorical Exclusion (CX).

The proposed action is categorically excluded under NEPA Record of Environmental Consideration 21061 and the provisions set forth in “Part II Department of Defense, Department of the Army, 32 CFR Part 651 Environmental Analysis of Army Actions; (29 March 2002 Edition) Appendix B to Part 651-Categorical Exclusions” as follows:

CEQA applies to discretionary projects. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21080, subd. (a).) CEQA does not apply to ministerial projects. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21080, subd. (b)(1).) there is a recognized policy consideration underlying the distinction between ministerial and discretionary projects. The purpose of CEQA is to minimize the adverse effects of new construction on the environment. To trigger CEQA compliance, the discretion must be of a certain kind; it must provide the agency with the ability and authority to mitigate environmental damage to some degree. Unless a public agency can shape the project in a way that would respond to concerns Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 5., Item Page 5, Packet Page 26 2 raised in an EIR, or its functional equivalent, environmental review would be a meaningless exercise.

Here, the City does not have the power to deny or condition the permit, or otherwise modify the project in ways which would mitigate environmental problems an environmental impact report might conceivably have identified. The City does not have the authority to dictate changes to the Army’s project’s design or location in response to any impacts that an environmental review might reveal, the City’s authority under CEQA is essentially ministerial and therefore no further environmental review is required by the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY it hereby

1. Approves the plans and specifications for the CR-USASA B18301 RPL A-Bank Batteries and CR-USASA B18301 RPL B-Bank Batteries (POM 21-033 and POM 21- 057) Project, and granting the Public Works Director, or her designee, the authority to approve all amendments and addenda thereto as necessitated by conditions in the field;

2. Accepts all responsive, responsible bids;

3. Rejects all non-responsive bids;

4. Awards a construction contract to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder Total Online Protection, in the amount of $336,916.00 for the total base bid;

5. Authorizes the City Manager, or his designee, to execute the contract upon the receipt of information required by the project plans and specifications; and,

6. Authorizes staff to expend up to an additional 10% for unforeseen construction contingencies for timely completion of the project.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 5., Item Page 6, Packet Page 27 3 Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 5., Item Page 7, Packet Page 28 ORDINANCE NO. ____ C.S.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№07/19

AN OMNIBUS ORDINANCE TO MAKE CLERICAL/TECHNICAL UPDATES TO THE

MONTEREY CITY CODE
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY DOES ORDAIN, as follows:

SECTION 1:

WHEREAS, several departments in the City have been reorganized and job titles have changed, requiring clerical updates to the City Code for accuracy; WHEREAS, on April 28, 2022, the Board of Library Trustees considered and recommended edits to the code that are set forth below that pertain to Library employees and the Library Director;
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City to maintain an up-to-date, legally compliant, and accurate City Code;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project.

NOW THEREFORE, the Monterey City Council declares as follows:

SECTION 2: The foregoing recitals are adopted as findings of the City Council as though set forth fully herein.

SECTION 3: Monterey City Code, Chapter 1, Section 1-9.1(B) is hereby amended to read as follows:
““Enforcement Officer” shall mean the City Attorney, Code Compliance Coordinator, any Police Officer, and any City employee or agent of the City delegated authority by the City Manager to enforce any provision of this Code.”
SECTION 4: Monterey City Code, Chapter 9, is hereby amended as follows:

1. The term “Building Inspector” is replaced with “Chief of Inspection Services/Building Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 6.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 6., Item Page 1, Packet Page 29 2 Official” in sections 9-22 and 9-70.2.

2. The term “Public Works Director” is replaced with “Chief of Inspection Services/Building Official” in sections 9-51, 9-77 and 9-81 through 9-83.

3. The term “Public Works Director” is replaced with Chief Building Official in section 9-

70.2. 4. The term “Department of Plans and Public Works” is replaced with “Building and Safety Division” in section 9-69.2.

SECTION 5: Monterey City Code, Chapter 9, section 9-78 is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Permit Procedure.

The Community Development Director shall review the permit application and shall approve the permit unless evidence is available which indicates that the proposed grading or excavation will create an undue risk to the health and safety of the public at large. Prior to acting on any such application, the Chief of Inspection Services/Building Official, in his/her sole discretion, may set and conduct a public hearing for the purpose of receiving comments on the proposed grading and excavation. Except as otherwise indicated in Section 9-80, any permit issued hereunder shall be subject to the following conditions:
(a) All excavation and grading shall be performed solely in accordance with the permit approved by the City and in accordance with the permit as issued by the City. (b) Prior to movement of any soil on any property located within a district, the permittee or designee shall personally deliver to each person who intends to work on the property described in the permit the notice and safety plan, which is attached as an exhibit to the permit, and explain to each such person the information set forth in that notice. (c) The permittee may not move or disturb soil in a manner inconsistent with restrictions placed on the property by the Army and as noted on the grading district map unless there is a Department of Defense certified, or equivalent, explosive ordnance disposal technician acceptable to the Chief of Inspection Services/Building Official who is on site and visually supervises any such activity. Any excavation or soil disturbance inconsistent with restrictions placed on the property by the Army may be accomplished only after investigation using sweep lanes no wider than five feet throughout the excavation area and after using detection devices and visual identification to locate, identify and remove any unexploded ordnance discovered during such excavation activity.
(d) The permittee shall cease soil disturbance activities and shall notify the Army and DTSC of any suspected unexploded ordnance discovered during any excavation or soil removal immediately upon discovery. The permittee shall coordinate appropriate response actions with the Army and DTSC.
(e) No later than thirty days following the completion of the permitted soil disturbance activity, the permittee shall prepare and file with the Chief of Inspection Services/Building Official, the Army and DTSC an after action report that shall state whether and where UXO was detected and the extent and depth of UXO response actions undertaken and completed on the property that is the subject of the permit. The after action report shall include site maps to illustrate the information contained in the report. All after action reports prepared and filed in accordance with this chapter shall be deemed public records. (f) The permittee agrees as a condition of issuance of a permit to defend at its sole expense, indemnify and hold harmless from any liability the City, and reimburse the City for any expenses incurred resulting from or in connection with the approval of the project including any claim, suit or legal proceeding. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any such action, but such participation shall not relieve the permittee of its obligations under this subsection.”
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 6., Item Page 2, Packet Page 30 SECTION 6: Monterey City Code, Chapter 25, Section 25-1.06 is hereby amended to read as follows:
“The City Manager, City Attorney, and Library Director (notwithstanding the Board of Library Trustee’s power to appoint and remove library personnel pursuant to Section

7.1(c) of the City Charter) have primary responsibility for appointment and removal of officers and employees within their respective departments as established in the City Charter. The City Manager, City Attorney, and Library Director shall each be responsible for administering these Rules and Regulations within their department and scope of authority, except as appropriately delegated to subordinate officers and employees. All duties and authority of the City Manager established in these Rules and Regulations shall apply equally to the City Attorney and Library Director in administering these Rules and Regulations to employees of their respective departments.” SECTION 7: Monterey City Code, Chapter 25, Section 25-2.10 is hereby amended to read as follows:
“The Classified Service shall consist of all employees who have been appointed to regular full-time or regular part-time positions except:
a. The City Manager.
b. The City Attorney.
c. The Library Director.
d. All other positions designated as Executive Management in the City’s annual salary schedule.
e. All elected officials and members of appointed boards, commissions and committees.
f. All temporary personnel whether employed directly by the City or retained under contract for services, except as provided in the contract for services. g. All volunteer personnel.”
SECTION 8: Monterey City Code, Chapter 25, Section 25-2.14 is hereby amended to read as follows:
“The following are, for purposes of definition, the department heads for the City of Monterey
a. City Manager.
b. Assistant City Manager.
c. City Attorney.
d. Finance Director.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 6., Item Page 3, Packet Page 31 4 e. Fire Chief.
f. Library Director.
g. Parks and Recreation Director.
h. Human Resources Director.
i. Police Chief.
j. Community Development Director.
k. Public Works Director.”
SECTION 9: Monterey City Code, Chapter 25, Section 25-3.03(d)(1) is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Complaint Regarding Department Head (Other than City Manager, City Attorney, or Human Resources Director). Any time a department head is the accused perpetrator of an incident of discrimination, harassment, abusive conduct/bullying, or retaliation under the definitions of this policy, the complaint shall be made to the Human Resources Director who shall investigate the complaint and make a recommendation for the disposition of the complaint to the City Manager, or to the Board of Library Trustees if the complaint concerns the Library Director.”
SECTION 10: Monterey City Code, Chapter 25, Section 25-3.03(d)(4) is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Complaint Regarding Member of Council, or Member of a Board, Committee or Commission. If a member of the City Council or a member of a City Board, Committee, or Commission is the accused perpetrator of an incident of discrimination, harassment, abusive conduct/bullying or retaliation under the definitions of this policy, the complaint shall be made to the City Attorney or Human Resources Director, who shall retain outside counsel to investigate the allegations and file a recommendation to the City Council for action on the complaint.

SECTION 11: Monterey City Code, Chapter 25, Section 25-3.08(d)(4) is hereby added to read as follows:
“Immediate family members of the members of the Board of Library Trustees may hold positions in the City except for the Library Director position.” SECTION 12: Monterey City Code, Chapter 25, Section 25-7.01(c) is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Promotional examinations shall be open only to qualified, regular City employees unless, at the discretion of the Human Resources Director, it is open to application by temporary/seasonal employees. Applications may be accepted from qualified employees on probation subject to the provisions of City Code section 25-10.06.” Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 6., Item Page 4, Packet Page 32 SECTION 13: Monterey City Code, Chapter 25, Section 25-14.10 is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Appeal to the City Council or Board of Library Trustees a. Definitions. Appeal Authority for Library personnel means the Board of Library Trustees. The Appeal Authority for other personnel is the City Council. For appeals involving Library personnel, the term “Clerk” in the below procedures denotes the Library personnel serving as the Clerk to the Board of Library Trustees. For appeals involving other personnel, the term “Clerk” as used in this section means the City Clerk. b. Decisions of the City Manager which result in termination may be appealed to the Appeal Authority. Disciplinary actions initiated by the City Manager, except oral and written reprimands and actions not involving loss of pay, may be appealed to the Appeal Authority. This appeal shall be in writing and filed with the Clerk within ten (10) City working days of receipt of the City Manager’s decision. The appeal shall be signed by the employee and shall set forth the reasons for the appeal. The Clerk shall provide written notice of the appeal to the Appeal Authority, the City Manager, the City Attorney, the employee’s department head, the Human Resources Director, and to any other appropriate parties. c. Upon the filing of an appeal, the Clerk shall notice a hearing of the appeal within fifteen (15) City working days, and the hearing shall be held not less than ten (10) City working days nor more than forty-five (45) City working days from the date of the Clerk’s notice. The Clerk’s notice shall include the date, time and place of the hearing. Once commenced, the hearing may be continued until it can be completed.
d. The Appeal Authority’s hearing shall be closed, unless requested to be open by the employee. Formal rules of evidence shall not apply. Principles of due process will be applied.

Provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act, the City Charter, and the City Code shall apply to all such hearings.
e. The Appeal Authority shall render its decision in writing to the employee within ten (10) City working days after the conclusion of the hearing. Appropriate copies of the decision will be furnished to the City Manager, Human Resources Director, and department head of the employee. The decision will also be reported in open session of the Appeal Authority in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act and the City Code. f. In rendering its decision, the Appeal Authority may reaffirm the disciplinary action, reverse it, or modify it.”
SECTION 14: Monterey City Code, Chapter 22, Section 22-31.13, subsection (c)(2) is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Each person employed or retained by a massage establishment to perform massage in or on the premises or through an outcall massage service shall have in their possession the valid current photograph-bearing identification card issued to that employee by the CAMTC. A copy of each such identification card shall also:

A. Be kept in a specific location by management and accessible to any regulatory body performing an inspection; and
B. Be displayed in an open and conspicuous place visible from the main entry Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 6., Item Page 5, Packet Page 33 6 door and/or reception and waiting area of the massage establishment. The displayed copy need only include the first name and first letter of the last name. The home address of any employee need not be displayed.” SECTION 15: Monterey City Code, Chapter 32, section 32-55, is hereby amended as follows:
“It shall be unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation to make any excavation in or under the surface of any street, alley, sidewalk, public way, or public place in the City of Monterey without first obtaining a permit so to do from the City. City may at its discretion require a cash deposit upon issuance of such permit to defray the cost of restoring the surface of said street, alley, sidewalk, public way or public place, as the case may be, to its former condition.”
SECTION 16: Monterey City Code, Chapter 32, sections 32-56; 32-57; and 32-60 are hereby amended by replacing the phrase “Department of Plans and Public Works” with “City.” SECTION 17: Monterey City Code, Chapter 33, is hereby amended to read as follows:

1. Section 33-8, subsection (b) is amended to read as follows: “The Public Works Director shall be responsible for analyzing the design and the Community Development Director is responsible for coordinating the processing of minor subdivision maps, preliminary maps, and tentative maps. The Public Works Director shall be responsible for coordinating and processing of final maps and parcel maps.” a. The phrase “Public Works Director” is replaced with “Community Development and Public Works Directors” in sections 33-5, 33-8(e), 33-28, 33-49, 33-52, and 33-82.

2. Section 33-7 is amended by replacing the phrase “Public Works Director” with “Community Development Director” in the definition of “Preliminary Map.”

3. Section 33-28 is amended by replacing the phrase “Public Works Director” with “City Forester.”

4. The phrase “Department of Plans and Public Works” is replaced with “Public Works Department” in the following sections:
a. 33-14.5;
b. 33-49;
c. 33-78; and
d. 33-81(a), and (e).

5. The phrase “Plans and Public Works Staff” is replaced with “Public Works Staff” in section 33-14.5.

6. The phrase “Public Works Director or the Planning Commission” is replaced with “Public Works Director, Community Development Director, or the Planning Commission” in section 33-18.

7. The phrase “Public Works Director” is replaced with “Public Works or Community Development Directors” in sections:
a. 33-44;
b. 33-45; and
c. 33-46(a)(1).

8. The phrase “Plans and Public Works Department” is replaced with “Public Works Department” in section 33-81(e).

SECTION 18: Monterey City Code, Chapter 33, Section 33-50 is hereby amended to Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 6., Item Page 6, Packet Page 34 read as follows:
“Filing of preliminary map.

Prior to submitting a tentative map of any proposed standard subdivision, the subdivider shall submit to the Community Development and Public Works Director three copies of a preliminary map for review, along with such additional materials, data, reports or the like as the Public Works or Community Development Directors may require.” SECTION 19: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38 is hereby amended as follows:

1. The phrase “Department of Plans and Public Works” is replaced with “Community Development Department” in the following sections:
a. 38-2.B;
b. 38-22.E;
c. 38-23.G;
d. 38-24.E;
e. 38-25.F;
f. 38-26.F;
g. 38-26.M.3.a;
h. 38-28.D;
i. 38-29.D;
j. 38-30.D;
k. 38-31.D;
l. 38-41.F;
m. 38-46;
n. 38-50;
o. 38-64;
p. 38-75 – subsections D.1, G.2.a.(1), and G.2.b.(2);
q. 38-76 – subsections G.2.a.(1) and G.2.b.(2);
r. 38-77.C.1;
s. 38-90;
t. 38-126 subsections D.6 and F;
u. 38-150;
v. 38-155;
w. 38-159.C.2;
x. 38-170.A;
y. 38-186.A;
z. 38-208;
aa. 38-210 subsections B and C;

2. The phrase “Public Works Director” is replaced with “Community Development Director” in sections:
a. 38-5.E;
b. 38-7.A;
c. 38-7.B.5;
d. 38-7.D; and
e. 38-7.E.
f. 38-11 (Lot, Corner);
g. 38-12;
h. 38-16.D;
i. 38-22.B ‘R-E District Land Use Regulations’;
j. 38-23.B ‘R-1 District Land Use Regulations’;
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 6., Item Page 7, Packet Page 35 8 k. 38-26.M.3.a;
l. 38-26.K.3.a;
m. 38-28.B.3 ‘C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District Land Use Regulations,’ ‘Temporary Uses’;
n. 38-29.B.3 ‘C-2 Community Commercial District Land Use Regulations’; o. 38-30.B.3 ‘C-3 General Commercial District Land Use Regulations,’ ‘Temporary Uses’;
p. 38-31.B.3 ‘CO Office and Professional District Land Use Regulations,’ ‘Temporary Uses’;
q. 38-32.B.1 ‘CR Cannery Row District Land Use Regulations,’ ‘Temporary Uses’;
r. 38-33.C.3.c;
s. 38-33.D – subsections 2 and 5;
t. 38-33.E.2 – subsections (c) and (e);
u. 38-40.B ‘I-R District Land Use Regulations,’ ‘Temporary Uses’; v. 38-41.B – subsections 1, 2, and 4;
w. 38-44 ‘O Districts Land Use Regulations,’ ‘Temporary Uses’; x. 38-57;
y. 38-73.M;
z. 38-73.Q;
aa. 38-74b – subsections A, B.2, and D.1;
bb. 38-75 – subsections D.1, G.2.a.(2), and G.2.d;
cc. 38-76 – subsections G.2.a.(2) and G.2.d;
dd. 38-85;
ee. 38-109.A;
ff. 38-111 – subsections A.2, 4, and 5; D.1, and J;
gg. 38-115 (introductory paragraph) and ‘Horticulture, Limited’; hh. 38-116.B and D;
ii. 38-119.A;
jj. 38-120.C;
kk. 38-125;
ll. 38-130;
mm. 38-131.B;
nn. 38-133;
oo. 38-136.B;
pp. 38-137;
qq. 38-151;
rr. 38-153, title, and subsections A, B, C.1, C.15, and C.17; ss. 38-157;
tt. 38-159.A, B, and E;
uu. 38-160;
vv. 38-162;
ww. 38-162.D;
xx. 38-165.A and B.4;
yy. 38-166.B;
zz. 38-170, subsections A.1, A.2, and B;
aaa. 38-171.B;
bbb. 38-172.A;
ccc. 38-174.B;
ddd. 38-180.B;
eee. 38-182.A.1;
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 6., Item Page 8, Packet Page 36 fff. 38-185;
ggg. 38-186.B;
hhh. 38-195;
iii. 38-197.A and C.3;
jjj. 38-198.A;
kkk. 38-208;
lll. 38-210.B;
mmm. 38-214.D;
nnn. 38-216.A;
ooo. 38-217;
ppp. 38-219; and
qqq. 38-221.A.

3. The phrase “Director of Plans and Public Works” is replaced with “Community Development Director” in the definition of Floor Area Ratio in section 38-11.

4. The phrase “Public Works Director” is replaced with “Community Development Director” in the definition of Public Works Director in section 38-11 and the resulting new definition of Community Development Director is sorted in alphabetical order.

5. The phrase “Community Development Department” is replaced with “Public Works Department” in section 38-26.M.3.a
SECTION 20: All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

SECTION 21: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from and after its final passage and adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 6., Item Page 9, Packet Page 37 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Clementine Bonner Klein, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Authorize Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Boards, Commissions, and Committees for the Period July 22, 2022 through August 19, 2022 Pursuant to AB361 Ralph M. Brown Act Provisions (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council consider the state of the COVID-19 emergency and adopt a resolution to authorize remote teleconference attendance for all public meetings of City of Monterey legislative bodies under emergency-specific Brown Act provisions for the period of July 22, 2022 through August 19, 2022. This action is required to comply with the Brown Act.

VALUE DRIVERS:

This action aligns with the City’s Value Driver to: “in collaboration with our community partners, work to improve the quality of life of all of our community members by fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion; championing equitable access to affordable housing; and maintaining a safe environment.”
Furthermore, it is consistent with the City’s Strategic Priority to “ensure the health and wellness of the community including the COVID-19 pandemic response through emergency operations, clear communication with the public, delivering vaccinations, supporting testing efforts, issuing emergency orders, managing social distancing regulations, adopting eviction protections, hosting blood drives, and providing food security.”
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The recommendations in this report are consistent with the requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code section 54950 through 54963). The City’s policy is to ensure the public’s health, safety, and welfare of its employees, residents, and visitors. Continuing to authorize remote attendance of public meetings will help reduce the spread of COVID-19.

Government Code section 54953(e)(3) requires the city to make certain findings to continue with the emergency teleconferencing provisions of the Brown Act: to consider the circumstances of the state of emergency, and any of the following circumstances must exist (1) the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of members to meet safely in person and (2) state or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no new or additional cost associated with offering free and secure teleconferencing participation in the City’s public meetings through toll-free telephone and internet-based ZoomGov webinars and free live-streamed meeting observation on cable access television and/or on the internet via YouTube when possible. The City currently pays $5,500 annually for Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 7.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 7., Item Page 1, Packet Page 38 the ZoomGov webinar accounts and toll-free phone access used for public meetings. Live streaming of public meetings on Comcast Channel 25 is provided under an ongoing public, educational, and government (“PEG”) cable access agreement with Access Monterey Peninsula, Inc. In 2021, the City contributed around $240,000 towards Access Monterey Peninsula.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 CEQA Guidelines Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Upon consideration of the state of emergency, the Council may choose not to authorize emergency teleconference attendance of meetings. This would mean that meetings held after July 21, 2022 (the expiration date of Resolution No. 22-074 C.S.) would be subject to Government Code section 54953(b)(3) pre-COVID-19 Brown Act noticing and quorum requirements for teleconference attendance at public meetings by elected and appointed officials of the City’s legislative bodies.

DISCUSSION:

Background
The Ralph M. Brown Act requires local government business to be conducted at open and public meetings with few exceptions. The COVID-19 pandemic presented significant health and safety concerns that made public gatherings unsafe. This resulted in the City of Monterey and many other public agencies holding public meetings with remote attendance methods authorized in Governor Newsom’s emergency executive orders to protect attendees' health and safety.

In September 2021, the Brown Act was amended by Assembly Bill 361 (“AB 361”), authorizing the city and other public agencies to continue to allow teleconference attendance at public meetings if the legislative body makes certain findings. Accordingly, the City Council has adopted resolutions with the required findings at least every 30 days from October 5, 2021, to June 7, 2022. During this period, attendance was primarily conducted in a hybrid format, allowing both in-person and teleconference attendance. (The early stages of the prevalence of Omicron variants presented a brief exception from mid-January to the end of March 2022.) This flexibility has ensured transparent, healthy, and safe public access to the city’s meetings and meetings of its legislative bodies. The current teleconferencing authorization is effective through July 21, 2022. Findings regarding the COVID-19 state of emergency will continue to be agendized for Council consideration at least every 30 days as required by State law as long as Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 7., Item Page 2, Packet Page 39 the state of emergency is in place and until the Council determines conditions are safe to return to non-pandemic Brown Act provisions for the city’s public meetings.

The ZoomGov platform currently used by the City for teleconference meeting attendance allows for participation that is free, broadly accessible, safe, and secure. The Council and public are able to attend meetings remotely using any internet-accessible device or by dialing toll-free on the telephone and remain socially distanced while engaging in important public discourse.

Current Findings
Facts supporting continued authorization for teleconferencing pursuant to Government Code section 54954(e)(3)(B)(i) are:
 The Omicron variant of the virus was classified by the World Health Organization (“WHO”) as a Variant of Concern on November 26, 2021, was identified in the United States as reported by the CDC on December 1, 2021, and six lineages of the Omicron variant constituted 100% of COVID-19 cases in the United States as of June 25, 2022, as reported by the CDC on July 12, 2022.
 According to Monterey County’s COVID-19 Biweekly Update updated on July 14, 2022, the COVID-19 case rate in Monterey County is 28.4 cases per 100,000 people with a test positivity rate of 12.5% (7-day average for both statistics), with 53 people currently hospitalized.

Staff recommends that the City Council consider the current state of the COVID-19 emergency and, in order to protect the health and safety of public meeting attendees, adopt the attached resolution to authorize emergency teleconference attendance of public meetings through August 19, 2022.

CBK
Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution
cc: All City boards, commissions, and committees
Neighborhood Associations
Business Associations
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 7., Item Page 3, Packet Page 40 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY

AUTHORIZE REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS

OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 22 THROUGH AUGUST 19, 2022
PURSUANT TO AB 361 RALPH M. BROWN ACT PROVISIONS
WHEREAS, the City Council is empowered to take actions necessary to protect and has an important governmental interest in protecting the health, safety, and welfare of those who participate in meetings of the City Council and its legislative bodies subject to California Government Code sections 54950-54963 (the Ralph M. Brown Act, or “Brown Act”); WHEREAS, on October 5, 2021, November 2, 2021, November 16, 2021, December 7, 2021, December 21, 2021, January 18, 2022, February 15, 2022, March 15, 2022, March 23, 2022, April 19, 2022, May 17, 2022, June 7, 2022, and June 29, 2022, the City Council adopted resolutions authorizing teleconference attendance of public meetings for the City Council and Boards, Commissions and Committees due to the imminent risk to the health and safety of attendees relating to in-person meeting attendance;
WHEREAS, the City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of the COVID-19 emergency;
WHEREAS, the Omicron variant of the virus was classified by the World Health Organization (“WHO”) as a Variant of Concern on November 26, 2021, was identified in the United States as reported by the CDC on December 1, 2021, and six lineages of the Omicron variant constituted 100% of COVID-19 cases in the United States as of June 25, 2022, as reported by the CDC on July 12, 2022;
WHEREAS, according to Monterey County’s COVID-19 Biweekly Update updated on July 14, 2022, the COVID-19 case rate in Monterey County is 28.4 cases per 100,000 people with a test positivity rate of 12.5% (7-day average for both statistics), with 53 people currently hospitalized;
WHEREAS, the Monterey County Health Department continues to recommend that physical and social distancing strategies be practiced in Monterey County, which includes remote meetings of legislative bodies of local agencies, to the extent possible; and WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 7., Item Page 4, Packet Page 41 2 change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that:

1. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
2 Pursuant to Government Code section 59453(e)(3)(B)(i), the City Council has reviewed the circumstances of the continued state of emergency posed by the spread of COVID-19 and finds that the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the public and members of City legislative bodies to meet safely in person, and holding meetings exclusively in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees.

3. The City Council authorizes remote teleconferencing public meetings of the City Council and city boards, commissions, and committees pursuant to Government Code section 59453(e)(1). This Resolution expires on August 19, 2022.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this __ day of ______, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 7., Item Page 5, Packet Page 42 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Andrea Renny, Interim Public Works Director
Submitted By: Rex VanSlyke, Fleet Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize the Purchase of a Combination (Jet/Vac) Truck from Vac-Con, Inc. in the Amount of $558,137.07 (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the purchase of one (1) combination (jet/vac) truck from Vac-Con, Inc. in the amount of $558,137.07.

VALUE DRIVERS:

Protect and preserve our natural environment by addressing climate change through ecologically responsible and pragmatic solutions.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The action is consistent with the City policy to replace City vehicles and equipment when they have fulfilled their useful life cycle and are no longer economical to operate or maintain.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

A total of $558,137.07 is required for the purchase of one new combination (jet/vac) truck. The Equipment Replacement Fund has adequate funding for the purchase of this vehicle and has been appropriated in the FY 2022-23 adopted budget. The expenditure will come from account 705-110-1130-3153-4503. The Equipment Replacement Fund serves to centrally account for the new or replacement costs for all vehicle apparatus, and heavy equipment assets. The cost of this service is charged back to the operating departments. An internal service fund is used to account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department to other departments of the City on a cost-reimbursement basis.

The Combination Sewer and Storm Drain Cleaner, Vac-Con Model V350H/850 LHA-P, would be purchased from Vac-Con, Inc., and fulfilled by Municipal Maintenance Equipment, Inc., under the Sourcewell Contract number 101221-VAC. A cooperative procurement contract, such as the Sourcewell Contract, is an exception to the City’s competitive procurement requirements pursuant to Monterey City Code section 28-14(a).

The majority of this funding comes from monies collected for public works service fees, sewer line maintenance fees, sewer grease trap fees and storm drain fees.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 8.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 8., Item Page 1, Packet Page 43 rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Council could choose not to replace the Combination (Jet/Vac) Truck at this time. This action is not recommended due to the new mandate from the Air Resources Board (see Discussion below). The City has two sewer problem-remediation vehicles in its inventory; the jet truck is for preventative maintenance of the City’s sewer lines, while the combination truck is needed to clean up sewer spills. City staff have reviewed and considered specifications for smaller combination trucks, and have determined that this truck is necessary to meet the needs of the City and has a smaller capacity than the truck being replaced. Having a combination truck is highly critical, as it is the only City vehicle capable of resolving sewer spills and preventing runoff into the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.

DISCUSSION:

The combination sewer/jet truck is used regularly for opening sewer blockages, and mitigating the effects of sanitary sewer overflows (rinse, wash, disinfect, and vacuum up of effluent), as well as routine cleaning of storm drain catch basins to minimize the amount of refuse that ends up in the bay (vacuum out leaves and debris). The combination truck is also used quarterly for the washing of the Lighthouse Tunnel (vacuum up wash water, soap, and engine particulate that accumulates on the walls to prevent it from entering the bay). This unit is also used for hydro-excavating when digging around sensitive utilities (gas, electric, and fiber optic) as well as supporting Monterey One Water, who maintains our sewer wet wells (large holding tanks of sewage; we assist with grit and grease removal). This truck also supports the Monterey Police Department with “pump-outs” (emptying the holding tanks of Recreational Vehicles that require towing services) as well as providing mutual aid to other municipalities during major sanitary sewer overflows.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has set a new mandate requiring all diesel vehicles operated in the State of California with over a 16,500 gross vehicle weight rating, to be model year 2010 or newer after January 1, 2023. Registrations will be revoked for any diesel vehicle that does not meet the new requirements. The current City combination sewer truck was purchased in April 2010 but has an engine manufacturing date of September 2009. The life cycle age of this combination sewer truck is set at ten years, making it two years past its predetermined replacement time.

The current combo sewer truck chassis mileage is 71,056 and the engine hours are 4,300 which equates to 258,000 driving miles. To date, the operating and maintenance costs are $161,873.

This truck would be funded through the Equipment Replacement Fund.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 8., Item Page 2, Packet Page 44 Staff recommends that Council approve the attached resolution authorizing the purchase of one combination (jet/vac) truck for the Sewers Division.

RV/dt
Attachments: 1. Resolution
e: James Wheeler, Municipal Maintenance Equipment, Inc.

M.J. Dubois, Vac-Con, Inc.

Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
Andrea Renny, Interim Public Works Director
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 8., Item Page 3, Packet Page 45 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/22

AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF A COMBINATION (JET/VAC) TRUCK FROM VAC-CON, INC IN THE AMOUNT OF $558,137.07
WHEREAS, the Air Resources Board has set a new mandate requiring all diesel vehicles operated in the State of California with over a 16,500 gross vehicle weight rating, be model year 2010 or newer after January 1, 2023;
WHEREAS, the current City combo sewer truck was purchased in April 2010 but has an engine manufacturing date of September 2009;
WHEREAS, the City wishes to enter into a contract with Vac-Con, Inc. under the Sourcewell Contract number 101221-VAC for the purchase of one Combination (Jet/Vac) Truck.

A cooperative procurement contract, such as the Sourcewell Contract, is an exception to the City’s competitive procurement requirements pursuant to Monterey City Code section 28-14(a); WHEREAS, the Equipment Replacement Fund has adequate funding for the purchase of this vehicle and has been appropriated in the FY2022-23 adopted budget. The expenditure will come from account 705-110-1130-3153-4503; and,
WHEREAS, The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY it hereby authorizes the purchase of one New Combination (Jet/Vac) Truck and authorizes the City Manager to sign any contracts for:

1. Vehicle – One New Combination (Jet/Vac) Truck utilizing the Sourcewell Contract number 101221-VAC with Vac-Con, Inc. in the amount of $558,137.07.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 8., Item Page 4, Packet Page 46 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 8., Item Page 5, Packet Page 47 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Christy Sabdo, AICP, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Appropriate $150,000 in California Housing and Community Development (HCD) Local Early Action Planning (LEAP) Grant Funds and Appropriate $369,940 from the General Fund Balances Designated for General Plan Updates to include the 6 th Cycle Housing Element, Safety Element, and Land Use Element Update (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution that:

1. Authorizes the Finance Director, or designee, to increase revenue by $150,000 in account 101-400-4400-3472, and appropriate $150,000 of expense to 101-400-4400- 0000-4240 related to the anticipated spending for the previously accepted LEAP Grant award.

2. Authorizes the Finance Director, or designee, to appropriate $369,940 of expense to 101-400-4400-0000-4240, from the General Fund deposit account balance designated for General Plan updates (101-2650).

VALUE DRIVERS:

Protect and preserve our natural environment by addressing climate change through ecologically responsible and pragmatic solutions.

Support efforts and policies that provide equitable access to affordable housing in Monterey and the region.

Expand opportunities for people of all ages and abilities to bike and walk safely through active transportation, accessibility, and safety initiatives.

The proposed General Plan update will meet these Value Drivers because the agenda report demonstrates how the grant and development fees are utilized. The project purpose is to plan for affordable housing while considering the environment.

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 9.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 9., Item Page 1, Packet Page 48 POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

California law requires that each county and city in the state develop and adopt a General Plan.

State law requires Housing Elements to updated more frequently than other elements. The Housing Element update triggers updates to the Land Use and Safety Elements.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The City applied for and has been awarded from the California Housing and Community Development (HUD) in the amount of $150,000 for the preparation and adoption of the City’s Housing Element update. The $150,000 in expenses will be reimbursed to the City only upon preparation and adoption of the Housing Element. If this money isn’t allocated for the Housing Element update, the City would lose this funding source.

The City also collects development fees to help fund general plan updates. The proposed $369,940 in collected fees is proposed to pay for the Land Use and Safety.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Council could decide not to appropriate funds for the General Plan update; however, the City will be unable to access the HCD LEAP grant funds for the 6th Cycle Housing Element.

Furthermore, the City’s General Plan funds would go unused and the City’s General Plan would be out of compliance with state law.

DISCUSSION:

General Plans outline a community’s vision for future growth. The mandatory elements for all jurisdictions are land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety.

Housing Element: The Housing Element is one of the components of the General Plan and is required to be updated more frequently than other General Plan elements. California is in its sixth “housing-element update cycle.” Late submittal of a Housing Element can result in a jurisdiction being required to submit a four-year update to their housing element, among other actions by the State.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 9., Item Page 2, Packet Page 49 State law includes a long list of mandated topics that a Housing Element must address including but not limited to:
 Quantification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs  Identification and analysis of special housing needs
 Inventory of at-risk units
 Identification of governmental and non-governmental constraints  Site inventory and analysis
 Quantified objectives and housing programs
One of the key sections of the housing element will be to address the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 3,654 housing units over the next planning horizon. The City will be required to identify adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA and include programs to rezone properties to address shortfalls of sites to accommodate the RHNA. Due to the large RHNA allocation of 3,654 housing units, staff anticipates fundamental changes to the City’s land use planning strategy.

Safety Element: The goal of the safety element is to reduce the potential short and long-term risk of death, injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation resulting from fires, floods, droughts, earthquakes, landslides, climate change, and other hazards (Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, General Plan Guidelines, Safety Element, Page 141). As safety hazards are changing with climate change, The goal of the Safety Element update is that decisionmakers be adequately informed if there are safety risks when placing new housing in specific locations.

While Monterey does not have any disadvantaged communities (DACs) as identified by the State pursuant to SB 535, some tracts within the City experience disproportionate rates of pollution exposure, health risks, or socioeconomic vulnerabilities. State law requires that the General Plan address issues of environmental justice and climate change, which can be interrelated. These issues will be addressed as part of a holistic planning approach, promoting equity and protecting human health from environmental hazards, by integrating detailed data analysis and meaningful community engagement to understand the issues and develop policies to address them.

Land Use Element: The California General Plan Guidelines state that the Land Use Element answers, “The most fundamental decisions in planning begin with land use: what to put where.” (Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, General Plan Guidelines, Land Use Element,

Page 42 ends

triggering amendments to the City’s Land Use Element.

Comprehensive Community Engagement Strategy: A critical component of the General Plan update will be to implement a comprehensive strategy to inform, engage, and solicit input from a broad range of community members and stakeholders throughout the process. This strategy will include:
 Key informant face-to face interviews in small groups  Interactive Online Survey integrated with Have Your Say Monterey  Community Meetings
 Website Materials
 Newsletter and Email Blast Content
 Social Media Promotion
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 9., Item Page 3, Packet Page 50  Youth-Led Survey
In summary, the City is proposing the resolution to fund the updates to specific General Plan elements.

SAB/jc
Attachments: 1. Resolution Appropriating $150,000 in HCD LEAP grant funds and $369,940 in General Plan funds from the City’s General Plan deposit account

2. Final LEAP Grant Resolution No. 20-081 C.S.

3. HCD Award of Leap Grant
e: Grant Leonard, Housing Analyst
Andrew Hill, Principal, Dyett and Bhatia Urban and Regional Planners Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 9., Item Page 4, Packet Page 51 RESOLUTION NO. ____ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
1 AUTHORIZE STAFF TO APPROPRIATE $150,000 IN HCD LOCAL EARLY ACTION PLANNING GRANT FUNDS AND APPROPRIATE $369,940 FROM THE DEPOSIT ACCOUNT FOR GENERAL PLAN UPDATES (101-2650)
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey General Plan (General Plan) Housing Element is required to have an adopted, certified Sixth Cycle Housing Element in place by December 15, 2023;
WHEREAS, multiple state laws have been passed requiring a General Plan update of the Safety Element;
WHEREAS, while Monterey does not have any disadvantaged communities as identified by the State pursuant to SB 535, State law requires that the General Plan address issues of environmental justice and climate change;
WHEREAS, the General Plan Land Use Element will need to be updated to be consistent with the General Plan elements described above, and will need to be consistent with the Monterey Regional Airport, Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan; WHEREAS, in January 2020, the City received a Local Early Action Planning (LEAP) Grant from the California Housing and Community Development (HCD) for the preparation and adoption of the City’s housing element update that includes an implementation component to facilitate compliance with the sixth cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA); and on June 16, 2020 the City Council authorized staff to apply for and receive local government planning support grant program funds or LEAP grants program for the sixth cycle housing element (Resolution No. 20-081 C.S.);
WHEREAS, the City collects development fees as part of building permits to offset the cost of future General Plan updates and currently there is $406,000 designated for General Plan updates in the General Fund deposit account. Staff requests the City Council approve $369,940 from the General Plan fund to be appropriated for a General Plan update; WHEREAS, after the release of the General Plan funds, the City would issue a Notice to Proceed with on-call planning and environmental consultant, Dyett and Bhatia Urban and Regional Planners, who will prepare the General Plan update to include, the 6th Cycle Housing Element, updates to the Safety Element, and Land Use Element; WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 9., Item Page 5, Packet Page 52 to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby:

1. Authorizes the Finance Director, or designee, to increase revenue by $150,000 in account 101-400-4400-3472, and appropriate $150,000 of expense to 101-400- 4400-0000-4240 related to the anticipated spending for the previously accepted LEAP Grant award.

2. Authorizes the Finance Director, or designee, to appropriate $369,940 of expense to 101-400-4400-0000-4240, from the General Fund deposit account for General Plan updates (101-2650).

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this 19th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 9., Item Page 6, Packet Page 53 RESOLUTION NO. 20-081 C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY

AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR, AND RECEIPT OF, LOCAL GOVERNMENT PLANNING

SUPPORT GRANT PROGRAM FUNDS
WHEREAS, pursuant to Health and Safety Code 50515 et. Seq, the Department of Housing and Community Development (Department) is authorized to issue a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) as part of the Local Government Planning Support Grants Program (hereinafter referred to by the Department as the Local Early Action Planning Grants program or LEAP); and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Monterey desires to submit a LEAP grant application package (“Application”), on the forms provided by the Department, for approval of grant funding for projects that assist in the preparation and adoption of planning documents and process improvements that accelerate housing production and facilitate compliance to implement the sixth cycle of the regional housing need assessment; and WHEREAS, the Department has issued a NOFA and Application on January 27, 2020 in the amount of $119,040,000 for assistance to all California Jurisdictions; WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Monterey (“Applicant”) resolves as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to apply for and submit to the Department the Application package;
SECTION 2. In connection with the LEAP grant, if the Application is approved by the Department, the City Manager of the City of Monterey is authorized to submit the Application, enter into, execute, and deliver on behalf of the Applicant, a State of California Agreement

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 9., Item Page 7, Packet Page 54 2 (Standard Agreement) for the amount of $150,000, and any and all other documents required or deemed necessary or appropriate to evidence and secure the LEAP grant, the Applicant’s obligations related thereto, and all amendments thereto; and SECTION 3. The Applicant shall be subject to the terms and conditions as specified in the NOFA, and the Standard Agreement provided by the Department after approval. The Application and any and all accompanying documents are incorporated in full as part of the Standard Agreement. Any and all activities funded, information provided, and timelines represented in the Application will be enforceable through the fully executed Standard Agreement. Pursuant to the NOFA and in conjunction with the terms of the Standard Agreement, the Applicant hereby agrees to use the funds for eligible uses and allowable expenditures in the manner presented and specifically identified in the approved Application.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this 16th day of June, 2020, by the following vote:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof

ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 9., Item Page 8, Packet Page 55 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 9., Item Page 9, Packet Page 56 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
Andrea Renny, Interim Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Award a Professional Services Agreement in the Amount of $174,770 to COAR Design Group for the Monterey Public Safety Facility Feasibility Study (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution awarding a Professional Services Agreement for the Monterey Public Safety Facility Feasibility Study to COAR Design Group (previously Jeff Katz Architectural Corporation) with a not-to-exceed fee of $174,770.00 and authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute the Professional Services Agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This Project is consistent with the City Council’s Vision and Strategic Initiative of “Working to improve the quality of life of our residents” by ensuring that the City’s infrastructure meets the needs of the community, including those who work to provide services to the City.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

On December 7, 2021, Council authorized an appropriation of $125,000 from the unassigned fund balance to complete a Public Safety Facility Feasibility Study. The funds need to be reappropriated for the 2022-23 fiscal year along with an additional $49,770 for a total of $174,770.

The appropriation is from unassigned fund balance and expenditures will be paid from account 101-310-3110-0000-4220.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 10., Item Page 1, Packet Page 57 CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

No alternatives are recommended, as four (4) very well-qualified firms submitted responsive, technical proposals. If Council does not award a contract for the feasibility study, the issues at the Central Public Safety Facility will continue to go unaddressed without a plan for moving forward. The City’s Central Public Safety Complex, which consists of Fire Station 11, Fire Administration, the Police Department, and the Emergency Operations Center, is well beyond its useful life. The buildings’ aging infrastructure is beyond repair, and choosing to delay or not to conduct a feasibility study would result in continued negative impacts to operations of the City’s Fire and Police departments.

DISCUSSION:

Central Public Safety Facility Capital Improvement Needs The City’s Police Department, Fire Station 11, Fire Administration, and the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) make up the Central Public Safety Facility, located at the corner of Pacific and Madison Streets. This facility also serves as the primary location for the City’s information services and technology infrastructure.

The “El Cuartel” Building was opened 62 years ago, on May 10, 1959. The Monterey Police Department is approximately 17,088 square feet and Monterey Fire Station 11 (previously Station 1) is approximately 5,480 square feet. The building has surpassed its useful lifespan and issues such as heating, cooling, electric and plumbing all provide significant challenges.

The bathrooms and locker rooms in the building have had numerous sewage backup and overflow incidents which cannot be resolved without significant renovation. The heating/cooling system operates at different levels of the building creating cold areas in one portion of the building and hot areas in others, often during the cold and hot seasons of the year. The electrical system is antiquated and includes the "push-button" light switch technology of the 1950s.

The original 1959 facility does not meet the needs of today’s public safety and response personnel. There is insufficient storage space for evidence, a lack of locker room space to accommodate multiple genders and gender-neutral personnel, limited office and meeting space, as well as access control and security concerns. Offices have been converted to locker room facilities, which has led to a decrease in staff workspaces. Furthermore, Police training has greatly evolved since 1959 and areas specifically devoted to training and wellness need to be part of a modern facility. The MPD Investigations Division, Fire Administration, and some evidence and property storage are provided in standalone, prefabricated buildings, or shipping containers located in the parking area. The Emergency Operations Center (EOC) is also Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 10., Item Page 2, Packet Page 58 housed in the Central Public Facility. The EOC, which was constructed with Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) funding in 1998, does not have adequate meeting or storage space.

For these reasons, a new public safety facility is needed to address the ongoing issues with the current facility.

Next Steps: A Feasibility Study for the Central Public Safety Facility On December 7, 2021 Council approved an appropriation of $125,000 for the development of a Central Public Safety Facility Feasibility Study. A request for proposal was prepared by staff and extensively advertised on January 11, 2022 to solicit proposals from qualified firms. Selection of the best-qualified firm was made in accordance with Section 28-30 of the City’s Purchasing Ordinance. On February 15, 2022, four (4) proposals were received, evaluated, and ranked by a selection committee, consisting of Public Works, Fire, Police Department, and City Manager’s Office staff. After deliberations, the selection committee chose to interview the two (2) topranked firms: Jeff Katz Architecture and Dewberry Associates, Inc. Following the interviews, the selection committee agreed that Jeff Katz Architectural Corporation (“JKA”) was the most qualified firm for this project. On April 20, 2022, JKA announced a new name, COAR Design Group.

COAR Design Group has over 30 years of experience, completing over 450 public works facilities across the state of California, including numerous police and fire facilities, administration centers, and public facilities for municipalities. Additionally, COAR Design Group has completed over 40 preliminary planning studies, feasibility analyses, and programing studies for a variety of new and adapted facilities, specifically including police facilities.

The original fee proposal submitted by COAR Design Group of $272,376, exceeded the amount Staff had originally budgeted for the project. Staff negotiated a reduced scope and fee to achieve the results needed to move the project forward productively, while more closely aligning with available funding. An additional appropriation of $48,770 is needed in order to award this contract (not to exceed fee of $174,770).

The current scope of the proposal includes assessing the space needs (and overall condition of the current facility) to determine how best to modify the existing facility to address current and future space and staffing needs. This would result in a recommendation to create a facility that will extend the useful life of the facility for 30 to 50 years (if possible) or the recommendation to construct a new facility that replaces the existing one.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution:

1. Awarding a Professional Services Agreement for the Monterey Public Safety Facility Feasibility Study to COAR Design Group (previously Jeff Katz Architectural Corporation) with a not-to-exceed fee of $174,770.00, and

2. Authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute the Professional Services Agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney.

3. Re-appropriating $125,000 and authorizing an additional appropriation of $49,770 in account 101-310-3110-0000-4220.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 10., Item Page 3, Packet Page 59 AR/mb
Attachments: 1. Resolution
c: COAR Design Group, 200 E. Street, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 10., Item Page 4, Packet Page 60 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№08/22
AWARD A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $174,770 TO

COAR DESIGN GROUP FOR THE MONTEREY PUBLIC SAFETY FACILITY FEASIBILITY STUDY
WHEREAS, a new public safety facility is needed to address the ongoing issues with the current Central Public Safety Facility;
WHEREAS, on December 7, 2021 Council authorized an appropriation of $125,000 from the unassigned fund balance to complete a Public Safety Facility Feasibility Study, WHEREAS, the funds need to be re-appropriated for the 2022-23 fiscal year along with an additional $49,770 for a total of $174,770. The appropriation is from unassigned fund balance and expenditures will be paid from account 101-310-3110-0000-4220, WHEREAS, a request for proposal was prepared by staff and extensively advertised on January 11, 2022 to solicit proposals from qualified firms, WHEREAS, selection of the best-qualified firm was made in accordance with Section 28- 30 of the City’s Purchasing Ordinance,
WHEREAS, on February 15, 2022, four (4) proposals were received, evaluated and ranked by a selection committee, consisting of Public Works, Fire, Police Department, and City Manager’s Office staff,
WHEREAS, the selection committee agreed that COAR Design Group (previously Jeff Katz Architectural Corporation) was the most qualified firm for this project, WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 10., Item Page 5, Packet Page 61 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF MONTEREY

1. Awards a Professional Services Agreement for the Monterey Public Safety Facility Feasibility Study to COAR Design Group (previously Jeff Katz Architectural Corporation) with a not-to-exceed fee of $174,770.00, and

2. Authorizes the City Manager or his designee to execute the Professional Services Agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney.

3. Re-appropriates $125,000 and authorizes an additional appropriation of $49,770 in account 101-310-3110-0000-4220.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 10., Item Page 6, Packet Page 62 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Andrea Renny, P.E., Interim Public Works Director Prepared By: Tom Harty, P.E., QSD, Interim City Engineer, NCIP Staff Coordinator
SUBJECT: Appropriate $50,000 from the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Ending Balance Account to the Mar Vista Reconstruction Design Project Account ***NCIP*** (Further CEQA Review Required) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council appropriate $50,000 from the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Ending Balance Account (31nunap) to the Mar Vista Reconstruction Design project account (35n1616).

VALUE DRIVERS:

QUALITY OF LIFE – In collaboration with our community partners, work to improve the quality of life of all of our community members by fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion; championing equitable access to affordable housing; and maintaining a safe environment.

ACTIVE MOBILITY – Expand opportunities for people of all ages and abilities to bike and walk safely through active transportation, accessibility, and safety initiatives.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This Project is consistent with the City Council’s Vision and Strategic Initiative of “Working to improve the quality of life of our residents” by maintaining our existing infrastructure.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

A supplemental appropriation of $50,000 from the NCIP Ending Balance (31nunap) to the Mar Vista Reconstruction Design Project Account (35n1616) will allow the project to move forward:

Estimated Project Costs
Project Design (Whitson Engineers) $ 225,000
Project Management $ 23,000
Total $ 248,000
Current Available Funding
Mar Vista Reconstruction Design (35n1616) $ 82,830.18
Project Expended to Date $115,169.82
Supplemental Appropriation (this recommendation) $ 50,000.00 Total $248,000.00
Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 11.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 11., Item Page 1, Packet Page 63 As of July 11, 2022, the Ending Balance Account balance is $774,317.14. On June 29, 2022, Council approved appropriations from the Ending Balance Account for three other NCIP projects - the Aeneas Bridge Restoration, Fishermen’s Flats Traffic Calming Plan, and the Pearl / Figueroa Street Intersection projects, amounting to a total of $155,000. The available Ending Balance Account will be reduced to $619,317.14, and sufficient funding is available in the Ending Balance Account.

Approval of this action will provide sufficient funding to complete this project.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Project-specific environmental review will be conducted on the Mar Vista Reconstruction Project. As currently conceived, the project is consistent with the City’s plans, and projectspecific impacts could be reduced to a less-than-significant level through project design and specifications. CEQA determination to be made after project design is completed so the project impacts can be understood and evaluated.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

City Council could decide to close the underfunded project. This is not recommended because City Council approved the project in 2015 and closing the project would now result in an incomplete project.

DISCUSSION:

The Mar Vista Reconstruction Design Project will, using Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) funds, would reconstruct 2,700 linear feet of roadway and seven unsignalized intersections on Mar Vista Drive from Dry Creek Road to Soledad Drive, and include improvements to curb ramps, bulb-outs, islands, and potentially storm water treatment facilities. The project was approved by Council on June 16, 2015 as part of the FY 2015-16 Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program and was funded for $228,000. City Council subsequently reduced funding by $ 30,000 on April 21, 2020, resulting in a revised total project budget of $198,000. This design project was completed to an appropriate milestone and shelved until funding to NCIP was restored.

The intent of this project is to produce a "shovel-ready" project, making the overall project more competitive for obtaining grant funding from safe routes to schools and complete streets programs.

Due to the reallocation of funding for this project in April 2020 into the General Fund for the ordinary and necessary City services through the COVID-19 pandemic, current funding is not enough to complete the project.

In order to move this project forward, a supplemental appropriation of $50,000 is required for this project. The current balance of the NCIP Ending Balance account is $774,317.14.

Therefore, sufficient funding is available in that account.

During their June 2, 2022 meeting, the NCIP Committee voted to approve this recommendation to Council.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 11., Item Page 2, Packet Page 64 Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council appropriate $50,000 from the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Ending Balance Account (31nunap) to the Mar Vista Reconstruction Design Project Account (35n1616).

AR/th
Attachments: 1. Resolution
e: Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Committee Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 11., Item Page 3, Packet Page 65 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/22
APPROPRIATE $50,000 FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT

PROGRAM ENDING BALANCE ACCOUNT TO THE MAR VISTA RECONSTRUCTION DESIGN PROJECT ACCOUNT ***NCIP***
WHEREAS, Mar Vista Reconstruction Design Project (35n1616) was approved by Council on June 16, 2015 as part of the FY 2015-16 Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program and was funded for $228,000;
WHEREAS, City Council subsequently reduced funding by $ 30,000 on April 21, 2020, resulting in a revised total project budget of $198,000; WHEREAS, in order to move this project forward, a supplemental appropriation of $50,000 is required for this project;
WHEREAS, the current balance of the NCIP Ending Balance account is $774,317.14; WHEREAS, project-specific environmental review will be conducted on the Mar Vista Reconstruction Project. As currently conceived, the project is consistent with the City’s plans, and project-specific impacts could be reduced to a less-than-significant level through project design and specifications. CEQA determination to be made after project design is completed so the project impacts can be understood and evaluated;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it appropriate $50,000 from the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Ending Balance Account (31nunap) to the Mar Vista Reconstruction Design Project Account (35n1616).

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 11., Item Page 4, Packet Page 66 2 City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 11., Item Page 5, Packet Page 67 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Gaudenz Panholzer, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Adoption of the 2022 Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the 2022 Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, consisting of Volume 1 (Exhibit A) in its entirety and the City of Monterey’s Annex (Annex H) in Volume 2 (Exhibit B); and
That the City Council resolves to integrate the Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan by reference into the Public Safety Element of the General Plan in accordance with the requirements of Government Code sections 65302, 65302.6, and 8685.9; and That the City Council directs staff to:

1. Use the Plan to guide pre-and post-disaster hazard mitigation.

2. Pursue implementation of the identified mitigation actions subject to the limitations of available funding and staff.

3. Coordinate the strategies in the plan with other planning programs and mechanisms under its jurisdictional authority.

4. Continue support of ongoing countywide mitigation efforts.

5. Continue to participate in the regional planning partnership as described by the MJHMP; and
That the City Council directs staff to submit the adopted resolution to the California Office of Emergency Services and FEMA Region IX officials to enable the Plan's final approval in accordance with the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and to establish conformance with the requirements of AB 2140.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

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

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 12.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 12., Item Page 1, Packet Page 68 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no fiscal impact for the approval of the MJHMP. However, implementation of the MJHMP will require funding and staff resources. Future funding requests will come before the Council for consideration as part of the budget process or on a case-by-case basis ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose to not adopt the 2022 Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. This alternative is not recommended as the City would be in violation of the Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) of 2000 (Public Law 106-390) and further would not be eligible to receive pre- and post-disaster mitigation funding from the FEMA.

DISCUSSION:

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

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

Monterey County, the cities of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Del Rey Oaks, Gonzales, Greenfield, King, Marina, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Salinas, Sand City, Seaside, and Soledad, as well as the Monterey County Water Resources Agency, the Carmel Area Wastewater District, Monterey Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 12., Item Page 2, Packet Page 69 One Water, the Monterey Regional Waste Management District, and the Moss Landing Harbor District.

The 2022 update to the MJHMP was developed by the MJHMP Steering Committee, made up of participants from the County and Participating Jurisdictions. The Steering Committee served as an advisory body on hazard and mitigation action priorities both for the County as a whole and each jurisdiction individually, with Monterey County Office of Emergency Services as the Planning Lead. The Monterey County MJHMP:
 Provides an explanation of prevalent hazards within the County and describes how hazards may affect the County and participating jurisdictions differently based upon various relationships to natural hazards.
 Includes a discussion of hazard location, size of a typical event, historical occurrences, and the probability of future occurrences for each identified hazard.  Identifies risks to vulnerable assets, both people and property.  Provides a mitigation strategy that responds to the identified vulnerabilities within each community and provides prescriptions or actions to achieve the greatest risk reduction based upon available resources.
 Pools resources from throughout the County and creates a uniform local hazard mitigation plan that can be consistently implemented.
 Ensures eligibility for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Cal OES grants
The City of Monterey Annex (Annex H) provides specific details on the City’ planning process, a City specific risk and vulnerability assessment, and a mitigation strategy that responds to the identified vulnerabilities within to achieve the greatest risk reduction based upon available resources.

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

GP/gp
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. 2022 Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, Volume 1 (Exhibit A)

3. 2022 Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, City of Monterey’s Annex in Volume 2 (Exhibit B)
e: Assistant City Manager
Finance Director
City Attorney
Public Works Director
Community Development Director
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 12., Item Page 3, Packet Page 70 Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 12., Item Page 4, Packet Page 71 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№08/22
ADOPTION OF THE 2022 MONTEREY COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD

MITIGATION PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey is vulnerable to natural hazards that may result in loss of life and property, economic hardship, and threats to the public health and safety; and WHEREAS, City of Monterey anticipates climate change will exacerbate the severity, frequency, and impacts of natural hazards; and
WHEREAS, proactive mitigation of known hazards before a disaster event can reduce or eliminate long-term risk to life and property; and
WHEREAS, the federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires all cities, counties, and special districts to have adopted a Hazard Mitigation Plan to receive pre-and post-disaster mitigation funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA); and WHEREAS, a coalition of Monterey County local governments and special districts embarked on a planning process to prepare for and lessen the impacts of specified hazards by updating the Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP), which is the blueprint for reducing the Operational Area's vulnerability to disasters and hazards; and WHEREAS, the update to the MJHMP has been prepared in accordance with federal laws, including the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended; Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, as amended; the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended; and the National Dam Safety Program Act, as amended; and WHEREAS, the MJHMP identifies mitigation goals and actions to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property in the City of Monterey from the impacts of future hazards and disasters; and
WHEREAS, the MJHMP planning partnership and the City of Monterey completed a coordinated planning process that engaged the public, assessed the risk and vulnerability to the impacts of natural hazards, developed a mitigation strategy consistent with a set of uniform goals and objectives, and created a plan for implementing, evaluating, and revising the strategy; and
WHEREAS, each jurisdiction has been responsible for the review and approval of their individual sections of the Plan and the Plan presents the accumulated information in a unified framework to ensure a comprehensive and coordinated hazard mitigation plan that covers the entire Monterey County Operational Area planning area that is aligned with the goals, objectives, and priorities of the State's multi-hazard mitigation plan; and WHEREAS, the result of the countywide organizational effort is a two volume Hazard Mitigation Plan, which will result in a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 12., Item Page 5, Packet Page 72 2 California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) approved multi-jurisdictional, multi-hazard mitigation plan; and
WHEREAS, the MJHMP has been reviewed by the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and FEMA, Region IX, and have approved it contingent upon its official adoption by the participating governing bodies; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Plan will allow the jurisdictional partners to become collectively and individually eligible to apply for hazard mitigation project funding and demonstrate their commitment to hazard mitigation and achieving the goals outlined in the Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby adopts the 2022 Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, consisting of Volume 1 (Exhibit A) in its entirety and the City of Monterey’s Annex (Annex H) in Volume 2 (Exhibit B).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it will integrate the Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan by reference into the Public Safety Element of the General Plan in accordance with the requirements of Government Code sections 65302, 65302.6, and 8685.9.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY to direct staff to:

1. Use the Plan to guide pre-and post-disaster hazard mitigation.

2. Pursue implementation of the identified mitigation actions subject to the limitations of available of funding and staff.

3. Coordinate the strategies in the plan with other planning programs and mechanisms under its jurisdictional authority.

4. Continue support of ongoing countywide mitigation efforts.

5. Continue to participate in the regional planning partnership as described by the MJHMP.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY to direct staff to submit this adopted resolution to the California Office of Emergency Services and FEMA Region IX officials to enable the Plan's final approval in accordance with the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and to establish conformance with the requirements of AB 2140.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 12., Item Page 6, Packet Page 73 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this 19th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 12., Item Page 7, Packet Page 74 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Fernanda Roveri, AICP, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: Authorize the City Manager to Enter into an Easement Deed and Agreement for Sewer Purposes over Portion of the Land at 675 and 681 Van Buren Street (APN 001-512-008-000 and APN 001-512-009-000), and for the Mayor to Sign the Certificate Accepting the Easement (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution to authorize the City Manager to enter into an easement deed and agreement for sewer purposes over a portion of the land at 675 and 681 Van Buren Street and for the Mayor to sign the certificate accepting the easement.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The sewer was constructed at this location around the year 1900. The City has maintained this line. Entering into an Easement Deed and Agreement would formalize the easement which is used to access the sanitary sewer main located at 675 and 681 Van Buren Street. The City would be able to continue to maintain and repair the sewer main as necessary.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The City shall pay any and all costs associated with the recordation of the Easement Deed and Agreement. No costs are anticipated since recording fees are waived pursuant to Government Code section 27383.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 13., Item Page 1, Packet Page 75 this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose to not adopt the resolution. This is not recommended as it would impair the City’s ability to maintain and repair the sewer main.

DISCUSSION:

The City of Monterey owns the public sanitary sewer main lines within the City. The subject City sewer main lies within the property at 675 and 681 Van Buren Street (Figure 1). City staff researched the County records and could not find a recorded easement over the abovementioned property to accommodate the sewer main, which was constructed in the year 1900. The City needs to enter into an Easement Deed and Agreement with the property owner of the abovementioned property to formalize the City’s existing right to maintain and repair the public sewer line.

Figure 1: City Sewer Main Line, 675 and 681 Van Buren Street (APN 001-512-008-000), and APN 001-512-009-000
APN 001-512-008-000
APN 001-512-009-000
City Sewer Main Line
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 13., Item Page 2, Packet Page 76 On May 19, 2022, the City of Monterey Minor Subdivision Committee approved Lot Line Adjustment SD-21-0061 between 675 and 681 Van Buren Street (APN 001-512-008-000) and APN 001-512-009-000 (the parcel to the south). The lot line was approved to be adjusted so that it separates the 675 and 681 Van Buren Street dwellings (Figure 2). The adjusted lot line would cut across the existing 675 Van Buren Street dwelling. Therefore, the lot line adjustment approval was conditioned on the demolition of the 675 Van Buren Street dwelling prior to recordation. The adjusted lot line location would generally, but not perfectly, coincide with the existing City sewer main line location. The property owner, Property Solutions West LLC Tr., has proposed to enter into an Easement Deed and Agreement with the City to formalize the City’s right to access the property for sewer line maintenance and repairs. The easement would be 10 feet wide and between the two parcels (Figure 3). The property owner’s ultimate goal is to reconstruct the dwelling at 675 Van Buren Street and expand the dwelling at 681 Van Buren Street and have them be on separate parcels.

Figure 2: Lot Line Adjustment Existing vs. Proposed
Existing Lot Line
Proposed Lot Line
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 13., Item Page 3, Packet Page 77 Figure 3: Lot Line Adjustment, 10-Foot-Wide Sewer Easement, Reconstructed Dwelling at 675 Van Buren Street, and Expanded Dwelling at 681 Van Buren Street Deeds conveying an interest in real property, such as an easement, cannot be recorded without a certificate or resolution of acceptance by the City Council (Government Code §27281).

Accepting the sewer easement will not place any additional burden on the City. The easement will run with the land, meaning that the City will be allowed to access the sewer to conduct future maintenance regardless of who owns the underlying fee title to the land.

KC/fr
Attachments: 1. Resolution
e: Property Solutions West LLC Tr., Property Owner
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 13., Item Page 4, Packet Page 78 Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 13., Item Page 5, Packet Page 79 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/22

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN EASEMENT DEED AND AGREEMENT FOR SEWER PURPOSES OVER A PORTION OF THE LAND AT 675 AND 681 VAN BUREN STREET (APN 001-512-008-000) AND APN 001-512-009-000, AND FOR THE

MAYOR TO SIGN THE CERTIFICATE ACCEPTING THE EASEMENT
WHEREAS, the City owns and maintains certain sewer lines that are located within private property;
WHEREAS, the maintenance and operation of said sewer lines require public easements over the private property;
WHEREAS, there is a six-inch diameter City sewer main line that lies within the property at 675 and 681 Van Buren Street (APN 001-512-008-000), owned by Property Solutions West LLC Tr. This property owner also owns the parcel to the south (APN 001-512-009-000); WHEREAS, on May 19, 2022, the City of Monterey Minor Subdivision Committee approved Lot Line Adjustment SD-21-0061 between 675 and 681 Van Buren Street; WHEREAS, the property owner has proposed to enter into an Easement Deed and Agreement with the City to formalize the existing access for sewer line maintenance and repairs;
WHEREAS, the sewer lines at this location were first constructed around the year 1900 and the City has maintained this line; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY it hereby authorizes the City Manager to enter into an Easement Deed and Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 13., Item Page 6, Packet Page 80 2 Agreement for sewer purposes over a portion of the land at 675 and 681 Van Buren Street (APN 001-512-008-000) and APN 001-512-009-000, and for the Mayor to sign the certificate accepting the easement.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this 19th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 13., Item Page 7, Packet Page 81 Council
Agenda Report
№10/13
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Amend Resolution 21-106 to Change the Salary Schedule for the Engineering Assistant II, Senior Engineer, and Assistant City Attorney Positions (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council amend Resolution 21-106-150 to adjust the salary schedule for the Engineering Assistant II, Senior Engineer, and Assistant City Attorney positions, effective August 1, 2022.

VALUE DRIVER:

Provide sufficient resources and support to develop, retain, and recruit a high-quality city workforce.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Amending the salary schedule to meet the municipal service delivery needs of the City of Monterey is consistent with City policy.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The salaries for the Engineering Assistant II, Senior Engineer, and Assistant City Attorney positions are significantly below other agencies in the region. It is fiscally prudent for the City to update the salary range for the positions to remain competitive. Staff recommends, effective August 1, 2022:
 Adjusting the top salary of the Engineering Assistant II position to $106,497. With benefits, the cost of this position is $140,934, which is a total increase of $6,334.  Adjusting the top salary of the Senior Engineer position to $155,236. With benefits, the cost of this position is $193,572, which is a total increase of $12,213.  Adjusting the top salary of the Assistant City Attorney position to $202,587.00. With benefits, the cost of this position is $244,711, which is a total increase of $25,612.

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 14.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 14., Item Page 1, Packet Page 82 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The Council could choose not to approve the recommendations outlined above and direct Staff to consider alternatives to adjusting the salary range for the Engineering Assistant II, Senior Engineer, and Assistant City Attorney positions.

DISCUSSION:

City staff recommends adjusting the salary ranges for engineer positions in the Public Works Department as well as the Assistant City Attorney position to be more closely aligned with other public agencies in the region. This recommendation comes at a critical time for the City of Monterey, which has experienced hiring and retention challenges in certain positions in the City:
specifically, engineers, attorneys, and information technology professionals. As part of the FY 2022/23 Operating Budget, salary ranges were updated for information technology classifications. This action would implement changes for one position in the City Attorney’s Office and two positions in Engineering Division.

These are highly skilled, professional positions that have become increasingly difficult to retain.

They require a high degree of technical knowledge. Professional engineers are licensed through the Board of Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists; and attorneys are licensed through The State Bar of California.

A best practice for adjusting salary ranges involves conducting a formal compensation study which closely identifies mean and median salary ranges for each position to benchmark agencies and reviews the job descriptions for each comparable agency. This effort is usually a six to eight month process involving a consultant. Due to staffing limitations and the urgency of our retention challenges, staff has conducted an informal review, and is recommending salary range adjustments to three positions before a City-wide compensation study is completed.

Engineering Positions in Public Works Department
The Engineering Division currently has 18 engineering and project management positions that are funded and approved by City Council. Out of these 18 positions, there are 9 vacancies.

The City currently has 4 licensed engineers in comparison to 11 licensed engineers in 2015.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 14., Item Page 2, Packet Page 83 Having engineering assistants, licensed engineers and project managers is critical to project delivery for the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP), Measure X, Measure P/S as well as the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Engineering services, particularly in California, are highly sought after for their depth of knowledge, expertise, and ability to support the City Infrastructure. The competition for engineers and project managers has increased to the point where neighboring cities such as Seaside are offering a hiring bonus of $30,000 for engineers, as well as higher salaries. Increasing the salaries for these positions would allow the City to be more competitive in its recruitment and retention of engineers.

Engineering Assistant II
The Engineering Assistant II performs engineering office and field work to support City services and infrastructure. The essential functions of preparations of plans, specifications, and engineering studies for public infrastructure include streets, storm drains, sewers, and transportation facilities. The Engineering Assistant II role requires additional experience and works under a licensed engineer with greater autonomy. The City currently has two staff members in this classification.

The City’s current salary range for the Engineering Assistant II is $82,776 to $100,632 (prior to any salary adjustments in 2022/23). An informal review of comparable agencies conducted in June 2022 shows that the median top salary step for the Engineering Assistant II equivalent position is $106,497. For these reasons, City staff is recommending adjusting the Engineering Assistant II top step to $106,497.

Senior Engineer
The Senior Engineer is a licensed engineer that performs engineering design and project management to support City services and infrastructure. Prepares and supervises preparation of engineering plans, calculations, cost estimates and specifications for the construction of streets, storm drains, sewers, buildings, parks, harbor projects, street lighting, traffic signals and other facilities; assists and directs subordinate staff member on difficult engineering problems; reviews plans, calculations, cost estimates and specifications. The Senior Engineer is a management position that supervises and trains engineers. The Senior Engineer is also in charge of a group of engineers and project delivery for NCIP, CIP or PMSA. The City currently has one staff member in this classification.

The City’s current salary range for the Senior Engineer is $118,440 to $143,928 (prior to any salary adjustments in 2022/23). An informal review of the City’s comparable agencies conducted in 2022 shows that the median top salary step for the Senior Engineer equivalent position is $155,236. For these reasons, City staff is recommending adjusting the top step of the Senior Engineer salary to $155,236.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 14., Item Page 3, Packet Page 84 Assistant City Attorney
The Assistant City Attorney provides critical legal services to the City Council, City Manager’s Office, and City staff on a variety of complex issues relating to municipal law. The essential functions for the position include performing legal research and analysis; providing assistance to department heads on legal requirements, preparing cases for civil criminal, and administrative hearings; representing the City at trials and at hearings; monitor and supervise cases handled by outside counsel; serving as legal counsel during City Council and boards and commission meetings; investigating claims and complaints against the City; and much more. In addition, the position represents the City Attorney when absent or as requested. The Assistant City Attorney is expected to have a Juris Doctorate (JD) from a law school and have a strong understanding of municipal and governmental law.

City Attorneys and Assistant City Attorneys, particularly in California, are highly sought after for their depth of knowledge, expertise, and ability to address issues across multiple areas of municipal law: land use, labor and employment, public safety, conflicts of interest, public finance, public contracts, environmental law, real estate, public works, transportation, and housing. The City’s current salary range for the Assistant City Attorney is $147,144 to $178,872. An informal review of the comparable agencies conducted in 2022 shows that the average maximum salary range for the Assistant City Attorney position is $202,587.36. For these reasons, City staff is recommending adjusting the Assistant City Attorney salary range, with the top step at $202,587.36.

The workload in the City Attorney’s Office has and continues to justify an in-house Assistant City Attorney and Deputy City Attorney. City staff is able to obtain legal services without needing to outsource items for review by outside counsel. Having an Assistant City Attorney compensated at public sector market rates will help the City continue to reduce liability risk, maintain efficient use of staff, and provide value by continuing to provide on-site legal support.

Attachments: 1. Resolution
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours of the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 14., Item Page 4, Packet Page 85 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№12/12
AMEND RESOLUTION 21-106 TO CHANGING THE SALARY SCHEDULE FOR THE

ENGINEERING ASSISTANT II, SENIOR ENGINEER, AND ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY

POSITION
WHEREAS, the City Council has previously authorized the establishment of all employee classifications and salaries for regular full-time and regular part-time employees; WHEREAS, California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 570.5, and Government Code section 20636(b)(1), require governing bodies of local agencies contracting with CalPERS to adopt a publicly available pay schedule;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey’s salary range adopted in Resolution 21-106 for the Engineering Assistant II, Senior Engineer, and Assistant City Attorney positions are below the median salary of comparator agencies;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey would be better served by amending the salary range for the Assistant City Attorney and is more cost-effective than contracting with outside legal counsel for services at a higher rate of pay;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey would be better served by amending the salary schedule to adjust the maximum annual base salaries for the Engineering Assistant II to $106,497, Senior Engineer to $155,236.00, and Assistant City Attorney to $202,587.00; and WHEREAS, the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action has no potential to cause any effect on the environment, this matter is not a project. Because the proposed action does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that Resolution 21-106, the Adopted Salary Schedule, is hereby amended and to update the salaries for the following positions, effective August 1, 2022:

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 14., Item Page 5, Packet Page 86 2 Engineering Assistant II
Semi- Monthly Salary Annual Salary
Step 1 $3,768.88 $90,453.00
Step 2 $3,925.92 $94,222.00
Step 3 $4,089.50 $98,148.00
Step 4 $4,259.88 $102,237.00
Step 5 $4,437.38 $106,497.00
Senior Engineer
Semi- Monthly Salary Annual Salary
Step 1 $5,268.33 $126,440.00
Step 2 $5,545.63 $133,095.00
Step 3 $5,837.50 $140,100.00
Step 4 $6,144.75 $147,474.00
Step 5 $6,468.17 $155,236.00
Assistant City Attorney
Semi- Monthly Salary Annual Salary
Step 1 $6,875.33 $165,008.00
Step 2 $7,237.21 $173,693.00
Step 3 $7,618.13 $182,835.00
Step 4 $8,019.08 $192,458.00
Step 5 $8,441.13 $202,587.00
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 14., Item Page 6, Packet Page 87 Council
Agenda Report
№10/13
FROM: Hans Uslar, City Manager
By: Christine Davi, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Amend and Restate Resolution 22-087 Calling a General Municipal Election for November 8, 2022 and Proposing a General Business License Tax on Commercial Cannabis Activity to Revise the Ballot Measure Question (Exempt from CEQA pursuant to Pub. Resources Code 21065, CEQA Guidelines 15378(b)(4), 15061(b)(3) and Pub. Resources Code 21080, subd. (b)(8); CEQA Guidelines 15273(a)(4).))
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council amend and restate Resolution 22-087 to revise the ballot measure question to reflect the maximum tax rates that the City can impose on commercial cannabis activity rather than the initial (minimum) rates.

VALUE DRIVER:

This recommendation is consistent with the value driver to “foster a local government that is transparent and collaborative; and solicits, welcomes and appreciates input from all.” This recommendation is also consistent with the value driver of “fiscal stewardship” to serve as stewards of the City’s financial resources through sound economic vitality efforts, streamlining operations, reasonable revenue enhancements, visionary long-term planning, fiscal transparency, and community partnerships.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This recommendation is consistent with the City of Monterey Charter requirements for general municipal elections.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Proposition 64 added a state excise tax of 15% on the privilege of purchasing cannabis at a retail store (Rev. & Taxation Code section 34011(a).) It also added an excise tax for the privilege of cultivating cannabis. Proposition 64 did not affect the City’s authority to impose taxes on cannabis except for cannabis cultivated for personal use is exempt; medical cannabis is exempt from state and local sales tax, but not state or local excise taxes.

The City’s proposed ballot measure is to implement a local cannabis excise tax. City sales tax cannot differ from Bradley-Burns Uniform Sales and Use tax law in either what is taxed or the rate of tax. Accordingly, local taxes on cannabis commerce are typically business license taxes, but often calculated as a percentage of retail sales and reflected on retail receipts, so they are commonly perceived as sales taxes when, technically, they are not.

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 15.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 1, Packet Page 88 With regard to the proposed business license tax for commercial cannabis activity, the estimated revenue according to HdL Companies is about $604,000 to $1.3 million based on three store front dispensaries and one cannabis testing laboratory.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that calling for the election is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed commercial cannabis business license tax is exempt from CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that its enactment would have a significant effect on the environment (Pub. Resources Code 21065, CEQA Guidelines 15378(b)(4), 15061(b)(3) and because the Ordinance involves the approval of government revenues to fund existing services (Pub. Resources Code 21080, subd. (b)(8); CEQA Guidelines 15273(a)(4). It does not make any commercial activity lawful nor commit the City to fund any particular activity.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

No alternatives are considered. The ballot question should be revised to reflect the maximum, rather than the minimum, business license tax rate that may be authorized by the City Council.

DISCUSSION:

The City Council directed staff on December 21, 2021 to bring forward for its consideration a ballot measure to ask the voters to implement a local cannabis excise tax.

If voters approve the proposed measure, cannabis retail businesses would pay an initial tax of 4% on gross receipts, cannabis testing lab businesses would pay 1%, and all other cannabis businesses would pay 6%.

The measure would allow the City Council to increase the tax to up to 8% for cannabis retail businesses, 2% for testing laboratories, and 6% for all other businesses. In addition to these tax rates, the measure also allows higher taxes on cannabis-infused beverages containing natural or artificial sweeteners and on high potency products (those with more than 17% THC) to discourage products with public health risks.

Delivery businesses are taxed the same rate as retail businesses, with an initial tax of 4% that may be adjusted by City Council action up to 8% of gross receipts. Other businesses that are not retail or testing laboratories, such as manufacturing, processing, or distribution, are taxed at an initial tax rate of 2% that may be adjusted by City Council action up to 6% of gross receipts.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 2, Packet Page 89 Commercial cultivation is not contemplated to be an allowable use in the City at this time, and it is not included in the proposed ballot measure.

The ballot measure question adopted on June 29, 2022 in Resolution 22-087 reads as follows:

Measure ____.

YES
Cannabis Business License Tax. Shall the measure to
impose an annual cannabis (marijuana) business license
tax of 4% of gross receipts from retail businesses, 1% of gross receipts from testing laboratories, and 2% of gross receipts from other cannabis businesses, with an additional tax on highly potent products, generating about $604,000 to $1.3 million a year, with all funds staying local and subject to audit, and effective until repealed by voters, be adopted?
NO
The recommended revised ballot measure question, with edits shown in bold, is as follows:

Measure ____.

YES
Cannabis Business License Tax. Shall the measure to
impose an annual cannabis (marijuana) business license
tax of up to 8% of gross receipts from retail businesses, 2% of gross receipts from testing laboratories, and 6% of gross receipts from other cannabis businesses, with an
additional tax on highly potent products, generating about $604,000 to $1.3 million a year, with all funds staying local and subject to audit, and effective until repealed by voters, be adopted?
NO
Conclusion:

It is recommended that the City Council amend and restate Resolution 22-087 to revise the ballot measure question to reflect the maximum amount of cannabis business license tax that the City may charge should the measure pass.

Attachments: 1. Resolution
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 3, Packet Page 90 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
AMENDING AND RESTATING RESOLUTION 22-087 TO REVISE THE BALLOT

MEASURE QUESTION TO REFLECT THE MAXIMUM TAX RATES THAT THE CITY

CAN IMPOSE ON COMMERCIAL CANNABIS ACTIVITY
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey imposes license taxes upon businesses in the city; WHEREAS, these business license taxes are imposed to raise revenue and not for regulation;
WHEREAS, the ordinance attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference would impose a business license tax on persons engaged in commercial cannabis activity in the City;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.6 of Article 2 of the City Charter and Section 9222 of the California Elections Code, the City Council may submit the Ordinance directly to the voters; WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.3 of Article 2 of the City Charter, the City Council adopted Resolution 22-087 C.S. at a properly noticed meeting on June 28, 2022 to call a general municipal election for November 8, 2022, at which voters will consider adopting the Ordinance to impose a general tax on commercial cannabis activity in the city as well as other offices and questions that may properly come before voters; WHEREAS, this amendment is necessary to revise the ballot measure question to reflect the maximum rates that the City can impose on commercial cannabis activity should the measure be approved, rather than the initial (minimum) rates; WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that calling the election is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability; and WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed commercial cannabis business license tax is exempt from CEQA because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that its enactment would have a significant effect on the environment (Pub.

Resources Code 21065, CEQA Guidelines 15378(b)(4), 15061(b)(3) and because the Ordinance involves the approval of government revenues to fund existing services (Pub.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 4, Packet Page 91 2 Resources Code 21080, subd. (b)(8); CEQA Guidelines 15273(a)(4). It does not make any commercial activity lawful nor commit the City to fund any particular activity.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Monterey that:

1. The above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.

2. The City Council hereby calls a general municipal election on November 8, 2022 and submits the attached Ordinance to the qualified voters of the city to impose a general tax on commercial cannabis activity in the City.

3. The type, rate, and method of collection of the tax are set forth in the Ordinance, the full text of which shall be printed and made available to voters pursuant to Sections 9119 and 9223 of the California Elections Code.

4. The ballot label for the proposed Measure shall be submitted for a “Yes” or “No” vote as follows:

Measure ____.

YES
Cannabis Business License Tax. Shall the measure to
impose an annual cannabis (marijuana) business license
tax of up to 8% of gross receipts from retail businesses, 2% of gross receipts from testing laboratories, and 6% of gross receipts from other cannabis businesses, with an additional tax on highly potent products, generating about $604,000 to $1.3 million a year, with all funds staying local and subject to audit, and effective until repealed by voters, be adopted?
NO

5. The City Council requests that the Board of Supervisors of Monterey County (the “County”) consolidate the Election with the statewide general election to be held on that date.

6. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the Board of Supervisors and Chief Election Official of the County.

7. The City Attorney is authorized and directed to prepare an impartial analysis of the measure as required by section 9280 of the California Elections Code.

8. The Mayor is authorized to select two members of the City Council to prepare a written argument, not to exceed 300 words, in favor of the Measure on behalf of the City Council, as specified in section 9282 of the California Elections Code. If an argument is filed against the Measure, the Mayor is also authorized to select two members of the City Council to prepare a written rebuttal.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 5, Packet Page 92 3 9. Arguments against the Measure may not exceed 300 words and must be submitted to the City’s elections official in compliance with 9282 and 9283 of the California Elections Code by the deadline the Elections Official establishes as authorized by law.

10. Rebuttal arguments are hereby authorized and may not exceed 250 words and must be submitted to the city’s elections official as specified in section 9285 of the California Elections Code. This paragraph 10 applies only to the November 8, 2022 general municipal election and shall have no effect thereafter.

11. Pursuant to Charter section 2.3, the following elective offices shall be submitted to qualified voters of the city at the General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 8, 2022:
a. One (1) Mayor for a two (2) year term, representing the City of Monterey at large; b. One (1) Council Member for a four (4) year term, representing District 1; and c. One (1) Council Member for a four (4) year term, representing District 2.

12. Notice of the Election is hereby given and the City Clerk shall give such further notice of the Election as required by law.

13. The City acknowledges that the consolidated election will be held and conducted in the manner prescribed by Elections Code section 10418.

14. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to take all other steps necessary to conduct the election.

15. The City Manager is authorized and directed to appropriate the funds necessary to fund the Election and to execute an agreement with Monterey County to conduct the election.

The City Council of Monterey duly adopted this Resolution at a meeting held on July 19, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 6, Packet Page 93 4 ORDINANCE NO. ____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
ADOPTING ARTICLE 6 OF CHAPTER 19 OF THE MONTEREY CITY

CODE IMPOSING A CANNABIS BUSINESS LICENSE TAX
Be it ordained by the People the City of Monterey as follows:

SECTION 1. CODE AMENDMENT. Article 6 of Chapter 19 of the Monterey City Code is hereby adopted to read as follows:

CANNABIS BUSINESS LICENSE TAX
19-121 - Title.

This article shall be referenced as the “City of Monterey Cannabis Business License Tax.” 19-122 - Purpose.

This ordinance is adopted to achieve the following purposes, among others, and shall be interpreted to accomplish them:

A. To impose an excise tax on the privilege of transporting, dispensing, manufacturing, producing, processing, preparing, storing, testing, providing, donating, selling, or distributing cannabis or cannabis products by commercial cannabis businesses in the City, pursuant to the state Medicinal and Adult Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act, California Business and Professions Code section 26000, Proposition 64, approved by the voters in November 2016 and as amended to date (“MAUCRSA”), which legalized and regulates adult use of cannabis in California, and other applicable law as it now exists or may hereafter be adopted; B. To impose a general tax that generates revenues which may be used for any lawful purpose of the city in the discretion of the City Council;
C. To specify the type of tax and rate of tax to be levied and the method of its collection; and D. To comply with all requirements for imposition of a general tax.

This article is enacted solely to raise revenue, not for regulation. It shall apply to all persons engaged in cannabis business in the city. The tax imposed by this article is a general tax under articles XIII A and XIII C of the California Constitution.

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 7, Packet Page 94 5 19-123 - Definitions.

For the purposes of this article, the following words shall have the meanings ascribed to them by this section unless the context makes apparent another meaning was intended.

A. “Cannabis” or “marijuana” means all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa Linnaeus, Cannabis indica, or Cannabis ruderalis, or any other strain or varietal of the genus Cannabis that may exist or hereafter be discovered or developed that has psychoactive or medicinal properties, whether growing or not, including the seeds of such plants. “Cannabis” also means cannabis as defined by Business and Professions Code section 26001, subdivision (f), the Health and Safety Code section 11018, and by other state law.

B. “Cannabis accessory” is any device intended to aid in the use of cannabis or cannabis products which does not itself consist in all or part of cannabis or cannabis products and includes, without limitation, “cannabis accessories” as defined in Health and Safety Code section 11018.2 and by other state law.

C. “Cannabis business” means the activity of any natural or legal person, business, or collective in the City relating to cannabis, including but not limited to transportation, distribution, manufacture, compounding, conversion, processing, preparation, testing, storage, packaging, delivery and sales (including both wholesale and retail sales) of cannabis, cannabis products, or cannabis accessories, whether or not carried on for gain or profit, whether for medical or adult use, and whether or not such business is licensed by the State. A cannabis business does not include any business the only relationship of which to cannabis or cannabis products is the production or sale of cannabis accessories. A cannabis business does not include commercial cannabis cultivation.

D. “Cannabis product” means any product containing cannabis or its derivatives, including, but not limited to, flowers, buds, oils, tinctures, concentrates, extractions, edibles, and products described in Section 11018.1 of the Health and Safety Code.

E. “Collector” means the City Manager or their designee charged to administer this article.

F. “Commercial cannabis cultivation” means cultivation conducted by, for, or as part of a cannabis business. Commercial cannabis cultivation does not include personal medical cannabis cultivation, or cultivation for personal adult use as authorized by the MAUCRSA, including Health & Safety Code section 11362.1 et seq., for which the cultivator receives no compensation whatsoever.

G. “Cultivation” means any activity involving the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, curing, grading, or trimming of cannabis.

H. “Delivery” means the transfer for any form of compensation of cannabis or cannabis products to a customer or caregiver at a location that is not a dispensary.

I. “Dispensary” means a fixed place at which cannabis, cannabis products, or accessories for the use of cannabis or cannabis products are offered, either individually or in any combination, for retail sale, including, without limitation, a dispensary that engages in delivery.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 8, Packet Page 95 6 J. “Distributor’’ means a person engaged in procuring cannabis and/or cannabis products for sale to a dispensary, to a business engaged in delivery, or at another point of retail sale. “Distribution” means engaging in that conduct and a “distribution facility” is any real estate, whether or not improved, used in such conduct.

K. “Gross receipts,” except as otherwise specifically provided in this code or by regulation authorized by this code, has the meaning stated in Section 19-1 of this code.

L. “High potency” cannabis or cannabis product means cannabis flower containing more than 17% tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), or a cannabis product containing more than 50% THC, excluding edibles containing 10 mg or less of THC per dose.

M. “Manufacturer” means a person who engages in the production, preparation, propagation, or compounding of cannabis or cannabis products either directly or indirectly or by extraction methods, or by means of chemical synthesis, or by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis.

N. “Sweetened cannabis beverage” is a liquid cannabis product containing natural or artificial sweeteners sold in units intended for consumption exceeding one fluid ounce. 19-124 - Cannabis business tax.

A. Beginning January 1, 2023, a cannabis business tax is imposed upon each person who is engaged in business as a cannabis business.

B. The initial rate of the cannabis business tax shall be as follows:

1. For every person who operates a testing laboratory: one percent (1%) of gross receipts.

2. For every person who operates a dispensary or delivery business: four percent (4%) of gross receipts.

3. For every person who engages in a cannabis manufacturing, processing, distribution, or any other cannabis business not described in subdivisions (B) (1) or (2) above: two percent (2%) of gross receipts.

C. The City Council may, by resolution or ordinance, adjust the rate of the cannabis business tax up to the following maxima:

1. For every person who engages in the operation of a testing laboratory, the maximum tax rate shall not exceed two percent (2%) of gross receipts.

2. For every person who engages in the retail sales of cannabis as a dispensary or delivery business, the maximum tax rate shall not exceed eight percent (8%) of gross receipts.

3. For every person who engages in a cannabis manufacturing, processing, distribution, or any other type of cannabis business not described in Section (C) (1) or (2), the maximum tax rate shall not exceed six percent (6%) of gross receipts.

D. In addition, there is hereby imposed on every cannabis business in the City:

1. An additional tax of up to one percent (1%) of the gross receipts from high potency cannabis and each high potency cannabis product cultivated, manufactured, or sold by a taxpayer, multiplied by the percent of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content of the product above 17% for cannabis flower and 50% for cannabis products; and,
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 9, Packet Page 96 7 2. An additional tax of 20% of gross receipts from sweetened cannabis beverages.

E. The City Council may, by resolution, in its discretion, implement a tax rate lower than the maximum rates established in subsections (B) through (D) of this section for all persons engaged in cannabis business, or establish differing tax rates for different categories of cannabis business.

The City Council may, by resolution, also decrease or increase such tax rates provided that the tax rate is not above the maximum tax rates established in subsections (B) through (D) of this section.
19-125 - Registration of cannabis business.

A. Each person engaging in a cannabis business, whether an existing, newly established or acquired business, shall register with the City Manager’s office by the later of:

1. 30 days after commencing operation, or

2. January 1, 2023,
and shall annually renew such registration on or before the anniversary of the initial registration for that business.

B. Registrants shall furnish to the City Manager a statement sworn under penalty of perjury, upon a form provided by the City Manager, setting forth:

1. Every name under which the business engages in commercial cannabis activity in the city;

2. The names and addresses of every person who is an owner, principal, or manager of the business;

3. The nature or kind of all business activity to be conducted;

4. The place or places, whether or not in the city, where such business is to be conducted; and

5. Any further information which the City Manager may require to administer this article.

C. Registrants shall pay an annual registration fee in an amount established from time to time by resolution of the city council to recover the city’s costs to implement the registration requirement of this section, and the other provisions of this article other than the duty to pay tax when due. As a regulatory fee, such fee shall be limited to the city’s reasonable costs for those activities. The City Manager may provide by a regulation adopted pursuant to section 19-132 of this article for waivers of the annual registration fee for one or more years for any class of cannabis businesses if such a waiver will facilitate elimination of the illegal market in cannabis in the City or to facilitate participation in the cannabis market by low-income persons. 19-126 - Payment obligations.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 10, Packet Page 97 8 All persons subject to a tax under this article shall pay that tax regardless of any rebate, exemption, incentive, or other reduction elsewhere in this code, except as required by state or federal law. Failure to pay such a tax shall be subject to penalties, fines, and interest charges established under this article and the City may use any or all other code enforcement remedies available at law or in equity to enforce this article. No provision of this code shall be interpreted to reduce a tax rate established under this article or otherwise reduce the taxes paid hereunder unless the provision specifically expresses that reduction. 19-127 - Tax payment does not authorize activity.

The payment of a tax imposed under this article shall not be construed to authorize the conduct or continuance of any illegal business or of a legal business in an illegal manner. Nothing in this article authorizes or implies the lawfulness of any activity connected with the distribution or possession of cannabis unless otherwise authorized and allowed in strict and full conformance with this code. Nothing in this article shall be applied or construed as authorizing the sale of cannabis.
19-128 - Cannabis business license tax is not a sales tax.

The tax imposed by this article is an excise tax upon the privilege of doing business within the city. It is not a sales or use tax. Nevertheless, at the option of a commercial cannabis business, the tax may be separately identified on invoices, receipts, and other evidences of transactions. 19-129 - Returns and remittances.

The tax imposed by this article shall be due and payable as follows:

A. Each person owing tax under this article shall provide a tax return to the City Manager on or before the last business day of each month stating the tax owed for the preceding month and the basis of its calculation. The taxpayer shall remit the tax owed to the City Manager when the return is due.

B. The City Manager may establish a form for tax returns submitted under this article and, if so, use of that form shall be mandatory.

C. Tax returns and payments for all outstanding taxes, fees, penalties, and interest owed the city are immediately due upon cessation of business for any reason.

D. Whenever a payment, statement, report, request, or other communication is received by the City Manager after the time prescribed by this section for its receipt, but is in an envelope postmarked by that time, the City Manager shall regard such payment, statement, report, request, or other communication as timely. If the due date falls on a day when city offices are not open for business, the due date shall be the last business day before that due date.

E. Unless otherwise specifically provided by this article, the taxes imposed by this article shall be delinquent if not paid by the due date specified in subsection (A) of this section.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 11, Packet Page 98 9 F. The City Manager need not send a delinquency or other notice or bill to any person subject to a tax or fee imposed by this article and failure to send such notice or bill shall not affect the validity of any tax, fee, interest, or penalty due under this article. 19-130 - Audits.

The City Manager shall arrange for an annual independent audit of the receipts and expenditures of the taxes imposed by this article. The City Manager shall share that audit report with the city council and make it available for public inspection. 19-131 - Refunds.

A. No refund shall be made of any tax collected pursuant to this article, except as provided in this section.

B. No refund of any tax collected pursuant to this article shall be made because of the discontinuation, dissolution, or other termination of a cannabis business.

C. Any person entitled to a refund of sums paid under this article may elect to have such refund applied as a credit against future obligations under this article.

D. Whenever any tax, fee, penalty, or interest under this article has been overpaid, paid more than once, or has been erroneously or illegally collected or received by the city, such amount shall be refunded to the person who paid the tax upon a written claim for refund filed with the City Manager within one year of payment of the sum to be refunded.

E. The City Manager may examine and audit all the books and business records of the claimant to determine eligibility to the claimed refund. No claim for refund shall be allowed if the claimant refuses to allow such examination of the claimant’s books and business records.

F. A sum erroneously paid under this article due to an error of the city shall be refunded to the claimant in full upon a timely claim. If an error is attributable to the claimant, the city may retain an amount established by resolution of the city council to recover the city’s cost to process the claim and refund the balance.
19-132 - Tax administration.

A. It shall be the duty of the City Manager to collect the taxes, penalties, fees, and perform the duties required by this article.

B. The City Manager may from time to time promulgate such administrative rules and procedures consistent with the purpose, intent, and terms of this article as they deem necessary to implement or clarify it or to aid in its enforcement. The City Manager shall give notice of those regulations as required for ordinances of the city council and such regulations shall take effect upon such notice unless otherwise provided by a particular regulation.

C. The City Manager may take such administrative actions as needed to administer this article, including but not limited to:

1. Provide information to any taxpayer about this article; Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 12, Packet Page 99 10 2. Receive and record all revenues remitted to the city under this article;

3. Maintain records of taxpayer reports and taxes collected under this article;

4. Assess penalties, fines, and interest charges to taxpayers under this article;

5. Determine amounts owed and enforce collection under this article; and

6. Take such other reasonable steps as he or she deems appropriate to enforce this article.

D. The City Council may establish penalties, fines and interest charges related to this article by ordinance or resolution.
19-133 - Appeals.

Any person aggrieved by any decision of the city under this article may appeal to the City Council pursuant to the procedures described in Article 27 of Chapter 38 of this code. The City Council may appoint a hearing officer to hear an appeal and, as the Council may direct, either recommend a decision for the City Council’s review or make a final decision for the city. Any such decision on appeal by the City Council or a hearing officer shall be subject to judicial review pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. 19-134 - Consistency with business license tax.

The City Council intends this article to be enforced consistently with the balance of Chapter 19 of this code and any rule or regulation promulgated under that chapter except as provided to the contrary in this article or a regulation adopted pursuant to this article. 19-135 - Constitutionality and legality.

A. This article is intended to be applied consistently with the United States and California Constitutions, state law, and the city charter. Its tax shall not be applied to cause an undue burden upon interstate commerce, a violation of the equal protection and due process clauses of the Constitutions of the United States or the State of California, to constitute a special tax, or to violate any other applicable law.

B. Under California Constitution, article XIII B, the appropriation limit for the city is hereby increased to the maximum extent over the maximum period of time allowed under law by the amount of the revenues generated by the tax.

SECTION 2. AMENDMENT. To the extent allowed under Article XIII C of the California Constitution, the City Council may amend this Ordinance without a vote of the People, except that voter approval shall be required for any amendment that would increase, within the meaning of Government Code section 53750, subdivision (h), the tax rate beyond the maximum rates this Ordinance authorizes.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 13, Packet Page 100 11 SECTION 3. This Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq., because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that its enactment would have a significant effect on the environment (Pub. Resources Code 21065, CEQA Guidelines 15378(b)(4), 15061(b)(3) and because the Ordinance involves the approval of government revenues to fund existing services (Pub.

Resources Code 21080, subd. (b)(8); CEQA Guidelines 15273(a)(4). It does not make any commercial activity lawful nor commit the City to fund any particular activity.

SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the final decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The People of the City of Monterey declare that they would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of it, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions might be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. Under Elections Code sections 9217 and 9122 this ordinance shall take effect 10 days after the City Council certifies its approval by a majority vote (50% + 1) of the electorate voting at the November 8, 2022 general municipal election.

SECTION 6. CERTIFICATION. Upon approval by the voters, the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause it to be published according to law.

It is hereby certified that this Ordinance was duly adopted by the voters at the November 8, 2022 Election and took effect 10 days following adoption of a resolution declaring the results of the election at a regular meeting of the City Council held on [date] by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST:
________________________________ ________________
Clementine Bonner Klein, City Clerk Date
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 14, Packet Page 101 12 Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 15., Item Page 15, Packet Page 102 Council
Agenda Report
№06/11
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Award Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan Update Professional Services Contract ***CIP***(Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the attached resolution to award a contract to Jensen Hughes, Inc. in the not-to-exceed amount of $212,660, as authorized by the City Manager, or his designee, to update the current Americans With Disability Act (ADA) Transition Plan.

VALUE DRIVERS:

Expand opportunities for people of all ages and abilities to bike and walk safely through active transportation, accessibility, and safety initiatives.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action supports the City Code as it relates to a request for proposal (RFP). Staff formed a selection committee that reviewed the three (3) submitted proposals. This committee narrowed the field and held a final interview prior to selecting the final candidate. This selection was based on qualifications.

The U.S. Department of Justice has stressed the necessity to strive to ensure equal accommodations for persons with disabilities. Updating the ADA Transition Plan will allow the City to effectively monitor and track the City’s compliance with the 2010 Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG) and the most current State of California accessibility requirements.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The total cost for the ADA Transition Plan Update is not-to-exceed amount of $212,660.

The City Council has partially budgeted to fund the ADA Transition Plan Update as part of the 2021/22 Budget but has not used those funds. Staff recommends reappropriating $100,000 from the prior year (FY 2021/22); and appropriate $10,000 in CIP Contingency Funds (31ccont), $60,000 in CIP ADA Transition Plan Improvements (30C1211), and $42,660 in unassigned General Fund fund balance, for a total additional appropriation of $112,660, and a grand total of $212,660.

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 16.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 16., Item Page 1, Packet Page 103 Funding Appropriations
Reappropriation (FY 2021/22) of General Fund $100,000
CIP Contingency Funds (31ccont) $10,000
CIP ADA Transition Plan Improvements (30C1211), $13,895.01 of which is Parking Fund $60,000
Unassigned Fund Balance $42,660
Total Projected Cost $212,660
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability. CEQA review will be conducted as specific site improvements as future Capital Improvement (CIP) projects or Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) projects incorporating ADA barrier removals are identified.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose to not award this contract to update the existing ADA Transition Plan. However, awarding the contract will allow this project to move forward so the City of Monterey will stay in compliance with the Federal requirements to maintain an updated ADA Transition Plan.

DISCUSSION:

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a Federal civil rights legislation signed into law on July 26, 1990 which prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities. The Act applies to both the private and public sectors. Applicability of the ADA to the City of Monterey is covered under Title II.

The ADA requires each public entity to conduct and maintain an ADA Transition Plan. This Plan identifies where a facility, program, service, or practice may be deficient according to current ADA standards. Once identified, it will rank the deficiency for overall importance, provide a rough cost estimate to bring the item into compliance, and create a schedule to complete the required repairs. If the entity does not have and maintain a current ADA transition, it will be out of compliance with federal law.

In January 1992, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) established Title II of ADA. This Title required all jurisdictions to complete an ADA Transition Plan. The City of Monterey did comply Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 16., Item Page 2, Packet Page 104 with this requirement within the time specified by the DOJ. The proposed action would update the Transition Plan.

In 2012, the City completed the most recent ADA Transition Plan Update, identifying 34 buildings, 27 parks, 22 parking lots/structures, and approximately 1150 curb ramps and 300 pedestrian signals in need of improvements to meet Federal and State accessibility standards. Since then, the City has incrementally completed the recommended changes.

On January 24, 2022, the City released an RFP to update the existing ADA Transition Plan, with a submission deadline of February 28, 2022. No proposals were initially submitted. The RFP was reissued on March 7, 2022 with proposals due on April 18, 2022. Three proposals were received.

A review committee consisting of staff from the City Manager’s Office, Building & Safety Inspection Division, and Public Works Department reviewed the submitted proposals. The review process criteria were based on knowledge and experience as it related to accessibility, Federal law, historic background, and being familiar with the local environment. The review committee selected Jensen Hughes, Inc. as the top firm that met the criteria listed in the RFP. The City project manager then opened the cost proposal and met with the project team from Jensen Hughes to work on contract details.

The DOJ has required all jurisdictions to maintain and update, as needed, ADA Transition Plans.

Transition Plans must include a self-evaluation of all programs, services, and activities in addition to access to all City-owned facilities. By updating the existing ADA Transition Plan, the City of Monterey will stay in compliance with the requirements set forth by the Department of Justice.

The scope of work involves an initial investigation and document review of the City’s policies, programs, services, and activities; a field survey and field inspections (as needed) for public rights-of-way, facilities, City rental properties, parks, and parking lot inspections; database and Geographical Information Systems (GIS) integration; and a final, updated ADA Transition Plan document.

Attachments: 1. Resolution
e: Jensen Hughes, Inc.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№06/11

AWARD AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA) TRANSITION PLAN UPDATE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CONTRACT ***CIP***
WHEREAS, on March 7, 2022, the City released a Request for Proposal (RFP) to update the existing ADA Transition Plan;
WHEREAS, the City received three (3) proposals to update the existing ADA Transition Plan;
WHEREAS, the City formed a staff evaluation committee to review the submitted proposals; and
WHEREAS, staff negotiated with the top selected firm a price to update the ADA Transition Plan.

WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability. CEQA review will be conducted as specific site improvements as future Capital Improvement (CIP) projects or Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) projects incorporating ADA barrier removals are identified.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute a contract to update the existing ADA Transition Plan with Jensen Hughes, Inc. for not-to-exceed amount of $212,660.

Funding sources are as follows: reappropriate $100,000 from the prior year (FY 2021/22); appropriate $10,000 in CIP Contingency Funds (31ccont), $60,000 in CIP ADA Transition Plan Improvements (30C1211), and $42,660 in unassigned General Fund fund balance, for a total additional appropriation of $112,660, and a grand total of $212,660.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 2022, by the following vote:

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 16., Item Page 4, Packet Page 106 2 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 16., Item Page 5, Packet Page 107 Council
Agenda Report
№07/19
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
Prepared By: Angie Blake, Assistant Director of Information Resources SUBJECT: Authorize Purchase of ePlus Technology Inc. Backup Hardware and Services for $84,986.38 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution to authorize purchase of ePlus Technology, Inc. Backup Hardware and Services for $84,986.38.

VALUE DRIVERS:

Negotiating lower-cost service agreements for technology aligns with the Value Driver to “Serve as stewards of the City’s financial resources through sound economic vitality efforts, streamlining operations, reasonable revenue enhancements, visionary long-term planning, fiscal transparency, and community partnerships.”
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The City's current backup system has outgrown the scalability and flexibility required to meet the City's current and future backup demands. The Information Services Division (ISD) proposes modernizing and replacing the existing backup system for enhanced capacity, cybersecurity, and ease of administration.

The choice of ePlus Technology, Inc. as the solution vendor is consistent with our existing practice of providing responsive, quality, and cost-effective information technology solutions that enable City departments to be successful in achieving their respective missions.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Monterey City Code section 28-15 allows for an exemption from formal bidding requirements in cases where the contract or purchase is capable of being performed through purchasing contracts negotiated by another governmental agency that utilized acceptable bidding procedures (“piggyback” agreements). This acquisition will be purchased from ePlus Technology, Inc. by utilizing GSA agreements #47QTCA20D0019 and GS-35F-303DA. Finance Director or her designee approved the piggyback request on June 30, 2022.

Staff has negotiated a new service and support agreement that would save approximately $16,238.69 over 3 years.

The pending purchase will total $84,986.38 including sales tax and delivery. Funding for this purchase is available in the Information Services fund. Expenditures will be charged to the Equipment Outlay-Other account 710-030-0340-4505.

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 17.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 17., Item Page 1, Packet Page 108 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Council could choose not to purchase ePlus Technology, Inc. backup hardware and services.

This action is not recommended due to the need for a new robust backup solution to replace the City’s end of life backup hardware. This alternative could leave the City without the ability to restore from backup.

DISCUSSION:

The City utilizes a backup system to support and back up the City's files and databases. The backup system automates these processes and provides immediate access to the backups for data recovery.

In recent years, the City has implemented or is implementing many technology initiatives such as Office 365. Additionally, the City has outgrown its current backup system and needs a solution that can grow and scale to meet the current and future needs of the City. Due to the City's existing backup system hardware's advancing age and the rise of powerful technology enhancements, ISD recommends replacing the City's current backup system and recommends decoupling the backup system from backup storage with a multilayered security posture that can better protect the City from emergent cyber threats and aid the City's recovery in the event of an attack.

ISD evaluated various products, architectures, and holistic systems that provide backup solutions and disaster recovery. Authorized reseller ePlus Technology, Inc. provides a modern, scalable backup solution geared towards supporting current technology and future needs for the City.

The proposed new backup system offers the following advantages:
 48 TB of data storage and Microsoft Office 365 backup to the government cloud.  It meets modern cybersecurity standards as it is fully decoupled from the infrastructure it protects.
 Connects to cloud storage with an additional local backup appliance designed for redundancy.
 Provides greater backup storage capacity and performs backups and recoveries faster and more efficiently.
 Easier for staff to manage, train and allows for future growth.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 17., Item Page 2, Packet Page 109  Provides secure encryption and meets or exceeds cybersecurity and compliance requirements.

The proposed amount for this solution is $84,986.38. This purchase price also includes implementation services and three years of support for hardware and software from ePlus Technology, Inc.

NR/ab
Attachments: 1. Resolution
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 17., Item Page 3, Packet Page 110 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№07/19
AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF EPLUS TECHNOLOGY INC. BACKUP HARDWARE AND SERVICES FOR $84,986.38
WHEREAS, the City's current backup system has outgrown the scalability and flexibility required to meet the City's current and future backup demands; WHEREAS, the Information Services Division (ISD) proposes modernizing and replacing the existing backup system for enhanced capacity, cybersecurity, and ease of administration; WHEREAS, this acquisition will be purchased from ePlus Technology, Inc. by utilizing GSA agreements #47QTCA20D0019 and GS-35F-303DA. Finance Director or her designee approved the piggyback request on June 30, 2022;
WHEREAS, staff has negotiated a new service and support agreement that would save approximately $16,238.69 over 3 years;
WHEREAS, the pending purchase will total $84,986.38 including sales tax and delivery.

Funding for this purchase is available in the Information Services fund. Expenditures will be charged to the Equipment Outlay-Other account 710-030-0340-4505; WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to execute a professional services agreement with ePlus Technology, Inc. to purchase backup hardware and provide professional services for three years, for a not to exceed amount of $84,986.38.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of ________________, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 17., Item Page 4, Packet Page 111 2 APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 17., Item Page 5, Packet Page 112 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Andrea Renny, P.E., PTOE, Interim Public Works Director Prepared By: Cody Hennings, Engineering Technician
SUBJECT: Confirm Alvarado Street Maintenance District 85-1 Area and Assessment Proposed in Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2022/2023 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the Council hold a public hearing on July 19, 2022 and adopt the attached resolution confirming the area to be assessed; confirm the assessments set out in the attached Engineer’s Report; and order the same to be filed with the Monterey County Auditor-Controller’s Office.

This is a property-based district in which liability for the assessment is premised upon a person’s property ownership.

VALUE DRIVERS:

FISCAL STEWARDSHIP – Serve as stewards of the City’s financial resources through sound economic vitality efforts, streamlining operations, reasonable revenue enhancements, visionary long-term planning, fiscal transparency, and community partnerships. Serve as stewards of the City’s financial resources through sound economic vitality efforts, streamlining operations, reasonable revenue enhancements, visionary long-term planning, fiscal transparency, and community partnerships.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action continues a process the City has followed since 1985 that establishes an annual assessment to repair and maintain improvements, and to add to these improvements as necessary, to meet the original intent of the districts established to repair and maintain improvements.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The assessment is for maintenance costs to the benefiting property owners, above and beyond usual maintenance costs. The property owners are requesting to increase the existing assessment by $.015 to the new amount of $1.63/foot/month. The total cost to the assessed is $53,073.13.

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 18.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 18., Item Page 1, Packet Page 113 Fees collected under this process must be for services that are over and above fees attributed to the general public. Prior to the establishment of the district, the City performed services and provided enhanced facilities in the Alvarado Street assessment area. The City established this cost and continues to pay for its "base year" maintenance costs escalated by the Consumer Price Index each year. For next fiscal year, the City’s "base year" portion will amount to $56,520.51. In addition to the base year costs, the City will be responsible for paying for the assessments for the City-owned parcels within the district.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines”), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could decide not to proceed with the re-establishment of this district. However, the assessment pays for maintenance of improvements that add to the character of the downtown area and support commerce.

DISCUSSION:

The Alvarado Street Maintenance District 85-1 was formed on April 11, 1985 pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (Streets & Highways Code section 22500 et seq.). The purpose of the District is to make minor improvements along the length of Alvarado Street identified in the report. All parcels that receive a special benefit have been identified and included in the report.

The staff recommendation continues a legal process, which began at the Council's meeting on March 15, 2022 when the Council ordered the preparation of the Engineer's Report to establish the annual assessment for the maintenance of Alvarado Street improvements. At the Council’s meeting on May 17, 2022, Council received the Engineer’s Report; adopted a resolution of intention to levy assessment; and set the time for public hearing. At the public hearing on July 19, 2022, the Council will be asked to adopt a resolution confirming the assessment and the district boundaries and ordering the same be filed with the County Auditor-Controller’s Office prior to the August 1, 2022 deadline set by the County Auditor.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 18., Item Page 2, Packet Page 114 Staff met with the Assessment District Coordinator on April 8, 2022. At the meeting, staff presented the following recommendations:

Current Assessment District Services:
 Provides current level of service for sidewalk cleaning (635 hours/year, or 12.2 hours/week).
 Includes charging City administrative costs for the assessment district.  Maintains current contractual and capital outlay items.  Includes grounds maintenance, sidewalk cleanings, Assessment District Coordinator, plant material and pots, tree light maintenance and energy, and minor painting (of benches, pots, light poles).

Members of the District recommended increasing the current assessment level by $0.15 to the new amount of $1.63/foot/month.

The assessment to be levied is proposed to increase from the previous year. To meet noticing requirements, a legal notice and ballot were mailed to each property owner 45 days prior to the scheduled meeting on July 19, 2022. After the public hearing, if a majority protest is not received, Council will be asked to adopt a resolution certifying compliance with state law concerning the assessment and ordering that it be filed with the County Auditor-Controller's office prior to the County’s August 1, 2022 deadline. A majority protest is measured by the areas of the parcels owned by those who are not in favor of the assessment. In other words, ballots received are weighted so that parcels proposed to have a larger assessment count more. It is not a “one parcel, one vote” proceeding. Unless a majority of the weighted ballots are in favor of the proposed assessment, the City may not impose the assessment. A majority protest exists if 50% plus one of the record owners of the parcels subject to the change submit a timely written protest. To be timely, the written protest must be submitted prior to the conclusion of the public hearing.

All interested persons shall be afforded the opportunity to be heard. The City Council shall consider all oral statements and all written protests made by any interested person. Protest must be in writing.

AR/ch
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Engineer’s Report
e: Rick Johnson, Executive Director, Old Monterey Business Association (OMBA) Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 18., Item Page 3, Packet Page 115 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/22
CONFIRM ALVARADO STREET MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 85-1 AREA AND ASSESSMENT PROPOSED IN ENGINEER’S REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022/2023 WHEREAS, the Alvarado Street Maintenance District was established in 1985 to maintain and fund beneficial improvements on Alvarado Street; WHEREAS, the cost of improvements has been reasonably apportioned among the benefitted parcels according to the special benefits;
WHEREAS, the Alvarado Street Maintenance District has been renewed annually and has remained in effect since the establishment of the district; WHEREAS, the Alvarado Street Maintenance District funds contribute to a clean and safe environment conducive to commerce;
WHEREAS, a duly noticed hearing was held on July 19, 2022 to consider the assessments for the Alvarado Street Maintenance District No. 85-1 as set forth in the Engineer's Report accepted and filed pursuant to Resolution No. 20-054; WHEREAS, evidence was received and considered concerning the diagram and the levy of said assessments;
WHEREAS, the evidence shows that the assessment imposed on each parcel does not exceed the cost of the special benefit conferred on the parcel. The properties subject to the assessment receive a special benefit over and above the benefits conferred on the public at large, and that the amount of any assessment is proportion to, and no greater than, the benefits conferred on the property or properties in question;
WHEREAS, the Alvarado Street Maintenance District will increase its assessment by $0.15, from $1.48 to $1.63/lineal foot/month; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines”), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 18., Item Page 4, Packet Page 116 2 Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that there was not a majority protest, and the diagram and assessments set forth in said Engineer's Report are hereby confirmed and the Clerk is ordered to file a copy of said diagram and assessments as amended with the County Auditor-Controller.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 18., Item Page 5, Packet Page 117 1 ENGINEER'S REPORT
ALVARADO STREET MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 85-1
PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR FY 2022/2023
(Pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972)
Steve Wittry, P.E., Public Works Director, Engineer of Work for the Alvarado Street Maintenance District, City of Monterey, Monterey County, California, makes this report, as directed by the City Council, pursuant to Section 22585 of the Streets and Highways Code (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972).

The improvements, which are the subject of this report are briefly described as follows:

The maintenance activities of: sidewalk cleaning, litter pickup, landscaping, and street lighting facilities installed pursuant to the Alvarado Street Improvement Assessment District.

This report consists of five parts as follows:

PART A - An estimate of the cost of the improvements.

PART B - An assessment of the estimated cost of the improvements on each benefited parcel of land within the assessment district.

PART C - A statement of the method by which the undersigned has determined the amount proposed to be assessed against each parcel.

PART D - A list of the names and addresses of the owners of real property within this assessment district, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll for taxes, or as known to the Clerk. The list is keyed to Part C by assessment number.

PART E - A diagram showing all of the parcels of real property within this assessment district. The diagram is keyed to Part B by assessment number.

Respectfully submitted,
Steve Wittry, P.E.

Engineer of Work
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 18., Item Page 6, Packet Page 118 2 ENGINEER'S REPORT
ALVARADO STREET MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 85-1
(Pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972)
The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed report as directed by the City Council.

Dated: _________________ Steve Wittry, Public Works Director City of Monterey, Engineer of Work
By:_______________________________
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report together with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached, was filed with me on the _____ day of ___________, 2022.

CLEMENTINE BONNER KLEIN, City Clerk
City of Monterey, Monterey County, California
By:___________________________
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached, was approved and confirmed by the City Council of the City of Monterey, California on the ______ day of _____________, 2022.

CLEMENTINE BONNER KLEIN, City Clerk
City of Monterey, Monterey County, California
By:___________________________
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached, was filed with the County Auditor of the County of Monterey on the ________ day of ____________, 2022.

CLEMENTINE BONNER KLEIN, City Clerk
City of Monterey, Monterey County, California
By:___________________________
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 18., Item Page 7, Packet Page 119 ALVARADO STREET MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 85-1
Estimated Costs for FY 2021/2022
PART A
4/28/22

ACCOUNT ENGINEER'S BUDGET
Personnel
Wages $19,563.82
Benefits $10,881.34
Retirement $10,740.48
SUB TOTAL $41,185.64
Operating supplies 4205 $2,722.00
Utilities 4211 $0.00
Contractual services 4220 $52,580.00
Street lighting 4236 $3,466.00
Vehicle rental 4621 $901.00
SUB TOTAL $59,669.00
Capital outlay-Special Projects 4285 $8,739.00
SUB TOTAL $8,739.00
TOTAL $109,593.64
Reduction of Total Cost by City Share ** (56,520.51)
$53,073.13
$1.63
Total LF of Frontage = 2713.35 LF
Contractual 4220 $6,250.00
$29,200.00
$3,600.00
$3,000.00
Tree trimming $900.00
City administrative cost $9,630.00
TOTAL $52,580.00
$3,100.00
$850.00
$500.00
Other District improvements $4,289.00
TOTAL $8,739.00
Sign repair
** City share for FY 20/21*CPI: $ 52,333.81*(1.08) = $ 56,520.51 CPI = 8% DEC 2021
Painting benches, pots, light
poles
Grounds maintenance
Sidewalk cleaning (16)
Assessment Dist. Coordinator
Capital Outlay - Special Projects Tree lights maintenance Landscape enhancements
Basic Assessment District Cost: Provides current level of service for sidewalk cleaning and grounds maintenance, and allows the ability to pursue additional Capital Outlay.

Net amount to be assessed
Cost per LF/month
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 18., Item Page 8, Packet Page 120 Assessment
Number Assessor Parcel Number Alvarado St. Frontage (ft) Percentage of Total
Alvarado St. Frontage Annual Assessment
1 001-572-019 123.83 4.56% $2,422.11
2 001-572-003 53.28 1.96% $1,042.16
3 001-572-004 111.24 4.10% $2,175.85
4 001-572-030 19.95 0.74% $390.22
5 001-572-029 52.75 1.94% $1,031.79
6 001-572-028 53.94 1.99% $1,055.07
7 001-572-009 52 1.92% $1,017.12
8 001-572-010 52.05 1.92% $1,018.10
9 001-572-020 25.26 0.93% $494.09
10 001-572-021 43.57 1.61% $852.23
11 001-572-013 67.5 2.49% $1,320.30
12 001-572-022 33.72 1.24% $659.56
13 001-572-025 92.8 3.42% $1,815.17
14 001-572-017 20 0.74% $391.20
15 001-385-005 31 1.14% $606.36
16 001-385-002 106.48 3.92% $2,082.75
17 001-385-001 101.72 3.75% $1,989.64
18 001-567-019 269.2 9.92% $5,265.55
19 001-567-014 380.49 14.02% $7,442.38
20 001-386-001 194.01 7.15% $3,794.84
21 001-386-002 40 1.47% $782.40
22 001-386-003 50 1.84% $978.00
23 001-388-001 70.5 2.60% $1,378.98
24 001-573-015 27.15 1.00% $531.05
25 001-573-006 86.98 3.21% $1,701.33
26 001-573-005 50 1.84% $978.00
27 001-573-003 21 0.77% $410.76
28 001-573-002 23.25 0.86% $454.77
29 001-573-012 36.25 1.34% $709.05
30 001-574-011 30 1.11% $586.80
31 001-574-028 82.6 3.04% $1,615.66
32 001-574-029 115.94 4.27% $2,267.79
33 001-574-026 34.99 1.29% $684.40
34 001-574-005 30 1.11% $586.80
35 001-574-004 19.92 0.73% $389.64
36 001-574-016 49.04 1.81% $959.22
37 001-574-012 60.94 2.25% $1,191.99
Totals 2713.35 100.00% $53,073.13
FY 22/23 Assessment will be $1.63/LF/month
ALVARADO STREET MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 85-1
Annual Assessment for FY 2022/2023
PART B
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 18., Item Page 9, Packet Page 121 PART C

METHOD OF ALLOCATING COSTS ON THE BASIS OF BENEFIT
ALVARADO STREET MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 85-1
FISCAL YEAR 2022/2023
The method utilized to allocate the costs associated with the benefits of the district shall be based upon lineal footage of frontage. The total cost necessary to be collected will be divided by the total frontage of the district. This will result in a cost per lineal foot. This amount will be multiplied by the lineal footage of each property frontage on Alvarado Street and Alvarado Mall.

The cost per lineal foot of frontage for the FY 2022/2023 is $1.63 per month.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 18., Item Page 10, Packet Page 122 # APN PARCEL ADDRESS OWNER NAME
1 001-572-019 486 Alvarado Street Chyr Robert Y TR 3436 Peachwillow Lane Walnut Creek, CA 94598 2 001-572-003 482 Alvarado Street Songs Dental Studio INC 499 Calle Principal, Suite 4 Monterey, CA 93940 3 001-572-004 464 Alvarado Street Wells Fargo Bank N A TR ET AL PO Box 87 Monterey, CA 93942 4 001-572-030 462 Alvarado Street Davi Anthony G TR PO Box 2350 Monterey, CA 93940 5 001-572-029 458 Alvarado Street Davi Anthony G TR PO Box 2350 Monterey, CA 93940 6 001-572-028 452 Alvarado Street Davi Anthony G TR PO Box 2350 Monterey, CA 93940 7 001-572-009 440 Alvarado Street Bonifacio Plaza Associates 801 Lighthouse Ave, Suite 109 Monterey, CA 93940 8 001-572-010 434 Alvarado Street Teaby John E & Moraz Andrea TRS 57 Castro Road Monterey, CA 93940 9 001-572-020 432 Alvarado Street Silacci Family Investment LLC 110 John Street Salinas, CA 93901 10 001-572-021 426 Alvarado Street FRE 553 LLC PO Box 5903 Carmel, CA 93921 11 001-572-013 416 Alvarado Street Cattermoul Patricia TR & JMDJ Co 165 West Franklin Street Monterey, CA 93940 12 001-572-022 414 Alvarado Street Sanchez Adobe LLC 39 Wharf No 1 Monterey, CA 93940 13 001-572-025 406 Alvarado Street PRI LLC 2905 Burton Drive Cambria, CA 93428 14 001-572-017 400 Alvarado Street JMDJ Company 165 West Franklin Street Monterey, CA 93940 15 001-385-005 398 Alvarado Street Ordway Buildings LLC 888 Munras Avenue, Suite 200 Monterey, CA 93940 16 001-385-002 351 Calle Principal Redevelopment Agency of Monterey City Hall Room 4 Monterey, CA 93940 17 001-385-001 316 Alvarado Street JMDJ Company 165 West Franklin Street Monterey, CA 93940 18 001-567-019 2 Portola Plaza Custom House Hotel Co LTD 2 Portola Plaza Monterey, CA 93940 19 001-567-014 201 Alvarado Street Custom House Hotel Co LTD 2 Portola Plaza Monterey, CA 93940 20 001-386-001 301 Alvarado Street Paseo De Alvarado Associates PO Box 2350 Monterey, CA 93942 21 001-386-002 399 Alvarado Street WFC Holdings Corporation PO Box 2609 Carlsbad, CA 92018 22 001-386-003 399 Alvarado Street WFC Holdings Corporation PO Box 2609 Carlsbad, CA 92018 23 001-388-001 401 Alvarado Street 401 Alvarado LLC 101 Laurel Street San Franciso, CA 94118 24 001-573-015 409 Alvarado Street JMDJ Company 165 West Franklin Street Monterey, CA 93940 25 001-573-006 417 Alvarado Street Monterey Historical Development LLC 417 Alvarado Street Monterey, CA 93940 26 001-573-005 423 Alvarado Street Lou Sim & Chhor Manhao ET AL 25459 Carmel Knolls Drive Carmel, CA 93921 27 001-573-003 429 Alvarado Street Davi Anthony G TR PO Box 2350 Monterey, CA 93940 28 001-573-002 435 Alvarado Street Beck Stuart B & Ivancko D TRS PO Box 87 Monterey, CA 93942 29 001-573-012 439 Alvarado Street Davi Real Estate PO Box 2350 Monterey, CA 93940 30 001-574-011 447 Bonifacio Place Old Capitol Land Company PO Box 107 Monterey, CA 93940 31 001-574-028 449 Alvarado Street NTMA 16 LP 2 Dorey Way Monterey, CA 93940 32 001-574-029 459 Alvarado Street Saucito Land Company PO Box 87 Monterey, CA 93942 33 001-574-026 475 Alvarado Street Saucito Land Company PO Box 87 Monterey, CA 93942 34 001-574-005 479 Alvarado Street Saucito Land Company PO Box 87 Monterey, CA 93942 35 001-574-004 481 Alvarado Street Romeka Christina M TR ET AL PO Box 3311 Monterey, CA 93942 36 001-574-016 487 Alvarado Street Churchill Monica M TR 124 Soledad Drive Monterey, CA 93940 37 001-574-012 499 Alvarado Street ACV Associates 53 Skyline Crest Monterey, CA 93940

MAILING ADDRESS
ALVARADO MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 85-1
PART D
2022
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 18., Item Page 11, Packet Page 123 ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS MAP.DWG SCALE: DEPARTMENT OF PLANS AND PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MONTEREY NO. DATE REVISION DATE: SHEET: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: CAD DWG NAME: TEL: 831.646.3921 WEBSITE: WWW.MONTEREY.ORG 580 PACIFIC STREET, MONTEREY, CA 93940 SHEET 1 OF 1 ALVARADO STREET PART E MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 85-1 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 85-1 - PART E - ALVARADO ST - C1 SWJFG JFG C-1 APR 2, 2020 NOT TO SCALE 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 27 28 33 32 31 30 29 34 35 37 36 13 14 15 16 17 18 12 10 11 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8CALLE PRINCIPAL ALVARADO STREET TYLER STREET

BONIFACIO PLACE

FRANKLIN STREET

DEL MONTE AVENUE PEARL STREET
PACIFIC STREET ASSESSMENT NUMBER ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER FRONTAGE (FT) 1 001-572-019 123.83 2 001-572-003 53.28 3 001-572-004 111.24 4 001-572-030 19.95 5 001-572-029 52.75 6 001-572-028 53.94 7 001-572-009 52.0 8 001-572-010 52.05 9 001-572-020 25.26 10 001-572-021 43.57 11 001-572-013 67.5 12 001-572-022 33.72 13 001-572-025 92.8 14 001-572-017 20 15 001-385-005 31 16 001-385-002 106.48 17 001-385-001 101.72 18 001-567-019 269.20 19 001-567-014 380.49 20 001-386-001 194.01 21 001-386-002 40 22 001-386-003 50 23 001-388-001 70.5 24 001-573-015 27.15 25 001-573-006 86.98 26 001-573-005 50 27 001-573-003 21 28 001-573-002 23.25 29 001-573-012 36.25 30 001-574-011 30 31 001-574-028 82.6 32 001-574-029 115.94 33 001-574-026 34.99 34 001-574-005 30 35 001-574-004 19.92 36 001-574-016 49.04 37 001-574-012 60.94 LEGEND ASSESSMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY # ASSESSMENT NUMBER PART E ATTACHMENT 2 Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 18., Item Page 12, Packet Page 124 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Andrea Renny, P.E., PTOE, Interim Public Works Director Prepared By: Cody Hennings, Engineering Technician
SUBJECT: Confirm Calle Principal Maintenance District 00-1 Area and Assessment Proposed in Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2022/2023 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

This is a property based district in which liability for the assessment is premised upon a person’s property ownership.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action continues a process the City has followed since 2000 that establishes an annual assessment to repair and maintain improvements, and to add to these improvements as necessary, to meet the original intent of the districts established to repair and maintain improvements.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The assessment district pays for maintenance costs above and beyond the usual maintenance costs to the benefitting property owners. General benefits to the public at large are not paid from special assessments. This year the property owners are requesting to continue the existing assessment of $0.74/foot/month. The total amount collected through assessments will Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 19.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 19., Item Page 1, Packet Page 125 be $25,243. The City of Monterey will be responsible for paying for the assessments for the City-owned parcels within the district. Funds for this will come from:
 The Parking Fund for the Calle Principal garage and surface lot; and  The General Fund for the park parcel frontage; and the City-owned portion of the assessment for 408 Alvarado Street (Monterey Hotel).

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines”), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could decide not to proceed with the reassessment of this District. However, the assessment pays for the maintenance of improvements that add to the character of the downtown area and support commerce.

DISCUSSION:

The Calle Principal Maintenance District 00-1 was established under the 1972 Landscape and Lighting Act (Streets and Highways Code section 22500 et seq.). The purpose of this district is to install, construct, and maintain landscaping, lighting, and park and recreational facilities, including graffiti removal, along the entire length of Calle Principal. All parcels that receive a special benefit have been identified and included in the report.

The staff recommendation continues a legal process, which began at the Council's meeting on March 15, 2022 when the Council ordered the preparation of the Engineer's Report to establish the annual assessment for the maintenance of Alvarado Street improvements. At the Council’s meeting on May 17, 2022, Council received the Engineer’s Report; adopted a resolution of intention to levy assessment; and set the time for public hearing. At the public hearing on July 19, 2021, the Council will be asked to adopt a resolution confirming the assessment and the district boundaries and ordering the same be filed with the County Auditor-Controller’s Office prior to the August 1, 2022 deadline set by the County Auditor.

Staff met with the Assessment District Coordinator on April 8, 2022. At the meeting, staff presented the following recommendations:

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 19., Item Page 2, Packet Page 126 Current Assessment Services:
 Provides current level of service for sidewalk cleaning (quarterly).  Includes charging City administrative costs for the assessment district.  Contractual costs include sidewalk cleaning, City administrative cost, and Assessment District Coordinator.

Members of the assessment district recommended continuing the current assessment level of $0.74/foot/month.

The assessment to be levied is proposed to remain the same as the previous year. To meet noticing requirements, a legal notice and ballot was mailed to each property owner 45 days prior to the scheduled meeting on July 19, 2021. After the public hearing, if a majority protest is not received, Council will be asked to adopt a resolution certifying compliance with state law concerning the assessment and ordering that it be filed with the County Auditor's office prior to the County’s August 1, 2021 deadline. A majority protest is measured by the areas of the parcels owned by those who are not in favor of the assessment. In other words, ballots received are weighted so that parcels proposed to have a larger assessment count more. It is not a “one parcel, one vote” proceeding. Unless a majority of the weighted ballots are in favor of the proposed assessment, the City may not impose the assessment. A majority protest exists if 50% plus one of the record owners of the parcels subject to the change submit a timely written protest. To be timely, the written protest must be submitted prior to the conclusion of the public hearing.

All interested persons shall be afforded the opportunity to be heard. The City Council shall consider all oral statements and all written protest made by any interested person. Protest must be in writing.

AR/ch
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Engineer’s Report
e: Rick Johnson, Executive Director, Old Monterey Business Association (OMBA) Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 19., Item Page 3, Packet Page 127 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/22
CONFIRM CALLE PRINCIPAL MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 00-1 AREA AND ASSESSMENT PROPOSED IN ENGINEER’S REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022/2023 WHEREAS, the Calle Principal Maintenance District was established in 2000 to maintain improvements and fund beneficial improvements on Calle Principal; WHEREAS, the Calle Principal Maintenance District has been renewed annually and has remained in effect since the establishment of the district; WHEREAS, the Calle Principal Maintenance District funds maintenance which contributes to a clean and safe environment conducive to commerce; WHEREAS, a duly noticed hearing was held on July 19, 2022 to consider the assessments for the Calle Principal Maintenance District No. 00-1 as set forth in the Engineer's Report accepted and filed pursuant to Resolution No. 20-055; WHEREAS, evidence was received and considered concerning the diagram and the levy of said assessments;
WHEREAS, the evidence showed that the assessment imposed on each parcel did not exceed the cost of the special benefit conferred on the parcel. The properties in this district receive a special benefit over and above the benefits conferred on the public at large; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that a majority protest has not been received, and the diagram and assessments set forth in said Engineer's Report are hereby confirmed and the Clerk is ordered to file a copy of said diagram and assessments as amended with the County Auditor.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 19., Item Page 4, Packet Page 128 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 19., Item Page 5, Packet Page 129

ENGINEER'S REPORT
CALLE PRINCIPAL MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 00-1
PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR FY 2022/2023
(Pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972)
Steve Wittry, P.E., Public Works Director, Engineer of Work for the Calle Principal Maintenance District, City of Monterey, Monterey County, California, makes this report, as directed by the City Council, pursuant to Section 22585 of the Streets and Highways Code (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972).

The improvements, which are the subject of this report are briefly described as follows:

The maintenance and installation, including but not limited to, street improvements, landscaping and street furniture, cleaning of sidewalks, upgrading street trees, and litter pickup on Calle Principal between Del Monte Avenue and Polk Street, and side streets of Franklin Street and Bonifacio Plaza.

This report consists of five parts as follows:

PART A - An estimate of the cost of the improvements.

PART B - An assessment of the estimated cost of the improvements on each benefited parcel of land within the assessment district.

PART C - A statement of the method by which the undersigned has determined the amount proposed to be assessed against each parcel.

PART E - A diagram showing all of the parcels of real property within this assessment district. The diagram is keyed to Part B by assessment number.

Respectfully submitted,
Steve Wittry, P.E.

Engineer of Work
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 19., Item Page 6, Packet Page 130

ENGINEER'S REPORT
CALLE PRINCIPAL MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 00-1
(Pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972)
The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed report as directed by the City Council.

CLEMENTINE BONNER KLEIN, City Clerk
City of Monterey, Monterey County, California
By:___________________________
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached, was filed with the County Auditor of the County of Monterey on the ________ day of ____________, 2022.

ACCOUNT ENGINEER'S BUDGET
Personnel
Salaries $6,520.93
Benefits $3,611.00
Retirement $4,476.16
SUB TOTAL $14,608.09
Operating supplies 4205 $425.00
Utilities 4211 $0.00
Contractual services 4220 $9,482.91
Vehicle rental 4248 $377.00
SUB TOTAL $10,284.91
Capital outlay-Special Projects 4285 $350.00
SUB TOTAL $350.00
Assessment cost TOTAL $25,243.00
$25,243.00
$0.74
Total Lineal Feet (LF) of Frontage = 2842.68 LF
Contractual 4220 $500.00
$2,000.00
$1,200.00
$5,782.91
SUB TOTAL $9,482.91
Capital Outlay / Special Project 4285 $350.00
SUB TOTAL $350.00
Sidewalk cleaning (4)
Assessment Dist Coordinator
City administrative cost
Other District improvements
Grounds maintenance
Basic Assessment District Cost: Provides current level of service for sidewalk cleaning and grounds maintenance, and allows the ability to pursue additional Capital Outlay.

Net amount to be assessed
Cost per LF/month
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 19., Item Page 8, Packet Page 132 Assessment
Number Assessor Parcel Number
Calle Principal Frontage
(ft)
Percentage of Total
Calle Principal Frontage Annual Assessment
1 001-525-009 23 0.81% $204.24
2 001-525-006 40 1.41% $355.20
3 001-525-005 60 2.11% $532.80
4 001-525-022 53.3 1.87% $473.30
5 001-525-021 86.5 3.04% $768.12
6 001-525-003 42 1.48% $372.96
7 001-525-002 59 2.08% $523.92
8 001-525-020 146.1 5.14% $1,297.37
9 001-534-010 40.78 1.43% $362.13
10 001-534-009 85 2.99% $754.80
11 001-534-008 69.77 2.45% $619.56
12 001-534-007 69.77 2.45% $619.56
13 001-534-011 176.66 6.21% $1,568.74
14 001-535-001 60 2.11% $532.80
15 001-534-001 35 1.23% $310.80
16 001-534-003 50 1.76% $444.00
17 001-534-002 71.8 2.53% $637.58
18 001-384-003 303.7 10.68% $2,696.86
19 001-385-001 102.01 3.59% $905.85
20 001-385-002 138.47 4.87% $1,229.61
21 001-385-004 20.23 0.71% $179.64
22 001-385-0005 45 1.58% $399.60
23 001-572-017 20.31 0.71% $180.35
24 001-572-025 124.86 4.39% $1,108.76
25 001-572-013 69.16 2.43% $614.14
26 001-572-021 22.17 0.78% $196.87
27 001-572-020 35.58 1.25% $315.95
28 001-572-010 51 1.79% $452.88
29 001-572-009 50.99 1.79% $452.79
30 001-572-032 5.02 0.18% $44.58
31 001-572-031 122.56 4.31% $1,088.33
32 001-572-004 104.24 3.67% $925.65
33 001-572-003 61.75 2.17% $548.34
34 001-572-018 124.5 4.38% $1,105.56
35 001-571-004 32 1.13% $284.16
36 001-571-002 170.52 6.00% $1,514.22
37 001-571-001 69.93 2.46% $620.98
Totals 2842.68 100.00% $25,243.00
FY 22/23 Assessment will be $0.74/LF/month
CALLE PRINCIPAL MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 00-1
Annual Assessment for FY 2022/2023
PART B
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 19., Item Page 9, Packet Page 133

METHOD OF ALLOCATING COSTS ON THE BASIS OF BENEFIT
CALLE PRINCIPAL MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 00-1
FISCAL YEAR 2022/2023
The method utilized to allocate the costs associated with the benefits of the district shall be based upon lineal footage of frontage. The total cost necessary to be collected will be divided by the total frontage of the district. This will result in a cost per lineal foot. This amount will be multiplied by the lineal footage of each property frontage on Calle Principal.

The cost per lineal foot of frontage for the FY 2022/2023 is $0.74 per month.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 19., Item Page 10, Packet Page 134 # APN PARCEL ADDRESS OWNER NAME
1 001-525-009 232 Madison Street Panetta Joseph R 4028 Sunset Lane Pebble Beach, CA 93953 2 001-525-006 590 Calle Principal State of California 2211 Garden Road Monterey, CA 93940 3 001-525-005 580 Calle Principal Raven Path LLC PO Box 6 Pebble Beach, CA 93950 4 001-525-022 559 Calle Principal City of Monterey City Hall, Room 4 Monterey, CA 93940 5 001-525-021 559 Calle Principal Monterey Museum of Art PO Box 1551 Monterey, CA 93942 6 001-525-003 540 Calle Principal The House of the Four Winds Foundation PO Box 1408 Monterey, CA 93942 7 001-525-002 535 Pacific Street Monterey Masonic Temple Corporation 525 Pacific Street Monterey, CA 93940 8 001-525-020 464 Calle Principal State of California 2211 Garden Road Monterey, CA 93940 9 001-534-010 499 Pacific Street Rossman James M & Giovanna C TRS 700 Briggs 27 Pacific Grove, CA 93950 10 001-534-009 490 Calle Principal Coniglio Peter J TR ET AL 31 La Ranchria Carmel Valley, CA 93924 11 001-534-008 480 Calle Principal Coniglio Peter J TR ET AL 31 La Ranchria Carmel Valley, CA 93924 12 001-534-007 468 Calle Principal Craft Charles Nicholas TR ET AL PO Box 167 Carmel Valley, CA 93924 13 001-534-011 438 Calle Principal City of Monterey City Hall, Room 4 Monterey, CA 93940 14 001-535-001 426 Calle Principal Casa De Calle Principal INC ET AL 426 Calle Principal, Suite 203 Monterey, CA 93940 15 001-534-001 410 Calle Principal Middlebury Institute of International Studies 460 Pierce Street Monterey, CA 93940 16 001-534-003 414 Calle Principal Professional Building of Monterey PO Box 3080 Monterey, CA 93942 17 001-534-002 201 West Franklin Street Professional Building of Monterey PO Box 3080 Monterey, CA 93942 18 001-384-003 350 Calle Principal San Carlos Associates LLC 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3030 Seattle, WA 98101 19 001-385-001 316 Alvarado Street JMDJ Company 165 West Franklin Street Monterey, CA 93940 20 001-385-002 351 Calle Principal Redevelopment Agency of Monterey City Hall, Room 4 Monterey, CA 93940 21 001-385-004 351 Calle Principal The City of Monterey 735 Pacific Street Monterey, CA 93940 22 001-385-005 398 Alvarado Street Ordway Building LLC 888 Munras Avenue, Suite 200 Monterey, CA 93940 23 001-572-017 400 Alvarado Street JMDJ Company 165 West Franklin Street Monterey, CA 93940 24 001-572-025 417 Calle Principal PRI LLC 2905 Burton Drive Cambria, CA 93428 25 001-572-013 416 Alvarado Street Cattermoul Patricia TR & JMDJ Company 165 West Franklin Street Monterey, CA 93940 26 001-572-021 426 Alvarado Street FRE 553 LLC PO Box 5903 Carmel, CA 93921 27 001-572-020 432 Alvarado Street Silacci Family Investments LLC 110 John Street Salinas, CA 93901 28 001-572-010 434 Alvarado Street Teaby John & Moraz Andrea TRS 57 Castro Road Monterey, CA 93940 29 001-572-009 440 Alvarado Street Bonifacio Plaza Associates 801 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite 109 Monterey, CA 93940 30 001-572-032 449 Calle Principal Davi Anthony G TR PO Box 2350 Monterey, CA 93940 31 001-572-031 449 Calle Principal Davi Anthony G TR PO Box 2350 Monterey, CA 93940 32 001-572-004 464 Alvarado Street Wells Fargo Bank N A TR ET AL PO Box 87 Monterey, CA 93942 33 001-572-003 482 Alvarado Street Songs Dental Studio Inc 499 Calle Principal, Suite 4 Monterey, CA 93940 34 001-572-018 Calle Principal (Parking) City of Monterey City Hall, Room 4 Monterey, CA 93940 35 001-571-004 Calle Principal (Parking) City of Monterey City Hall, Room 4 Monterey, CA 93940 36 001-571-002 516 Polk Street Casa Amesti Foundation 516 Polk Street Monterey, CA 93940 37 001-571-001 565 Calle Principal Callahan Wesley N TR ET AL 575 Calle Principal Monterey, CA 93940

MAILING ADDRESS
CALLE PRINCIPAL MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 00-1
PART D
2022
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 19., Item Page 11, Packet Page 135 ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS MAP.DWG SCALE: DEPARTMENT OF PLANS AND PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MONTEREY NO. DATE REVISION DATE: SHEET: DESIGNED BY: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: CAD DWG NAME: TEL: 831.646.3921 WEBSITE: WWW.MONTEREY.ORG 580 PACIFIC STREET, MONTEREY, CA 93940 SHEET 1 OF 1 CALLE PRINCIPAL PART E MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 00-1 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 00-1 - PART E - CALLE P - C1 SWJFG JFG C-1 APR 19, 2016 NOT TO SCALE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 26 28 29 31 30 32 33 34 35 36 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 CALLE PRINCIPAL ALVARADO STREET

BONIFACIO PLACE

FRANKLIN STREET

DEL MONTE AVENUE

PEARL STREET
PACIFIC STREET LEGEND ASSESSMENT DISTRICT BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY # ASSESSMENT NUMBER ASSESSMENT NUMBER ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER FRONTAGE (FT) 1 001-525-009 23 2 001-525-006 40 3 001-525-005 60 4 001-525-022 53.3 5 001-525-021 86.5 6 001-525-003 42 7 001-525-002 59 8 001-525-020 146.1 9 001-534-010 40.78 10 001-534-009 85.0 11 001-534-008 69.77 12 001-534-007 69.77 13 001-534-011 176.66 14 001-535-001 60 15 001-534-001 35 16 001-534-003 50 17 001-534-002 71.8 18 001-384-003 303.7 19 001-385-001 102.01 20 001-385-002 138.47 21 001-385-004 20.23 22 001-385-005 45 23 001-572-017 20.31 24 001-572-025 124.86 25 001-572-013 69.16 26 001-572-021 22.17 27 001-572-020 35.58 28 001-572-010 51 29 001-572-009 50.99 30 001-572-032 5.02 31 001-572-031 122.56 32 001-572-004 104.24 33 001-572-003 61.75 34 001-572-018 124.5 35 001-571-004 32.0 36 001-571-002 170.52 37 001-571-001 69.93

JEFFERSON STREET
POLK STREET 37

MADISON STREET
PART E
ATTACHMENT 2 Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 19., Item Page 12, Packet Page 136 Council
Agenda Report
№10/13
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
Prepared By: Brianna Kennedy, Intern, City Manager’s Office SUBJECT: 2
nd Reading - Amend Chapter 19 of the Monterey City Code (Licenses, Fees, and Charges) to Prohibit the Sale of all Flavored Tobacco Products Except for Flavored Shisha Tobacco Products and to Prohibit Single Use Electronic Smoking Devices (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council conduct a second reading of an ordinance to amend Chapter 19 of the Monterey City Code, Article 5 related to Tobacco Retail Licensing to prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco and vape products.

At its City Council meeting on June 29, 2022, the City Council introduced the ordinance. Based on feedback from the hookah industry, the City Council chose to introduce the ordinance with an exemption for hookah retail sales, and asked staff to present additional information at the second reading on July 19, 2022. The draft ordinance before the City Council today contains the exemption for flavored hookah/shisha retail sales.

Based on further research, however, staff continues to recommend that the City Council adopt an ordinance without exemption for flavored hookah tobacco.

VALUE DRIVERS:

Protect and preserve our natural environment by addressing climate change through ecologically responsible and pragmatic solutions.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The proposed Ordinance will significantly reduce the appeal, availability, and usage of nicotine and e-cigarette products by youth and young adults, who are at increased risk of developing nicotine addiction as adults. Exempting any flavored tobacco product would continue to provide an access point for youth to become addicted to these products.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

If approved, enforcement of the code amendment changes would be the responsibility of the City’s Code Enforcement Program. Citations would provide minimal cost recovery for code enforcement activities. Furthermore, the City may be impacted by the loss of tax revenue derived from these products once banned.

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 20.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 20., Item Page 1, Packet Page 137 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

In its first reading, Council requested that hookah be exempted from the proposed draft ordinance and the new draft reflects those changes (see attachment).

The staff recommendation is not to create any exemption for hookah tobacco. Therefore, Council may choose to pass the ordinance without exemption for flavored hookah tobacco or other flavored tobacco products. This allows the continued use of flavored tobacco products for personal and/or cultural purposes in private settings while cutting off youth access to the sale of flavored tobacco products in the City of Monterey.

DISCUSSION:

At the first reading of the ordinance proposal to City Council on June 21, 2022, City staff provided a recommendation to Council to pass the ordinance to amend Chapter 19 of the Monterey City Code to ban the sale of all flavored tobacco and vape products without exemptions. After some public comments and discussion about hookah tobacco, Council voted to amend the draft ordinance to exempt flavored hookah. Due to a technical glitch affecting the June 21st City Council meeting, the 1st reading was repeated on June 29, 2022. After hearing additional comments from the hookah industry and without staff analysis, Council moved to exempt hookah from the ordinance and again requested that staff provide additional information about hookah with the second reading of the ordinance.

Arguments in Favor of a Hookah Exemption
There were two primary arguments from hookah supporters lobbying for a hookah exemption.

First, they advocated for the preservation of hookah as a cultural practice and asserted that unflavored hookah tobacco was not an option. Second, they stated hookah was not attractive to youth due to its low utilization rates nationwide, as well as the prohibitive size and cost of hookah waterpipes. In this agenda report, staff will address these arguments and provide additional information on the public health implications of hookah tobacco.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 20., Item Page 2, Packet Page 138 Public Health Implications of Hookah Tobacco
Public health impacts is the primary argument against a hookah exemption, and is the reason municipalities do not exempt hookah from a flavored tobacco ban.

According to the FDA, a typical one-hour hookah session involves inhaling 100 to 200 times the volume of smoke from a single cigarette. Particularly concerning for youth, a typical hookah session can expose the user to up to 1.7 times the amount of nicotine and nine times the amount of carbon monoxide as a single cigarette. While the tobacco smoke is filtered through water, it is no less harmful than smoke from other combustible tobacco products, and in fact, the user inhales additional carcinogens and heavy metals due to the burning of coal to heat hookah tobacco.

Short-term hookah use has been associated with acute health effects, including increased heart rate, elevated blood pressure, and reduced pulmonary function. A 2021 study found that hookah and vape users are at greater risk of inflammation and cancer of the nose, throat, and sinuses than other combustible tobacco products. As with other tobacco products, long-term hookah use is linked to lung, bladder, oral, gastric, and esophageal cancers, cardiovascular disease, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Despite these risks, hookah is consistently perceived as less harmful and less addictive than traditional cigarettes and 48% of youth consider hookah to be socially acceptable among friends. This explains why susceptibility rates of youth and young adults to begin smoking hookah, particularly youth who have never used tobacco products, is higher than other forms of tobacco.

The Monterey County Health Department did not include a hookah exemption in their flavored tobacco ban, and the Monterey County Board of Supervisors agreed with this recommendation when they adopted the County Ordinance in March 2022. Out of the 127 municipalities in California that adopted a flavored tobacco ban, only 13, or 10%, included an exception for hookah tobacco and/or hookah lounges.

Cultural Considerations for Hookah Usage
According to Fumari, a manufacturer and advocate of flavored shisha tobacco, the practice of smoking hookah began in the 16th century and existed for three centuries before flavors began to be added in the 19th century. Molasses and honey were the first traditional flavors, with other flavorings like lemon, grape, watermelon, or mint added in when available. Other hookah retailers and historians report that shisha tobacco remained unflavored until the 1990s when hookah lounges spread worldwide and youth-targeted flavors like gummy bear and bubble gum were developed to appeal to a wider global audience. At this point, the tobacco industry began to perfect the process of curing and flavoring tobacco leaves to create smoother and more tolerable shisha varieties.

While Islam forbids substances harmful to the body, hookah continues to be a social activity for many from the Middle East, India, and other parts of Asia and Africa. However, studies conducted in different states have shown that the greatest number of hookah users in the United States do not come from these backgrounds. In California, Latinx make up the largest demographic of young adults who reported using hookah, approximately 54% of hookah users, according to the California Health Interview Survey. In other studies, white males and those from higher socioeconomic status were more likely to use hookah than other groups, while females and Hispanics were found to be more susceptible to trying hookah and continuing use.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 20., Item Page 3, Packet Page 139 Because unflavored shisha tobacco is a stronger and harsher experience, it is not as marketable as flavored shisha and is not commonly used; however, it does exist and is still sold.

Non-tobacco shisha, or herbal shisha, is another widely available alternative to flavored shisha tobacco. Hookah has become increasingly commercialized with the creation of portable and mini hookah pipes, some as small as 6 inches tall, as well as hookahs that resemble vape pens.

Many of these more discreet products are available online from hookah retailers and even from Amazon.com at a price as low as $15.

For comparison, it is well-known that the tobacco industry uses targeted marketing strategies to sell menthol cigarettes disproportionately to Blacks, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) populations. Because menthol is popular with those populations, some may consider menthol cigarettes to be a cultural experience for minorities in America. However, the NAACP, for example, supports the FDA’s proposal to ban menthol-flavored tobacco products. As a result, cities largely have not exempted menthol flavoring from ordinances because public health policies aim to promote health equity across all demographics and ensure that no group is left behind.

Hookah Usage Among Youth
Surveys reflect that hookah use is most prominent among young adults under the age of 30, with gaining popularity by college students. Because there is currently no state or federal law requiring that those entering a hookah bar or lounge be 21 years of age or older, underage adults and minors are able to enter these facilities and share hookah tobacco products purchased by older friends. According to the 2021 report from Monitoring the Future, hookah use by 12th graders increased steadily from 2010 (one year after the US banned flavored cigarettes) until 2014 when vapes replaced both cigarettes and hookah as the tobacco product of choice for youth. A reduction in vape availability could result in an increase in hookah usage if both are not sufficiently regulated.

In a 2021 study conducted by the National Cancer Institute with support from the FDA and University of Texas, researchers concluded “that around 11% of the youth become susceptible to hookah use by 13 years, and that the percentage increases to 51.3% by age 18. Therefore, education and intervention campaigns are needed urgently to prevent youth from becoming susceptible to hookah use, certainly before early adolescence.” In the California Student Tobacco Survey, hookah susceptibility has been consistently higher than other forms of tobacco since 2015 for students who have never used tobacco products.

California Student Tobacco Survey 2015-2016 Susceptibility Results While the California Student Tobacco Survey data from 2015-2020 does indicate a decrease in the utilization rates of hookah by middle and high school students, the 2015-2016 survey found Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 20., Item Page 4, Packet Page 140 that over 19% of students had tried hookah and 4.8% were current users. These rates decreased as vape usage increased in the following years’ surveys.

California Student Tobacco Survey Hookah Use Results
Survey Year Ever Used Current Use
2015-2016 19.4% 4.8%
2017-2018 9.2% 1.7%
2019-2020 4.6% 0.6%
Based on trends seen after the 2009 flavored cigarette ban, youth and young adults flock to the flavored tobacco products that still remain legally available and it is likely the utilization rates of hookah would increase if exempted from a flavored tobacco ban.

Summary of Staff Recommendation
The City recognizes and appreciates the cultural relevance of hookah tobacco among Middle Eastern, Indian, and African cultures. However, hookah usage has become widespread among all demographics in the U.S. (54% of young adults using hookah in California are Latinx).

Furthermore, hookah tobacco manufacturers and industry representatives continue to target youth with candy, fruit, and other flavored hookah products. The public health impacts of hookah are significant as long-term hookah use is linked to lung, bladder, oral, gastric, and esophageal cancers, cardiovascular disease, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. For these reasons, City staff agrees with public health advocates such as the Monterey County Public Health Department that a flavored tobacco ban without an exemption for hookah tobacco is necessary to protect public health.

Staff is recommending that Council adopt an ordinance implementing the changes to Article 5 of Chapter 19 of the Monterey City Code without providing an exemption for flavored hookah tobacco or other flavored tobacco products.

Attachment 1. Draft Ordinance
e: All Business Associations
All Neighborhood Associations
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 20., Item Page 5, Packet Page 141 ORDINANCE NO. ____ C.S.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№07/19
AMEND CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 5 OF THE MONTEREY CITY CODE (TOBACCO RETAILER

LICENSE) TO PROHIBIT THE SALE OF ALL FLAVORED TOBACCO PRODUCTS EXCEPT

FOR FLAVORED SHISHA TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND TO PROHIBIT SINGLE USE

ELECTRONIC SMOKING PRODUCTS
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY DOES ORDAIN, as follows:

SECTION 1:

WHEREAS, state law prohibits the sale or furnishing of cigarettes, tobacco products, and smoking paraphernalia to minors, as well as the purchase, receipt, or possession of tobacco products by minors (Cal. Pen. Code § 308);
WHEREAS, state law explicitly permits cities and counties to enact local tobacco retail permitting ordinances and allows for the suspension or revocation of a local permit for a violation of any state tobacco control law (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22971.3); WHEREAS, in 2014 the Monterey City Council enacted Monterey City Code section 19- 105 et seq. to establish a permitting system for tobacco retailers to ensure that retailers comply with tobacco control laws and business standards of the City to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City. Prohibiting the sale of flavored tobacco products also furthers these goals and objectives;
WHEREAS, prohibiting tobacco retailers from selling flavored tobacco products will not unduly burden legitimate business activities of retailers who sell cigarettes or other tobacco products to adults. It will, however, allow the City to regulate the operation of lawful business to discourage violations of local laws by selling flavored tobacco products; WHEREAS, the City has a substantial interest in promoting compliance with federal, state, and local laws intended to regulate flavored tobacco product sales and use; in discouraging the illegal purchase of flavored tobacco products by minors; in promoting compliance with laws prohibiting sales of e-cigarettes and flavored tobacco products to minors; and finally, and most importantly, in protecting children from being lured into illegal activity through the misconduct of adults;
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 793, approved by the Governor in August 2020, prohibits a tobacco retailer from selling flavored tobacco products. A referendum challenging this law qualified for the November 8, 2022 ballot. Therefore, the new state law is suspended until the outcome of the vote on the referendum. If the referendum is not successful, Health & Safety Code section 104559.5(g) provides that the state law does not preempt or otherwise prohibit the adoption of local standards that impose greater restrictions on the access to tobacco products than the restrictions imposed by the state. To the extent that there is an inconsistency between the state law and local standards, the greater restriction on the access to tobacco products in Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 20., Item Page 6, Packet Page 142 2 the local standard shall prevail;
WHEREAS, in a ruling issued on March 18, 2022, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company et al v. County of Los Angeles, et al (9th Cir. 2022) 29 F.4th 542 held that the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, codified at 21 USC §387 et seq., did not preempt a city from banning the sale of some or all tobacco products; WHEREAS, more than 5.2 million young people in the United States reported vape use in 2019, including 27.5% of high school students and 10.5% of middle school students (CDC); WHEREAS, 24% of high school students have reported trying vape products in California from 2019-2020 (California Student Tobacco Survey); WHEREAS, 27.3% of high school students in the Monterey County area have tried or currently use vape products as of 2020 (California Student Tobacco Survey); WHEREAS, disposable e-cigarette use, which are designed for one time-use, has increased 1000% among high school students in the United States between 2019 and 2020 (FDA);
WHEREAS, e-cigarette waste introduces plastic, nicotine salts, heavy metals, lead, mercury, and flammable lithium-ion batteries into waterways, soil, and to wildlife (CDC); WHEREAS, a garbology study performed in 12 San Francisco high schools from 2018 to 2019 to investigate e-cigarette, combustible cigarette, and cannabis product waste revealed that 99% of identifiable e-cigarette waste was from flavored pods other than tobacco flavor and 42% of all identifiable combustible cigarette waste was menthol flavored. In the same study, menthol flavored waste accounted for 60% in low-income schools, 38% in middle-income schools, and 28% in high-income schools of all identifiable combustible cigarette waste (CDC); WHEREAS, adolescents obtain e-cigarettes from a variety of sources, including purchasing from a store or online (31%), buying from another person (16%), and giving a person of legal age money to purchase for them (15%) (AJHP Pepper et al); WHEREAS, it has been determined that the use of flavored shisha tobacco, or hookah, should be preserved as a cultural activity and has less impact on youth nicotine addiction than other flavored tobacco products (California Student Tobacco Survey); WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 20., Item Page 7, Packet Page 143 NOW THEREFORE, the Monterey City Council declares as follows:

SECTION 2: The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 3. Monterey City Code, Article 5, Chapter 19, Section 19-105, subsection (c) is hereby amended to read as follows:
“c. This article is adopted to: (1) ensure compliance with business standards and practices of the City; (2) to encourage responsible retailing of tobacco; (3) to limit the sale of tobacco products to those with the taste or aroma of tobacco, or no taste or aroma at all; and (4) to discourage violations of tobacco-related laws, but not to expand or reduce the degree to which the acts regulated by federal or state law are criminally proscribed or otherwise regulated.”
SECTION 4: Monterey City Code, Chapter 19, Article 5, Section 19-106 is hereby relettered sequentially by inserting the following new definitions in alphabetical order into the existing text:
“a. “Characterizing flavor” means a taste or aroma, other than the taste or aroma of tobacco, imparted either prior to or during consumption of a tobacco product or any byproduct produced by the tobacco product, including but not limited to tastes or aromas related to menthol, mint, wintergreen, fruit, chocolate, vanilla, honey, candy, cocoa, dessert, alcoholic beverage, herb, or spice. Characterizing flavor includes flavor in any form, mixed with or otherwise added to any tobacco product or nicotine delivery device, including electronic smoking devices.
d. “Electronic smoking device” means:
(1) Any electronic device or delivery system that can be used to deliver an inhaled dose of nicotine, flavorings, chemicals, or other substances in aerosolized or vaporized form for human consumption, including but not limited to an electronic cigarette, cigar, pipe, vape pen, or hookah.
(2) Any component, part, or accessory of such a device or delivery system that is used during its operation.
(3) Any flavored or unflavored liquid or substance, whether sold separately or sold in combination with any such device or delivery system that could be used to deliver tobacco products, nicotine, or other substances in aerosolized or vaporized form. (4) Any product for use in such an electronic device or delivery system whether it contains nicotine or tobacco or is derived from nicotine or tobacco. e. “E-Liquid” means the liquid that is converted into an aerosol by an e-cigarette or vaping product. It is typically a mixture of water, food grade flavoring, and a choice of nicotine levels, cannabis (THC, CBD), propylene glycol (PG) or vegetable glycerin (VG). f. “Flavored tobacco product” means any tobacco product, as defined in this Article, which imparts a characterizing flavor.
g. “Hookah” means a type of waterpipe, used to smoke shisha or other tobacco products, with a long flexible tube for drawing aerosol through water. Components of a Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 20., Item Page 8, Packet Page 144 4 hookah may include heads, stems, bowls, and hoses.
j. “Shisha tobacco product” means a tobacco product smoked or intended to be smoked in a hookah. “Shisha tobacco product” includes, and may be referred to as, hookah tobacco, waterpipe tobacco, maassel, narghile, and argileh. k. “Single-use electronic smoking product” means an electronic smoking device that is not refillable or rechargeable and is typically discarded once its contents have been used.

SECTION 5: Monterey City Code, Chapter 19, Section 19-106 (i) is hereby amended to read as follows:
“i. “Tobacco product” means:
(1) Any substance containing, made, or derived from tobacco or nicotine, whether natural or synthetic, that is intended for human consumption, whether smoked, heated, chewed, absorbed, dissolved, inhaled, snorted, sniffed, or ingested by any other means, including but not limited to cigarettes, cigars, little cigars, pipe tobacco, hookah tobacco, shisha, waterpipe tobacco, maassel, narghile, argileh, smokeless tobacco (e.g., snuff, snus, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco) bidis, heated tobacco, or any other preparation of tobacco; or
(2) Any electronic smoking device that delivers nicotine or other substances, whether natural or synthetic, to the person inhaling from the device, including but not limited to an electronic cigarette, electronic cigar, electronic pipe, or vaping device. An electronic smoking device does not include an electronic hookah. (3) Any product or formulation of matter containing biologically active amounts of nicotine that is manufactured, sold, offered for sale, or otherwise distributed with the expectation that the product or matter will be introduced into the human body, (4) “Tobacco product” does not include drugs, devices, or combination products authorized for sale by the United States Food and Drug Administration, as those terms are defined in the Federal Drug and Cosmetic Act, as may be amended.” SECTION 6: Monterey City Code, Chapter 19, Section 19-113 through 19-120 are hereby renumbered as Section 19-114 through 19-121.

SECTION 7: Monterey City Code, Chapter 19, Section 19-113 is hereby added to read as follows:
“19-113. Violations.
a. It shall be a violation of this Article for a tobacco retailer, or its agents or employees, to violate any federal state or local tobacco law or regulation, including any provision of this Article.
b. Causing, permitting, aiding, abetting, or concealing a violation of any provision of this Article shall constitute a violation.
c. Failure to prominently display the Tobacco Retail License in a publicly visible location at the licensed premises shall constitute a violation.
d. The failure of the tobacco retailer, or its agents or employees, to allow any peace officer, or other authorized government official to conduct unscheduled inspections of the premises of the business for the purpose of ensuring compliance with any federal, state, or local tobacco law or regulations, including any provision of this Article, at any time the business is open for business shall constitute a violation. e. After 180 days of the effective date of this ordinance, it shall be a violation of this Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 20., Item Page 9, Packet Page 145 Article for a tobacco retailer, or its agents or employees to sell, or offer for sale, or possess with the intent to sell or offer for sale, any flavored tobacco product intended to impart, or imparting a characterizing flavor in any form, to any tobacco product. (1) Subsection (e) does not apply to flavored shisha tobacco products. f. After 180 days of the effective date of this ordinance, it shall be a violation of this Article for a tobacco retailer, or its agents or employees, to sell, or offer for sale, or possess with the intent to sell or offer for sale, any single use electronic smoking device.
g. A tobacco retailer’s possession of four or more flavored tobacco products creates a rebuttable presumption the retailer possesses such flavored tobacco products with intent to sell or offer for sale.
h. The following actions of a tobacco retailer, its employees or agents, creates a rebuttable presumption that a tobacco product is flavored:
(1) public statements or claims that the tobacco product imparts a characterizing flavor; (2) text and/or images on the product’s labeling or packaging to explicitly or implicitly indicate the tobacco product imparts a characterizing flavor; or (3) other actions directed to consumers that would reasonably cause consumers to believe the tobacco or electronic cigarette product imparts a characterizing flavor.

SECTION 8: All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

SECTION 9: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from and after its final passage and adoption.

SECTION 10. Nothing in this Article shall be interpreted or applied to create any power or duty in conflict with any federal or state law. If any provision of this Article or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Article or the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 20., Item Page 10, Packet Page 146 6 Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 20., Item Page 11, Packet Page 147 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Hans Uslar, City Manager
Prepared By: Gina Russo, Deputy Human Resources Manager SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution Establishing Compensation and Benefits Packages for Unrepresented Employees (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution establishing and amending the benefits and compensation for Unrepresented Employees.

VALUE DRIVERS:

Negotiating employment contracts is consistent with the City Council’s value drive to “provide sufficient resources and support to develop, retain, and recruit a high-quality city workforce.” POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The attached Resolution authorizes changes to their salaries and benefits for Fiscal Year 22/23 and 23/24 consistent with other represented employees.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The total net cost to the City to implement the recommendations for Unrepresented budget period is $46,486.54. The FY22/23 budget should be amended to include the salary adjustments. The FY23/24 budget forecasts will be included in the proposed budget for that for that fiscal year. The benefits forecast is included in the adopted budget.

FY2022/23 FY2023/24 Total
Salary Increase FT $22,787.52 $23,699.02 $46,486.54
Salary Increase RPT $43,036.66 $44,758.13 $87,794.79
Total Cost $65,824.18 $68,457.15 $134,281.33
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 21., Item Page 1, Packet Page 148 this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The staff recommendation is consistent with recent City Council guidance.

DISCUSSION:

It has been the policy of the City to provide matching wage increases to unrepresented employees that were provided to represented employees.

Unrepresented Confidential Executive Management
The Assistant City Manager, Finance Director and Human Resources Director are all unrepresented confidential executive management positions. Staff is recommending these positions receive wage and benefit increases as described below:
 4% salary increase effective July 1, 2022.
 4% salary increase effective July 1, 2023.
 Current Health Plan Spending Fund (HPSF) contributions for 2023 and for the plan year 2024 only, the City shall increase its contributions, not to exceed 9%, to the new PERS Gold premiums.

Unrepresented Confidential Employees
The Assistant Finance Director, Assistant Human Resources Director, Human Resources Coordinator, Human Resources Specialist, and the Human Resources Assistant are all unrepresented and confidential classifications. Staff is recommending these positions receive wage and benefit increases as described below:
 4% salary increase effective July 1, 2022
 4% salary increase effective July 1, 2023
 Current Health Plan Spending Fund (HPSF) contributions for 2023 and for the plan year 2024 only, the City shall increase its contributions, not to exceed 9%, to the new PERS Gold premiums.

Unrepresented Regular Part-time
Regular Part-time (RPT) employees are unrepresented employees who are scheduled to work between 20 and 30 hours per week and are limited to 1,560 hours per fiscal year. The City currently has 24 authorized RPT positions with 16 filled by employees. Staff is recommending these positions receive wage increases as described below:
 4% salary increase effective July 1, 2022
 4% salary increase effective July 1, 2023
HU/gr
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 21., Item Page 2, Packet Page 149 Attachments: 1. Resolution
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 21., Item Page 3, Packet Page 150 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/22

ESTABLISHING COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS PACKAGES

FOR UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES
WHEREAS, staff recommends the following compensation and benefits package for Unrepresented Confidential Executive Management and Unrepresented Confidential employees to include:
 4% salary increase effective July 1, 2022.
 4% salary increase effective July 1, 2023.
 Current Health Plan Spending Fund (HPSF) contributions for 2023 and for the plan year 2024 only, the City shall increase its contributions, not to exceed 9%, to the new PERS Gold premiums.

WHEREAS, staff recommends the following compensation and benefits package for Regular Part-time employees to include:
 4% salary increase effective July 1, 2022.
 4% salary increase effective July 1, 2023.

WHEREAS, The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute the above wage and benefit package and that the salary schedules be updated accordingly.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 21., Item Page 4, Packet Page 151 2 APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 21., Item Page 5, Packet Page 152 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Rafaela T. King, CPA, MBA, Finance Director
Prepared By: Stella Sandoval, Senior Accountant
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution Certifying Compliance with State Law with Respect to Levying Assessments and Special Taxes (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution certifying compliance with State Law with respect to levying assessments and special taxes.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The passage of this resolution will ensure the continued collection of assessments and special taxes by the County Tax Collector.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Passage of the resolution will have a positive fiscal effect on the City as the County will continue to collect assessments and special taxes on our behalf. This resolution has no effect on the amount of the assessments and special taxes.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 22.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 22., Item Page 1, Packet Page 153 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Non-passage of the resolution would mean that the County would discontinue collection of assessments and special taxes for the City of Monterey. If this were to occur, the city would be in a position of (1) collecting our own assessments and special taxes from individual property owners, (2) paying our outstanding assessment obligations with General Fund monies or (3) defaulting on the outstanding obligations.

DISCUSSION:

In 1997 the County of Monterey informed each agency using their tax rolls for collection of taxes, assessments, fees and charges (other than the 1% ad valorem tax) that they will require, for the 1997-98 fiscal year and each year thereafter, a certification resolution to ensure that Proposition 218’s provisions are being addressed by the agency. The City Attorney and the Finance Director have reviewed the City’s assessments and special taxes that are collected by the County on the annual tax bills and have concluded that we are in compliance on all issues.

The recurring assessments and special taxes are as follows:
1) Emergency Medical Services – this is a special tax approved by the voters in March 2000. The tax is currently set at $5.00 per benefit unit, and the proceeds are used to fund paramedic emergency medical service to the citizens of Monterey. 2) Alvarado Street Maintenance District – this is an annual assessment collected from property owners with property fronting Alvarado Street. The funds are used to repair and maintain improvements.
3) Calle Principal Maintenance District – this is an annual assessment collected from property owners with property fronting Calle Principal. The funds are used to repair and maintain improvements.

The resolution certifies compliance with the Proposition and includes a hold harmless and indemnification provision for administrative expenses of the County.

The resolution and the assessment information are due, and will be delivered, to Monterey County Auditor’s office no later than August 1, 2022.

NR/ss
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 22., Item Page 2, Packet Page 154 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY

CERTIFYING COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW WITH RESPECT TO THE LEVYING OF

GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES, ASSESSMENTS, AND PROPERTY-RELATED FEES

AND CHARGES
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey requests that the Monterey County Auditor-Controller enter those general or special taxes, assessments, or property-related fees or charges identified in Exhibit “A” on the tax roll for collection and distribution by the Monterey County Treasurer-Tax Collector commencing with the property tax bills for fiscal year 2022-23; and WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY:

1. The City of Monterey hereby certifies that it has, without limitation, complied with all legal procedures and requirements necessary for the levying and imposition of the general or special taxes, assessments, or property-related fees or charges identified in Exhibit “A”, regardless of whether those procedures and requirements are set forth in the Constitution of the State of California, in State statues, or in the applicable decisional law of the State of California.

2. The City of Monterey further certifies that, except for the sole negligence or misconduct of the County of Monterey, its officers, employees, and agents, with regard to the handling of the compact disc or electronic file identified as Exhibit “A”, the City of Monterey shall be solely liable and responsible for defending, at its sole expense, cost, and risk, each and every action, suit, or other proceeding brought against the County of Monterey, its officers, employees, and agents for every claim, demand, or challenge to the levying or imposition of the general or special taxes, Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 22., Item Page 3, Packet Page 155 2 assessments, or property-related fees or charges identified in Exhibit “A” and that it shall pay or satisfy any judgment rendered against the County of Monterey, its officers, employees, and agents on every such action, suit, or other proceeding, including all claims for refunds and interest thereon, legal fees and court costs, and administrative expenses of the County of Monterey to correct the tax rolls.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 22., Item Page 4, Packet Page 156 EXHIBIT "A"
TO

RESOLUTION CERTIFYING COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW WITH RESPECT TO THE LEVYING OF GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES, ASSESSMENTS, AND PROPERTYRELATED FEES AND CHARGES FISCAL YEAR 2022-23
GENERAL TAXES:

None
SPECIAL TAXES:

Emergency Medical Services
ASSESSMENTS:
(#528) Alvarado Street Maintenance District 85-1
(#533) Calle Principal Maintenance District 00-01

PROPERTY-RELATED FEES AND CHARGES:

None
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 22., Item Page 5, Packet Page 157 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Grant Leonard, AICP, Housing Analyst
SUBJECT: Authorize the City Manager to Enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with First Community Housing for Development of Affordable Housing at 442 Adams Street (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with First Community Housing for 442 Adams Street.

VALUE DRIVERS:

Support efforts and policies that provide equitable access to affordable housing in Monterey and the region.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Entering into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement for development of the property supports the City’s on-going housing efforts, including those intended to serve extremely low, very low and low-income residents. Moving forward with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement is a necessary step to support the City’s efforts to meet its Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation, should any new housing units result from the subsequent Development and Disposition Agreement and ground lease.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Negotiating the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) required substantial staff time and assistance of outside counsel. Staff anticipates substantial staff time and assistance of outside legal counsel to complete the next phases of the process, including completing predevelopment studies and drafting a development agreement. These activities are funded by the City’s the City’s Housing Successor Agency funds for affordable housing.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378) because the City still retains discretion to approve, modify or not proceed with any project pending the outcome of the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement and further CEQA review. In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 1, Packet Page 158 CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could decide not to enter into an ENA with First Community Housing as a potential developer for the property located at 442 Adams Street. Staff is not supporting this alternative because First Community Housing is an experienced affordable housing developer with a well presented plan to secure project financing.

DISCUSSION:

The City issued a Request for Proposals on July 20, 2020 to solicit proposals to develop affordable housing on four City-owned properties. The properties were:
 Harbor Yard located at 417 Figueroa Street
 Parking Lot 14 located at 442 Adams Street
 Calle Principal Parking Garage – 438 Calle Principal
 A portion of the City Hall Campus on Madison Street between Dutra and Van Buren Streets consisting of four properties (587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street).

Proposals were accepted on October 2, 2020. On February 16, 2021, the Council selected First Community Housing as the preferred developer for 442 Adams Street. The Council also appointed Kim Cole, Janna Aldrete and Grant Leonard as negotiators and directed staff to develop an exclusive negotiating agreement with First Community Housing.

Since February 2021, staff has been working with First Community Housing to draft an ENA for the Council to consider. Substantial progress has been made on drafting the ENA. Furthermore, on May 17, 2022, the Council provided direction to staff to prioritize development negotiations with First Community for 442 Adams Street and to reserve development of the Harbor Yard and the Calle Principal garage for a later phase. The Council also directed staff to explore drafting an Affordable Housing Local Preference Policy (the “Policy”).

Summary Terms
 51 Affordable Units
 Affordability level will be for households earning between 30% and 60% of the median income.
 The Exclusive Negotiating Agreement will have an initial term of 3 years with two additional 1-year extensions. First Community has requested an extended term due to uncertainty about water credit availability and the ability to set a water meter for the site.  Developer understands that the City is considering the preparation of an affordable housing preference policy and agrees to negotiate disposition agreements that will comply with the Policy, to the extent permitted by applicable law and other project funding sources. The City’s intent is that the Policy will require the affordable units to be rented to City of Monterey residents and workers.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 2, Packet Page 159  Financing: the ENA does not commit funding for the project. Funding agreements for pre-development and development costs will be negotiated.  Site access: the City will work with the developer to ensure they have access to the site to conduct needed pre-development studies during the term of the agreement.

Conclusion
Staff recommends the City Council direct the City Manager to enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with First Community Housing for the property located at 442 Adams Street.

KC/GL
Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution

2. Draft Exclusive Negotiating Agreement
e: Monterey Neighborhood Associations
Monterey Business Associations
Housing Outreach List
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 3, Packet Page 160 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/22

AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING

AGREEMENT WITH FIRST COMMUNITY HOUSING FOR DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT 442 ADAMS STREET
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey currently experiences both high housing costs and a low inventory of affordable housing units;
WHEREAS, in October 2019, the Governor signed several bills that acknowledge the statewide housing crisis and provide funding for affordable housing; WHEREAS, in 2019 the City Council reviewed City owned properties to determine their potential to be developed for affordable housing in support of the City’s on-going housing efforts, including those intended to serve extremely low, very low and low-income residents; WHEREAS, this review showed the potential to support the City in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation, should any new housing units results from this effort; WHEREAS, on August 20, 2019 and September 3, 2019, the City Council received a report on a site analysis of City owned properties for affordable housing development. The Council directed staff to focus on potential sites located on Figueroa Street, Calle Principal, Adams Street and Van Buren/Madison Streets;
WHEREAS, the City issued a Request for Proposals on July 20, 2020 to solicit proposals to develop affordable housing on four City owned sites consisting of properties located at 417 Figueroa Street, 442 Adams Street, 438 Calle Principal, 587 and 593 Van Buren Street, and 424 and 450 Madison Street;
WHEREAS, proposals were due on October 2, 2020, and the City received responsive proposals from five developers;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey received a responsive proposal for 442 Adams Street from First Community Housing Corporation that proposes to use not less than 80% of the property area for the development of affordable housing, providing that 100% of the proposed units will be permanently affordable housing, with an affordability mix of units at 30% AMI Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing/ Housing Choice Vouchers, units at 50% AMI, units at 60% AMI, and 1 manager unit, and approximately 1,200 sq.ft. of commercial space; WHEREAS, the Council directed staff to negotiate an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with First Community Housing for442 Adams Street;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378) because the City still retains discretion to approve, modify or not proceed with any project pending the outcome of the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement and further CEQA review. In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 4, Packet Page 161 2 general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY it hereby authorizes City Manager to enter into an exclusive negotiating agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, with First Community Housing for 442 Adams Street.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 5, Packet Page 162 ATTACHMENT 2
DRAFT 7-14-22

EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING RIGHTS AGREEMENT
First Community Housing Page 1 of 12
1130\96\3279567.1

EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING RIGHTS AGREEMENT
by and among

FIRST COMMUNITY HOUSING
and

THE CITY OF MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
DATED ______________________
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 6, Packet Page 163 1130\96\3279567.1
THIS EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING RIGHTS AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is entered into by and between the City of Monterey, a California municipal corporation (the “City”) and First Community Housing, a California non-profit public benefit corporation (the “Developer”) as of May ___, 2022 (the “Effective Date”). The City and the Developer are each referred to herein as “Party” or collectively referred to as the “Parties.” WHEREAS, the City is the owner of certain property located at 442 Adams Street known as APN 007-694-008 and 009 (the “Property”), as more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, on July 20, 2020 the City issued an Affordable Housing Development Opportunity Request for Proposals (the “RFP”) and selected the Developer to develop affordable housing on the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Developer proposes to build fifty-one (51) affordable family housing units on the Property (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the affordable housing units proposed by Developer will be affordable to individuals and families earning between thirty percent (30%) and sixty percent (60%) of area median income; and
WHEREAS, the intent of both City and Developer under this Agreement is to establish a specific, limited period of time to negotiate a mutually acceptable governing documents for the potential disposition of the Property and undertaking of the construction of the Project on the Property by the Developer; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to negotiate one or more definitive agreements, including but not limited to a disposition and development agreement, a ground lease and an affordable housing agreement (collectively, the “Disposition Agreements”) for the Project with Developer; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 54221(f)(1)(H), disposition of the Property is not subject to the State Lands Act as the intended use of the Property is for affordable housing.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:

1. Good Faith Efforts to Negotiate. The Parties will use their best efforts to successfully negotiate Disposition Agreements for the purchase and sale of the Property and any other documents necessary for the construction of the Project. The Parties will diligently and in good faith pursue such negotiations. Furthermore, the Parties will use their best efforts to obtain any third-party consent, authorization, approval, or exemption required in connection with the transactions contemplated hereby. This Agreement does not impose a binding obligation on City to convey any interest in the Property to Developer, nor does Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 7, Packet Page 164 1130\96\3279567.1
it obligate City to grant any approvals or authorizations required for the Property or any project or improvements constructed thereon.
a. If Developer has not continued to negotiate diligently and in good faith, City will give written notice thereof to Developer who will then have ten (10) business days to commence negotiating in good faith. Following the failure of Developer to thereafter commence negotiating in good faith within such ten (10) business day period, this Agreement may be terminated by City.
b. If City has not continued to negotiate diligently and in good faith, Developer will give written notice thereof to City which will then have ten (10) business days to commence negotiating in good faith. Following the failure of City to thereafter commence negotiating in good faith within such ten (10) business-day period, this Agreement may be terminated by Developer.
c. If, notwithstanding City's and Developer's mutual diligent, good faith negotiations, the Parties have not entered into at least one Disposition Agreement on or before expiration of the Term of this Agreement (as defined in Section 3 of this Agreement) or any extension thereof, this Agreement will terminate, and neither Party will have any further rights against or liability to the other under this Agreement.

2. Developer’s Exclusive Right to Negotiate With City. City agrees that it will not, during the term of this Agreement, directly or indirectly, through any officer, employee, agent, or otherwise, solicit, initiate or encourage the submission of bids, offers or proposals by any person or entity with respect to the acquisition of any interest in the Property or the development of the Property, and City will not engage any broker, financial adviser or consultant to initiate or encourage proposals or offers from other parties with respect to the disposition or development of the Property or any portion thereof.

Furthermore, City will not, directly or indirectly, through any officer, employee, agent or otherwise, engage in negotiations concerning any such transaction with, or provide information to, any person other than Developer and its representatives with a view to engaging, or preparing to engage, that person with respect to the disposition or development of the Property or any portion thereof.

3. Term.
a. The term of this Agreement (“Term”) commences on the Effective Date and will terminate three (3) years thereafter, unless extended or earlier terminated as provided herein.
b. The Term of this Agreement may be extended up to two (2) times for an additional term of one (1) year for each extension (the “Term Extension”) upon the mutual written agreement of Developer and City acting through and in the discretion of its City Manager, or their designee (“City Manager”). The Term Extension may be extended further upon written agreement of the Parties and approval by the City Council.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 8, Packet Page 165 1130\96\3279567.1

4. Relationship of the Parties. Nothing in this Agreement creates between the Parties the relationship of lessor and lessee, of buyer and seller, or of partners or joint-venturers.

5. Specific Terms and Conditions for Discussion.
a. Water Rights. As set forth in the RFP, the Developer must address whether adequate water is available for the construction of the Project and will be responsible for satisfying all water requirements and regulations associated with the Project. If Developer is unable to obtain the necessary water requirements for the Project during the Term, negotiation for Disposition Agreements for the Project will cease, and neither Party will have any further rights against or liability to the other under this Agreement with respect to the Project. b. Project Financing. The City has not yet authorized any loans or other financing, such as reduction in fees, for the predevelopment costs or construction costs for the Project.
c. City Preference Policy. Developer understands that the City is considering the preparation of an affordable housing preference policy (the “Policy”). The City’s intent is that the Policy will require that a preference be given in the Project to persons renting the affordable units to be persons who live or work within the City of Monterey. Developer agrees as part of the negotiation of the Disposition Agreements to include implementation of the Policy at the Project provided such Policy is: (i) in compliance with applicable fair housing requirements and Internal Revenue Service guidance applicable to low income housing tax credit projects, and (ii) is not in conflict with other Project financing (the "Policy Parameters").

If during the term of the negotiation of the Disposition Agreements or further refinement of financing for the Project, Developer reasonably determines in good faith that implementation of the Policy will not satisfy the Policy Parameters, the City agrees that Developer may pursue construction of the Project without the inclusion of the Policy.
d. Disposition Agreements. The Parties agree to use their good faith best efforts to successfully negotiate the terms of the Disposition Agreements including, but not limited to (i) ground lease terms for the Property; (ii) the proposed Project to be constructed on the Property; (iii) the schedule of performance for the construction of the Project; (iv) a proposed Disposition and Development Agreement; and (v) a regulatory agreement for the restriction of the affordable units.

6. Developer’s Studies; Right of Entry.
a. During the Term of this Agreement, Developer will use its best efforts to prepare, at Developer’s expense, any studies, surveys, plans, specifications and reports (“Developer’s Studies”) that the Developer deems necessary or desirable in Developer’s sole discretion, to complete its due diligence for the Property.

Developer’s Studies may include, without limitation, title investigation, relocation analyses, marketing, feasibility, soils, seismic and environmental studies, Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 9, Packet Page 166 1130\96\3279567.1
financial feasibility analyses and design studies. The Developer will have rights of access to the Property to prepare the Developer’s Studies. b. Developer hereby agrees to notify the City twenty-four (24) hours in advance of its intention to enter onto the Property.
c. Developer will provide the City with workplans, drawings, and descriptions of any intrusive sampling it intends to do and any additional items stated in this section. Developer must keep each of the Property in a safe condition during its entry. Developer shall repair, restore and return each of the Property to its condition immediately preceding Developer’s entry thereon at Developer’s sole expense.
i. On October 1, 2020, in response to the RFP, the Developer submitted a “Preliminary Development Package,” consisting of the following:
(1) Cover letter providing a general overview of the Project including details on the management and operation of the Project;
(2) Developer team breakdown identifying the members of the team, the teams experience, including the Developer’s organizational documents;
(3) Project cutsheets for developments that the Developer has completed in the past;
(4) Project concepts for the Project.
ii. Within ninety (90) days from Developer's determination that the Project may obtain appropriate water access pursuant to Section 5.4(a), Developer shall submit to the City and updated “Development Package,” consisting of the following:
(1) Fully updated information in each category and every item set forth in the “Preliminary Development Package”;
(2) Proposed identification of all sources of financing, including predevelopment, construction, and permanent financing with a description of the terms and conditions of such financings; (3) A well-defined site plan generally describing the Project using schematic drawings, and which depicts in detail the proposed design, density, and configuration thereof;
(4) Square footages of all improvements; total gross building area (“GBA”) of the Project, with the GBA of the affordable units, with size and floor plan/configuration of each of the affordable units;
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 10, Packet Page 167 1130\96\3279567.1
(5) The circulation areas and GBA thereof;
(6) Description of the common area amenities and common areas GBA thereof;
(7) Configuration of onsite parking, including residents’, guests’ and handicapped users’ parking spaces with number and type of parking spaces;
(8) A detailed and updated pro forma for the Project that identifies all sources and uses of funds including but not limited to design of the Project and supporting infrastructure, along with initial estimates of development costs, including hard and soft construction and non-construction costs;
(9) An updated timeline that includes, based upon consultation with City staff, as well as the best professional judgment of Developer, the provision of necessary onsite and offsite improvements for the Project;
d. If upon expiration of the Term of this Agreement and or any extensions, the Parties have not successfully negotiated the Disposition Agreements, Developer will provide City within fifteen (15) days following the date of expiration, electronic copies of the Developer’s Studies completed by such date. Developer will also provide City with copies of any Developer’s Studies completed after the expiration of the Term within fifteen (15) days following completion of such studies, or if Developer intends not to complete any Developer Studies, Developer will provide City with copies of such uncompleted studies.

7. City’s Reports and Studies. Within ten (10) days following the Effective Date, City will make available to Developer for review or copying at Developer’s expense all nonprivileged studies, surveys, plans, specifications, reports, and other documents with respect to the Property that City has in its possession or control, which have not already been provided. Studies or documents prepared by City and its agents solely for the purpose of negotiating the terms of Disposition Agreements are not required to be provided by City to Developer and are excluded from this requirement.

8. Developer’s Pro Forma and Evidence of Financing. Prior to the execution of the Disposition Agreements contemplated by this Agreement, Developer will provide City with a pro forma for the Project that confirms the financial feasibility of Developer’s proposed development of the Property. The pro forma shall include the names and amounts from each funding source. Developer will provide monthly progress reports to the City on the status of funding applications and commitments. City is not obligated to seek approval of a Disposition Agreements from the City Council unless and until the documents required by this Section have been provided.

9. Full Disclosure. Developer is required to make full disclosure to City of its principals; officers; major stockholders, partners or members; joint venturers; negotiators; Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 11, Packet Page 168 1130\96\3279567.1
development managers; consultants and directly involved managerial employees, if any, (collectively, “Developer Parties”); and all other material information concerning Developer. Any change in the identity of the Developer Parties will be subject to the approval of City, which will not be unreasonably withheld. Developer will make and maintain full disclosure to City of its methods of financing to be used in the acquisition and development of the Property.

10. Expenses. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, third-party costs and expenses (including, without limitation, all legal fees and expenses) incurred in connection with this Agreement and the activities contemplated hereby will be paid by the Party incurring the same.

11. Confidentiality; Dissemination of Information. To the extent permitted by law, during the term of this Agreement, each Party will obtain the consent of the other Party prior to issuing or permitting any of its officers, employees or agents to issue any press release or other information to the press with respect to this Agreement; provided however, no Party will be prohibited from supplying any information to its representatives, agents, attorneys, advisors, financing sources and others to the extent necessary to accomplish the activities contemplated hereby so long as such representatives, agents, attorneys, advisors, financing sources and others are made aware of the terms of this Section.

Nothing contained in this Agreement will prevent either Party at any time from furnishing any required information to any governmental entity or authority pursuant to a legal requirement or from complying with its legal or contractual obligations.

12. Execution of Disposition Agreements. If the Parties successfully negotiate Disposition Agreements, City agrees to comply with all applicable federal and state legal requirements, including the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The City has no legal obligation to grant any approvals or authorizations for the sale of the Property or any development thereon until the Disposition Agreements have been approved by the City Council.

13. Termination.
a. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by mutual consent of the Parties. b. City will have the right to terminate this Agreement upon its good faith determination that Developer is not proceeding diligently and in good faith to carry out its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. City will exercise such right in accordance with the provisions set forth in Section 1 of this Agreement. c. Developer will have the right to terminate this Agreement, in accordance with the provisions set forth in Section 1 of this Agreement, upon its good faith determination that the City is not proceeding diligently and in good faith to carry out its obligations pursuant to this Agreement, or if the results of its investigation of the Property is unsatisfactory, in Developer’s sole and absolute discretion, with respect to Developer’s desired development activities or if Developer is unable to obtain other necessary approvals, rights or interests.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 12, Packet Page 169 1130\96\3279567.1
d. Neither Party will have the right to seek an award of damages as a result of the termination of this Agreement pursuant to this Section.

14. Effect of Termination. Upon termination as provided herein, or upon the expiration of the Term and any extensions thereof without the Parties having successfully negotiated Disposition Agreements, this Agreement will forthwith be void, and there will be no further liability or obligation on the part of either of the Parties or their respective officers, employees, agents or other representatives; provided however, the provisions of Section 10 (Expenses), Section 11 (Confidentiality; Dissemination of Information), Section 16 (Indemnification), and Section 20 (Brokers) will survive such termination.

Provided further, that upon termination or expiration of this Agreement without the Parties having successfully negotiated Disposition Agreements, Developer will deliver to City all of the Developer’s Studies pursuant to the provisions of Section 6 of this Agreement.

15. Notices. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement, all notices to be sent pursuant to this Agreement will be made in writing, and sent to the Parties at their respective addresses specified below or to such other address as a Party may designate by written notice delivered to the other parties in accordance with this Section. All such notices will be sent by:
a. Personal delivery, in which case notice is effective upon delivery; b. Certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, in which case notice will be deemed delivered on receipt if delivery is confirmed by a return receipt; c. Nationally recognized overnight courier, with charges prepaid or charged to the sender’s account, in which case notice is effective on delivery if delivery is confirmed by the delivery service;
d. Electronic transmission, in which case notice will be deemed delivered upon transmittal, provided that duplicate copy of the notice is promptly delivered by first-class or certified mail or by overnight delivery.

City: City of Monterey
City Hall
580 Pacific Street
Monterey, Ca 93940
Attn: City Manager
Tel (510) 724-9000
Fax (510) 724-9826
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 13, Packet Page 170 1130\96\3279567.1
Developer: First Community Housing
75 East Santa Clara Street, Suite 1300
San Jose, CA 95113
Attn: Ava Kuo
Tel (408) 291-8650
Fax _____________________

16. Indemnification. Developer hereby covenants, on behalf of itself and its permitted successors and assigns, to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City and its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents, representatives and employees (“Indemnitees”) from and against all claims, costs (including without limitation reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation costs) and liability, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement and/or arising out of or in connection with claims resulting from or arising in connection with Developer or Developer’s agents, employees, consultants, contractors or subcontractors access to and entry on the Property pursuant to Section 6 of this Agreement; provided however, Developer will have no indemnification obligation with respect to the gross negligence or willful misconduct of any Indemnitee.

17. Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement or the application thereof will, to any extent, be held to be invalid or unenforceable, such term or provision will be ineffective to the extent of such invalidity or unenforceability without invalidating or rendering unenforceable the remaining terms and provisions of this Agreement or the application of such terms and provisions to circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable unless an essential purpose of this Agreement would be defeated by loss of the invalid or unenforceable provision.

18. Entire Agreement; Amendments In Writing; Counterparts. This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements and understandings, oral and written, between the Parties with respect to such subject matter. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument executed by the Parties or their successors in interest. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which will be an original and all of which together will constitute one agreement.

19. Successors and Assigns; No Third-Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective successors and assigns; provided however, that neither Party will transfer or assign any of such Party’s rights hereunder by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of the other Party, and any such transfer or assignment without such consent will be void. Subject to the immediately preceding sentence, this Agreement is not intended to benefit, and will not run to the benefit of or be enforceable by, any other person or entity other than the Parties and their permitted successors and assigns.

20. Brokers. Each Party warrants and represents to the other that no brokers have been retained or consulted in connection with this transaction. Each Party agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the other Party from any claims, expenses, costs or liabilities arising in connection with a breach of this warranty and representation. The terms of this Section will survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 14, Packet Page 171 1130\96\3279567.1

21. Approvals. Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, the City Manager will be authorized to enter into all written approvals, consents or waivers by the City without further authorization by the City Council. Nothing herein, however, will be deemed to prevent the City Manager from requesting formal approval by the City Council if the City Manager, in their sole discretion, determines to seek such approval.

22. Captions. The captions of the sections and articles of this Agreement are for convenience only and are not intended to affect the interpretation or construction of the provisions hereof.

23. Governing Law. This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 15, Packet Page 172 1130\96\3279567.1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.

CITY
By: _______________________________
City Manager
ATTEST:

By: _______________________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: _______________________________
City Attorney

DEVELOPER

FIRST COMMUNITY HOUSING,
a California nonprofit public benefit corporation
By:

Geoffrey Morgan, President & CEO
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 16, Packet Page 173 1130\96\3279567.1
Exhibit A
Legal Description
5149586.3
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 23., Item Page 17, Packet Page 174 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Grant Leonard, AICP, Housing Analyst
SUBJECT: Authorize the City Manager to Enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with MidPen Housing for Development of Affordable Housing at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street, 424 and 450 Madison Street (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with MidPen Housing Corporation for the properties located at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street.

VALUE DRIVERS:

Support efforts and policies that provide equitable access to affordable housing in Monterey and the region.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378) because the City still retains discretion to approve, modify or not proceed with any project pending the outcome of the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement and further CEQA review. In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.

Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the Date: 7/19/2022
Item No.: 24.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 1, Packet Page 175 environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could decide not to enter into an ENA with MidPen as a potential developer for the property located at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street. Staff is not supporting this alternative because MidPen is an experienced affordable housing developer with a well presented plan to secure project financing.

DISCUSSION:

Proposals were accepted on October 2, 2020. On February 16, 2021, the Council selected MidPen as the preferred developer for 417 Figueroa Street, 438 Calle Principal, 587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street. The Council also appointed Kim Cole, Janna Aldrete and Grant Leonard as negotiators and directed staff to develop exclusive negotiating agreements with MidPen for the properties.

Since February 2021, staff has been working with MidPen to draft an ENA for the Council to consider. Substantial progress has been made on drafting the ENA. Furthermore, on May 17, 2022, the Council provided direction to staff to prioritize development negotiations with MidPen regarding the City Hall site (587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street) and to reserve development of the Harbor Yard and the Calle Principal garage for a later phase.

The Council also directed staff to explore drafting an Affordable Housing Local Preference Policy (the “Policy”).

Summary of Terms
 36 Affordable Family Housing Units.
 Affordability level will be for households earning between 30% and 60% of the median income.
 The Exclusive Negotiating Agreement will have a term of 240 days with a one year extension possible.
 Developer understands that the City is considering the preparation of an affordable housing preference policy and agrees to negotiate disposition agreements that will comply with the Policy, to the extent permitted by applicable law and other project Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 2, Packet Page 176 funding sources. The City’s intent is that the Policy will require the affordable units to be rented to City of Monterey residents and workers.
 Financing: the ENA does not commit funding for the project. Funding agreements for pre-development and development costs will be negotiated.  Site access: the City will work with the developer to ensure they have access to the site to conduct needed pre-development studies during the term of the agreement.

Conclusion
Staff recommends the City Council direct the City Manager to enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with MidPen Housing Corporation for the properties located at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street, 424 and 450 Madison Street.

KC/GL
Attachment: 1. Draft Resolution

2. Draft Exclusive Negotiating Agreement
e: Monterey Neighborhood Associations
Monterey Business Associations
Housing Outreach List
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 3, Packet Page 177 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/22

AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING

AGREEMENT WITH MIDPEN HOUSING FOR DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT 587 AND 593 VAN BUREN STREET, 424 AND 450 MADISON STREET WHEREAS, the City of Monterey currently experiences both high housing costs and a low inventory of affordable housing units;
WHEREAS, in October 2019, the Governor signed several bills that acknowledge the statewide housing crisis and provide funding for affordable housing; WHEREAS, in 2019 the City Council reviewed City owned properties to determine their potential to be developed for affordable housing in support of the City’s on-going housing efforts, including those intended to serve extremely low, very low and low-income residents; WHEREAS, this review showed the potential to support the City in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation, should any new housing units results from this effort; WHEREAS, on August 20, 2019 and September 3, 2019, the City Council received a report on a site analysis of City owned properties for affordable housing development. The Council directed staff to focus on potential sites located on Figueroa Street, Calle Principal, Adams Street and Van Buren/Madison Streets;
WHEREAS, the City issued a Request for Proposals on July 20, 2020 to solicit proposals to develop affordable housing on four City owned sites consisting of properties located at 417 Figueroa Street, 442 Adams Street, 438 Calle Principal, 587 and 593 Van Buren Street, and 424 and 450 Madison Street;
WHEREAS, proposals were due on October 2, 2020, and the City received responsive proposals from five developers;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey received a responsive proposal for 587 and 593 Van Buren Street, and 424 and 450 Madison Street from MidPen Housing Corporation that proposes to use 100% of the property area for the development of affordable housing, providing that 100% of the proposed units will be permanently affordable housing, with an affordability mix of units at 30% AMI, 40% AMI, 50% AMI, and 60% AMI.

WHEREAS, the Council directed staff to negotiate an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with MidPen Housing Corporation for 587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378) because the City still retains discretion to approve, modify or not proceed with any project pending the outcome of the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement and further CEQA review. In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 4, Packet Page 178 2 significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 5, Packet Page 179 ATTACHMENT 2
DRAFT 4-19-22

EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING RIGHTS AGREEMENT
MidPen Housing Corporation Page 1 of 12

EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING RIGHTS AGREEMENT
by and among

MIDPEN HOUSING CORPORATION
and

THE CITY OF MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
DATED ______________________
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 6, Packet Page 180 THIS EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING RIGHTS AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is entered into by and between the City of Monterey, a California municipal corporation (the “City”) and MidPen Housing Corporation, a California non-profit corporation (the “Developer”) as of May _____, 2022 (the “Effective Date”). The City and the Developer are each referred to herein as “Party” or collectively referred to as the “Parties.” WHEREAS, the City is the owner of certain property known as a portion of the City Hall campus located on Madison Street between Dutra and Van Buren Street, known as Assessor Parcel Numbers 001-522-009, 001-522-010, 001-522-011, and a portion of 001-522-015 (the “Property”), as more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and
WHEREAS, on July 20, 2020 the City issued an Affordable Housing Development Opportunity Request for Proposals (the “RFP”) and selected the Developer to develop affordable housing on the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Developer proposes to build twenty 36 affordable family housing units on the Property (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the affordable housing units proposed by Developer will be affordable to individuals and families earning between thirty percent (30%) and sixty percent (60%) of area median income; and
WHEREAS, the intent of both City and Developer under this Agreement is to establish a specific, limited period of time to negotiate a mutually acceptable governing documents for the potential disposition of the Property and undertaking of the construction of the Project on the Property by the Developer; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to negotiate one or more definitive agreements, including but not limited to disposition and development agreements, ground leases and affordable housing agreements (collectively, the “Disposition Agreements”) for the Project with Developer; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 54221(f)(1)(H), disposition of the Property is not subject to the State Lands Act as the intended use of the Property is for affordable housing.

1. Good Faith Efforts to Negotiate. The Parties will use their best efforts to successfully negotiate Disposition Agreements for the purchase and sale of the Property and any other documents necessary for the construction of the Project. The Parties will diligently and in good faith pursue such negotiations. Furthermore, the Parties will use their best efforts to obtain any third-party consent, authorization, approval, or exemption required in connection with the transactions contemplated hereby. This Agreement does not impose a binding obligation on City to convey any interest in the Property to Developer, nor does Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 7, Packet Page 181 it obligate City to grant any approvals or authorizations required for the Property or any project or improvements constructed thereon.
a. If Developer has not continued to negotiate diligently and in good faith, City will give written notice thereof to Developer who will then have ten (10) business days to commence negotiating in good faith. Following the failure of Developer to thereafter commence negotiating in good faith within such ten (10) business day period, this Agreement may be terminated by City, and following such termination neither Party will have any further rights against or liability to the other under this Agreement.
b. If City has not continued to negotiate diligently and in good faith, Developer will give written notice thereof to City which will then have ten (10) business days to commence negotiating in good faith. Following the failure of City to thereafter commence negotiating in good faith within such ten (10) business-day period, this Agreement may be terminated by Developer, and neither Party will have any further rights against or liability to the other under this Agreement. However, if City defaults in City’s obligation hereunder to exclusively negotiate with Developer, then Developer may institute an action for specific performance of this Agreement.
c. If, notwithstanding City's and Developer's mutual diligent, good faith negotiations, the Parties have not entered into at least one Disposition Agreement on or before expiration of the Term of this Agreement (as defined in Section 3 of this Agreement) or any extension thereof, and provided that the City has not defaulted on its obligations under Sections 1 and 2, this Agreement will terminate, and neither Party will have any further rights against or liability to the other under this Agreement.

3. Term.
a. The term of this Agreement (“Term”) commences on the Effective Date and will terminate two hundred forty (240) days thereafter, unless extended or earlier terminated as provided herein.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 8, Packet Page 182 b. The Term of this Agreement may be extended for up to a maximum of one (1) year (the “Term Extension”) upon the mutual written agreement of Developer and City acting through and in the reasonable discretion of its City Manager, or their designee (“City Manager”). The Term Extension may be extended further upon written agreement of the Parties and approval by the City Council.

4. Relationship of the Parties. Nothing in this Agreement creates between the Parties the relationship of lessor and lessee, of buyer and seller, or of partners or joint-venturers.

5. Specific Terms and Conditions for Discussion.
a. Water Rights. As set forth in the RFP, the Developer must address whether adequate water is available for the construction of each of the Project and will be responsible for satisfying all water requirements and regulations associated with the Project. Developer shall use good faith best efforts to obtain the necessary water requirements for the Project during the Term, but in the event that Developer is unable to obtain them for the Project on or prior to the execution date for the Disposition Agreements, then either: (i) if City and Developer mutually agree at that time in their reasonable discretion that it is feasible to obtain the water requirements prior to construction finance closing, then this condition will be included in the Disposition Agreements as a condition to disposition of the Property; or (ii) if City and Developer mutually agree at that time in their reasonable discretion that it is not feasible to obtain the water requirements prior to the anticipated construction finance closing date, the negotiations for the Disposition Agreements for the Project will cease, and neither Party will have any further rights against or liability to the other under this Agreement.
b. City Preference Policy. Developer understands that the City is considering the preparation of an affordable housing preference policy (the “Policy”) and agrees to negotiate Disposition Agreements that will comply with the Policy, to the extent permitted by applicable law and other Project funding sources. The City’s intent is that the Policy will require that the affordable units be rented to City of Monterey residents and workers.
c. Disposition Agreements. The Parties agree to use their good faith best efforts to successfully negotiate the terms of the Disposition Agreements including, but not limited to (i) ground lease terms for the Property; (ii) the proposed Project to be constructed on the Property; (iii) the schedule of performance for the construction of the Project; (iv) a proposed Disposition and Development Agreement; and (v) a regulatory agreement for the restriction of the affordable units.

6. Developer’s Studies; Right of Entry.
a. During the Term of this Agreement, Developer will use its best efforts to prepare, at Developer’s expense, any studies, surveys, plans, specifications and reports (“Developer’s Studies”) that the Developer deems necessary or desirable in Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 9, Packet Page 183 Developer’s sole discretion, to complete its due diligence for the Property.

Developer’s Studies may include, without limitation, title investigation, relocation analyses, marketing, feasibility, soils, seismic and environmental studies, financial feasibility analyses and design studies. The Developer will have rights of access to the Property to prepare the Developer’s Studies. b. Developer hereby agrees to notify the City twenty-four (24) hours in advance of its intention to enter any one of the Property.
c. Developer will provide the City with workplans, drawings, and descriptions of any intrusive sampling it intends to do and any additional items stated in this section. Developer must keep each of the Property in a safe condition during its entry. Developer shall repair, restore and return each of the Property to its condition immediately preceding Developer’s entry thereon at Developer’s sole expense.
i. On October 2, 2020, in response to the RFP, the Developer submitted a “Preliminary Development Package,” consisting of the following:
(1) Cover letter providing a general overview of the Project including details on the management and operation of the Project;
(2) Developer team breakdown identifying the members of the team, the teams experience, including the Developer’s organizational documents;
(3) Project cutsheets for developments that the Developer has completed in the past;
(4) Project concepts for the Property.
ii. Within ninety (90) days from the Effective Date, Developer shall submit to the City “Updated Preliminary Development Package,” consisting of the following:
(1) Fully updated information in each category and every item set forth in the “Preliminary Development Package”;
(2) Proposed identification of all sources of financing, including predevelopment, construction, and permanent financing with a description of the terms and conditions of such financings; (3) A well-defined site plan generally describing the Project using schematic drawings, and which depicts in detail the proposed design, density, and configuration thereof;
(4) Square footages of all improvements; total gross building area (“GBA”) of the proposed Project, with the GBA of the
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 10, Packet Page 184 affordable units, with size and floor plan/configuration of each of the affordable units;
(5) The circulation areas and GBA thereof;
(6) Description of the common area amenities and common areas GBA thereof;
(7) Configuration of onsite parking, including residents’, guests’ and handicapped users’ parking spaces with number and type of parking spaces;
(8) A detailed and updated pro forma for the Project that identifies all sources and uses of funds including but not limited to design of the Project and supporting infrastructure, along with initial estimates of development costs, including hard and soft construction and non-construction costs;
(9) An updated timeline that includes, based upon consultation with City staff, as well as the best professional judgment of Developer, the provision of necessary onsite and offsite improvements for the Project;
d. If upon expiration of the Term of this Agreement and or any extensions, the Parties have not successfully negotiated the Disposition Agreements, Developer will provide City within fifteen (15) days following the date of expiration, electronic copies of the Developer’s Studies completed by such date. Developer will also provide City with copies of any Developer’s Studies completed after the expiration of the Term within fifteen (15) days following completion of such studies, or if Developer intends not to complete any Developer Studies, Developer will provide City with copies of such uncompleted studies. . In the event Developer provides City with the Developer Studies under this Section 6.d., City will thereafter assume all risk of damage to property or injury to person in connection with or arising from any cause in connection with the use those studies and agrees that Developer shall not be liable for any damage either to person or property or resulting from the loss of use thereof. At the time of delivery, City shall provide Developer with a release and indemnification from any and all loss, cost, damage, expense and liability incurred in connection with or arising from any cause in connection with the use of the Developer Studies thereafter.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 11, Packet Page 185

9. Full Disclosure. Developer is required to make full disclosure to City of its principals; officers; major stockholders, partners or members; joint venturers; negotiators; development managers; consultants and directly involved managerial employees, if any, (collectively, “Developer Parties”); and all other material information concerning Developer. Any change in the identity of the Developer Parties will be subject to the approval of City, which will not be unreasonably withheld. Developer will make and maintain full disclosure to City of its methods of financing to be used in the acquisition and development of the Property.

13. Termination; Specific Performance.
a. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by mutual consent of the Parties. b. City will have the right to terminate this Agreement upon its good faith determination that Developer is not proceeding diligently and in good faith to Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 12, Packet Page 186 carry out its obligations pursuant to this Agreement. City will exercise such right in accordance with the provisions set forth in Section 1 of this Agreement. c. Developer will have the right to terminate this Agreement, in accordance with the provisions set forth in Section 1 of this Agreement, if the results of its investigation of the Property is unsatisfactory, in Developer’s sole and absolute discretion, with respect to Developer’s desired development activities, if Developer is unable to obtain other necessary approvals, rights or interests, or if Developer determines the Project are not financially feasible. d. Neither Party will have the right to seek an award of damages as a result of the termination of this Agreement pursuant to this Section. e. In the event of an uncured default by the City in connection with the City’s obligation to negotiate exclusively with Developer under this Agreement, in lieu of terminating this Agreement, the Developer shall have the right to institute an action for specific performance of this Agreement.

Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 13, Packet Page 187 City: City of Monterey
City Hall
580 Pacific Street
Monterey, Ca 93940
Attn: City Manager
Tel (510) 724-9000
Fax (510) 724-9826
with a copy to: Meyers Nave
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 1200
Sacramento, Ca 95814
Attn: Adam Lindgren
Tel (916) 556-1531
Developer: MidPen Housing Corporation
275 Main Street, Suite 204
Watsonville, CA 95076
Attn: Joanna Carman, Director of Housing
Tel (925) 330-2113
Fax (650) 357-9766

18. Entire Agreement; Amendments In Writing; Counterparts. This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous agreements and understandings, oral and written, between the Parties with respect to such subject matter. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument executed by the Parties or their successors in Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 14, Packet Page 188 interest. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which will be an original and all of which together will constitute one agreement.

22. Captions. The captions of the sections and articles of this Agreement are for convenience only and are not intended to affect the interpretation or construction of the provisions hereof.

23. Governing Law. This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 15, Packet Page 189 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.

CITY
By: _______________________________
City Manager
ATTEST:

By: _______________________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: _______________________________
City Attorney

DEVELOPER
By: _______________________________
[Title]
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 16, Packet Page 190 Exhibit A
Legal Description
3837016.4
Council Regular Meeting, 7/19/2022, Item No. 24., Item Page 17, Packet Page 191

Monterey City CouncilJuly 19, 2022

Monterey City Council
July 19, 2022