Agenda packet — Monterey City Council, September 5, 2023 (part 1 of 2)

Council Chamber
580 Pacific Street
Monterey, California
City Council Agenda
Council Regular Meeting

AMENDED AGENDA
Tuesday, September 5, 2023
4:00 PM – 5:30 PM
7:00 PM – 11:00 PM
City Council
Tyller Williamson, Mayor
Kim Barber, Councilmember,
District 1
Gino Garcia, Councilmember
Alan Haffa, Councilmember
Ed Smith, Councilmember,
District 2
City Manager
Hans Uslar
How to participate in this meeting:
 Written comment: Members of the public may submit comment(s) to [email protected] until ½ hour before the start of the meeting. These messages are not read aloud during the meeting but are made available to the meeting body and public at https://monterey.org/submitted-comments. All comments received become part of the record.
 In-Person: Please see the meeting location listed above. Wearing a mask is recommended and encouraged.
 Remote via ZoomGov Webinar:
o Join on a computer or smartphone: https://montereyorg.zoomgov.com/j/1607729333 An up-to-date version of the Zoom software must be used.
o Or join by telephone: Dial 833-568-8864 (Toll Free), 669-254-5252 (Campbell, CA) or 646-828-7666 (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 o Need help using or updating Zoom? Read our Zoom Meeting Instructions (PDF)  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

EMERGENCY CIRCUMSTANCES REMOTE PARTICIPATION REQUEST

1. Approve Councilmember Haffa's Emergency Circumstances Remote Participation Request (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

PRESENTATIONS

2. Presentation on the Housing Resource Center of Monterey County (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)

PUBLIC COMMENTS (MATTERS NOT ON AGENDA)
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 9/5/2023 4:00:00 PM
2 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: For regular meetings with an afternoon and evening session, Public Comments are taken during both sessions. 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

3. August 15, 2023 Regular Meeting (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 19, Section 15061) 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.

4. 1st Reading by Title Only - Ordinance Updating Provisions, Processes, and Procedures relating to the City’s Boards, Commissions, and Committees (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
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."

5. Approve the Purchase of One (1) Backhoe in the Amount of $210,764.08 from Papé Machinery, Inc. (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

6. Reclassify Maintenance Technician to Administrative Services Technician, Approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Monterey Executive Management Employees’ Association, and Update the Salary Schedule (Not a Project Under CEQA, per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

7. Authorize Staff to Administratively Approve Consent to Sublease Requests for Allowed Uses Under the Primary Leases for the Properties Located at 560-570 Munras Avenue; 700 Cannery Row; and 720 Cannery Row (Not a Project under CEQA Per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
9/5/2023 4:00:00 PM
3 8. Authorize the Purchase of One (1) Parking Lot/Parking Garage Sweeper in the amount of $162,676.11 from Nitehawk Sweepers (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

9. Award a Contract in the Amount of $78,018.40 to Duke's Root Control, Inc. for Annual Sewer Root Foaming 2023 (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1)

10. Adopt Findings In Support of Decision to Grant Appeal Application AP-23-0135 and Approve Sign Permit Application SI-23-0051 for Six Rotating Projecting Signs (Flags) and Four Wall Signs at 611 Lighthouse Avenue; Property Owner Anna C Vermi Tr.; Planned Community – Lighthouse (PC-LH) Zoning District; Commercial General Plan Land Use Designation (Exempt from CEQA Requirements per Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1 and Section 15311, Class 11)

11. Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into An Agreement with Monterey Marriott Hotel for Food and Beverage Services for the Monterey Conference Center (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Other

12. Receive Mayor's Recommendation and Appoint Lorene Kimzey to the Museums and Cultural Arts Commission (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 19, 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).)

13. 1st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance Amending Monterey City Code Section 38-112.6 “Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units” and Amending Section 38-11 “Definitions” Retroactive to July 6, 2023 (Statutorily Exempt from CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.17)

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.

14. Presentation on the Monterey Police Department Outreach and Navigation Center (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
9/5/2023 4:00:00 PM
4 15. 2nd Reading of an Ordinance to Increase Compensation for the Mayor and City Councilmembers (Not a Project Under CEQA per 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.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS (MATTERS NOT ON AGENDA)
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: For regular meetings with an afternoon and evening session, Public Comments are taken during both sessions. Individuals may choose to speak once for up to three minutes at either session, but not both.

ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CLOSED SESSION

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.

16. 1st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance to Establish a Rental Inventory and Requiring Registration of All Residential Rental Properties within the City of Monterey Beginning January 1, 2024 (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.
9/5/2023 4:00:00 PM
5 ADJOURNMENT
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: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
Prepared by: Mark Ackermann, Intern, City Manager’s Office SUBJECT: Presentation on the Housing Resource Center of Monterey County (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council receive a presentation on the Housing Resource Center of Monterey County’s efforts to help families find affordable housing.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

It is within the City Council’s purview to receive presentations from community partners whose efforts benefit the health, safety, and quality of life of all who live, work, and visit in the City of Monterey.

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 Monterey City Council could choose not to receive the presentation; however, that is not recommended.

Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 2.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 2., Item Page 1, Packet Page 6 DISCUSSION:

The Housing Resource Center of Monterey County, a 501(c)(3) Non-Profit Organization The Housing Resource Center (HRC) has a history of helping families in Monterey County who find themselves in situations where they are homeless in need of rental housing, at risk of becoming homeless, or considering buying their first home. The organization was granted tax exempt 501(c)(3) status in 2004, originally operating under the Monterey County Housing Alliance name. The HRC mission is to provide a continuum of housing resources for homeless prevention and affordable housing opportunities. HRC fosters community stability, stronger communities, and personal economic empowerment through education, advocacy, counseling, and services. These efforts are rooted in their core values of open and honest communication, integrity, commitment, collaboration, respect, care and compassion, and accountability.

From 2009-2012, HRC was the grantee or lead agency for the Salinas and Monterey County Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing (HPRP) grants of approximately two million dollars. Administering a network of local partner agencies, the HRC HPRP programs assisted over 4,000 individuals, including more than 80 Veteran households, attain or maintain permanent affordable housing. From January 2022 through July 2023, 194 clients were able to benefit from HRC’s assistance in Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Programs.

HRC works to connect clients to one of four available programs:

1. The Housing Support Program (HSP) — assists homeless families on Calworks (a public assistance program that provides financial assistance and services to eligible families that have a child(ren) in the home) and CalFresh (a public assistance program for people with low-income who meet federal income eligibility rules and want to add to their budget to put healthy and nutritious food on the table) obtain and maintain permanent housing.

2. The Family Stabilization Program (FSP) — assists homeless families on CalWorks (a public assistance program that provides financial assistance and services to eligible families that have a child(ren) in the home and CalFresh (a public assistance program for people with low-income who meet federal income eligibility rules and want to add to their budget to put healthy and nutritious food on the table) obtain and maintain permanent housing.

3. Bringing Families Home (BFH) — offers financial assistance and housing-related wraparound supportive services, including but not limited to: rental assistance, housing navigation, case management, security deposits, utility payments, moving costs, interim shelter assistance, legal services, and credit repair.

4. The Prop 47 Behavioral Health Program (BH) — assists formerly incarcerated individuals on a substance treatment plan to located and maintain permanent housing.

HRC also offers direct support to landlords who agree to work with them in these programs.

Incentives include $1,000 for working with HRC for the first time, up to $2,000 for minor unit repairs, up to $2,000 for rental arrear payments from past HRC clients, $50 for each successful landlord referral, and landlord-tenant support seven days a week.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 2., Item Page 2, Packet Page 7 The HRC came about in 2009 when the Housing Advocacy Council and the Monterey County Housing Alliance agreed to merge to create a stronger, unified, HUD-approved organization to provide the entire continuum of housing resources and financial literacy education to all families in need in Monterey County. HRC’s work can be traced back to 1984, when the Housing Advocacy Council was founded.

HRC’s three-year goals include achieving financial strength and stability, increasing temporary and permanent housing, attracting, developing, and retaining quality staff, and strengthening Board development and diversity.

The City of Monterey has invited the Housing Resource Center of Monterey County to deliver a presentation on their programs at the Monterey City Council meeting on September 5, 2023.

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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 2., Item Page 3, Packet Page 8

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Tuesday, August 15, 2023
4:00 PM 7:00 PM

COUNCIL CHAMBER

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers

Present: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Smith, Williamson

Absent: None
City Staff

Present:

City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Community Development Director, Police Chief, Finance Director, Fire Chief, Human Resources Director, Library & Museums Director, Public Works Director, City Clerk, Property Manager, Senior Engineer, Associate Civil Engineer, Recreation Manager, Planning Manager, Assistant Human Resources Director, Environmental Regulations Manager, Deputy Public Works Director/Administration, Harbormaster
***Afternoon Session Agenda ***

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Williamson called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. City Clerk Klein called the roll with the Council present as highlighted above, and explained to the public how to participate in the meeting virtually. Those present sang "Happy Birthday" to celebrate members of staff and Council with birthdays on this day.

PRESENTATIONS

1. Recognition of Defense Language Institute Quarterly Joint Service Awards (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Recognized award recipients
Mayor Williamson recognized Staff Sergeant April Benson (U.S. Army), Lance Corporal Ryan Holman (U.S. Marine Corps), and Sergeant Joshua Weaver (U.S. Marine Corps). Staff Sergeant Benson and Sergeant Weaver each made brief remarks. Public comment was not received.

PUBLIC COMMENTS (MATTERS NOT ON AGENDA)
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from: Steve Lightfoot, Paul Farmer of the Monterey County Business Council, and Bob Faulis.

CONSENT ITEMS
Council commented favorably on Item 8, and pulled Item 3 from Consent.

On a motion by Councilmember Barber, seconded by Councilmember Haffa, and carried by the following vote, the City Council approved the CONSENT ITEMS except Item 3:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 3.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 3., Item Page 1, Packet Page 9 City Council Minutes August 15, 2023
2 RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Approval of Minutes

2. August 1, 2023 Regular Meeting (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Action: Approved
Award of Construction Contracts

3. Award a Construction Contract in the Amount of $3,672,900 to A. Teichert & Son, Inc. dba Teichert Construction for the Citywide Road Surface Repair Project, Phase 4 (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) ***Measure S *** Action: Pulled from Consent; Adopted Resolution No. 23-090 C.S.

City Manager Uslar made a brief verbal report. The Council remarked positively about the project and shared appreciation with the Public Works team for their efforts to improve City streets with Measure S funding.

Public comment was received from Esther Malkin, who asked the City to prioritize potholes on North Fremont Street near the Safeway parking lot.

On a motion by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 23-090 C.S. Awarding a Construction Contract in the Amount of $3,672,900 to A. Teichert & Son, Inc. dba Teichert Construction for the Citywide Road Surface Repair Project, Phase 4 ***Measure S ***:

4. Amend Agreement with Eide Bailly, LLP for Annual Independent Audit Services to Increase the Not-to-Exceed Amount from $65,870 to $97,880 for the Audit of Fiscal Year 2021-2022 and Approve an Increase to General Fund Budget Appropriations by $32,010 for Fiscal Year 2023- 24 (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 23-091 C.S.

5. Authorize an Appropriation of $50,850 and Approve the Purchase of Four (4) Parking Enforcement EV GO-4 Vehicles from Turf Star Western in the Amount of $196,133 (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 23-092 C.S.

6. Amend Resolution 23-067, the FY 23/24 Position Control List, By Adding Two Positions in the Parks and Recreation Department (Not a Project Under CEQA, per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 23-093 C.S.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 3., Item Page 2, Packet Page 10 City Council Minutes August 15, 2023
3 7. Review and Approval of City of Monterey’s Investment Policy (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 23-094 C.S.

8. Authorize Staff to Submit a Regional Early Action Planning (REAP) 2.0 Grant Application to the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) and, If Awarded, Appropriate the Grant Funds and Authorize the City Manager to Enter into a Contract with the AMBAG (Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15306, Class 6)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 23-095 C.S.

Other

9. Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 601 Wave Street (Cannery Row Parking Garage); Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Mei-I Funtanilla (Camp & Associates, Inc.) and Lynne Rush (Verizon Wireless, LLC); Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Amendment to License Agreement (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Appointed agency negotiators Cole and Aldrete
*** End of Consent Agenda ***

PUBLIC APPEARANCE

10. 1st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance to Increase Compensation for the Mayor and City Councilmembers (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Passed ordinance to print
Mayor Williamson introduced the ordinance by reading its full title. City Manager Uslar made a verbal presentation reiterating the need to adjust Mayor and Council salaries, referring to the extended length of time since increases were last applied.

Public comment was received from Esther Malkin, who asked why the ordinance could not go into effect until January and said that this action should allow more lower income people to run for Council and result in better representation.

The Council remarked on the matter, stressing the value drivers and Council goals that were included in the agenda packet for Item 11 (City Staff Work Program) and noting that that item demonstrated the scope and depth of topics that the Mayor and Council need to understand in order to effectively serve. It was noted that the Mayor and Council also serve on outside agencies' boards to represent the City. The Council encouraged members of the public to learn more about the job undertaken by the City's elected representatives and to consider running for office in future elections.

On question, City Manager Uslar explained the timeline for adopting ordinances and SB 329's provision that increases would be effective January 1, 2024.

The Council stated that the City would benefit from economically diverse future Council candidates.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 3., Item Page 3, Packet Page 11 City Council Minutes August 15, 2023
4 On a motion by Councilmember Haffa, seconded by Councilmember Garcia, and carried by the following vote, the City Council waived further reading and passed to print the ordinance 1st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance to Increase Compensation for the Mayor and City Councilmembers:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Public Comment on Closed Session Agenda Items
Public comment on the closed session was not received.
*** Adjourn to Closed Session (See additional agenda) *** The Council adjourned to closed session at 4:38 p.m.

RECONVENE
The Council reconvened at 7:03 p.m. with the full Council present. *** Evening Session Agenda ***

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Garcia led the Pledge.

CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS (MATTERS NOT ON AGENDA)
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from: Jean Rasch, Dan Turner, Nina Beety, Lorna Moffat, and Esther Malkin.

ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Davi reported:
cs1. Closed Session Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 30 Fisherman’s Wharf
Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete
Negotiating Parties: Michael Ungaro (San Pedro Fish Market Company, LLC) Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for New Lease Agreement (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: On a unanimous roll call vote, unanimous confidential direction was given to the City's real property negotiators
cs2. Closed Session Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 601 Wave Street (Cannery Row Parking Garage)
Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 3., Item Page 4, Packet Page 12 City Council Minutes August 15, 2023
5 Negotiating Parties: Mei-I Funtanilla (Camp & Associates, Inc.) and Lynne Rush (Verizon Wireless, LLC)
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Amendment to License Agreement (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: On a roll call vote with Councilmember Barber voting no, confidential direction was given to the City's real property negotiators
cs3. Conference with Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1):

1. City of Monterey v. Marianne McNicol (Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 23CV001205)

2. Lynne Denley v. City of Monterey, et. al (Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 23CV000133)

3. Clara Gilliland v. City of Monterey (Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 22CV003170)

4. Francisca Moralez v. City of Monterey et al. (United States District Court Norther District of California Case No. 22-CV-07540)

5. Yessenia Garcia Reveles, et al. v. City of Monterey et al (Monterey County Superior Court Case Nos. 22CV003162 and 22CV000736)

6. Richard Rosendale v. City of Monterey (Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 23CV000879)

7. Pacific Western Bank v. City and Stronghold Engineering, Inc. (San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. CIVSB2212212)

8. Stronghold Engineering, Inc. v. City of Monterey (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 18CV329015; Sixth District Court of Appeal Case No. H050157)

9. Stronghold Engineering, Inc. v City of Monterey (Riverside County Superior Court Case No.

CVR12103427; Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division 2, Case No. E080304)

10. Cynthia Wills v. City of Monterey (United States District Court, Northern District of California, San Francisco Division Case No. 21-CV-01998 EMC)

11. Sichel Young v. City of Monterey, et al (Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 22CV002243 and Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Cases) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: No reportable action taken on items 1-6; 7-9 may be considered in the evening, time permitting; 10 - On a unanimous roll call vote, confidential direction was given to legal counsel; 11 - no reportable direction on superior court case, on the WC appeals board unanimous roll call confidential direction was given to legal counsel

PUBLIC APPEARANCE (EVE)
On a motion by Councilmember Haffa, seconded by Mayor Williamson, and carried by the following vote, the City Council took up Item 12 first of the evening Public Appearance items:

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

11. Receive Update on the 2023 City Staff Work Program (Not a Project Under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Tabled (see vote under Item 12)
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 3., Item Page 5, Packet Page 13 City Council Minutes August 15, 2023
6 12. Adopt a City Council Policy on Governance (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Actions:

1. Agendizing of Council Items by Individual Councilmembers: Replaced majority vote requirement with a requirement for a minimum of two yes votes (3-2, with Councilmember Barber and Mayor Williamson voting no);

2. Appointing Members to Boards, Commissions, and Committees: Kept Mayor as the sole designated party to interview and recommend applicants, and added encouragement that the Mayor and Council consider district representation with other factors in recommending (Mayor) and appointing (Council) new members (4-1, with Councilmember Smith voting no);

3. City Budget: On consensus, the Council did not discuss the matter of public engagement as relates to the City budget;

4. Councilmember Participation at Conferences, Trainings, and Events: On consensus, added reference to Government Code section 53232.3(d)";

5. Letterhead Policy: On consensus, determined that Council letterhead should be used for letters representing the position of the full Council, except for social items like thank you letters which could be sent by individual members, and stressed that individuals should not do advocacy work or write about policy using City letterhead;

6. Strategic Planning and the City Staff Work Program: On consensus, agreed to continue to hear the City Staff Work Program updates on a semi-annual basis;

7. City Manager and City Attorney Annual Performance Evaluation: Directed staff to issue a Request for Proposals for a consultant to conduct an annual evaluation for both executives and bring it to Council as soon as possible (4-1, Councilmember Smith voting no);

8. Reconsideration Policy: Tabled;

9. Councilmember Interactions with Labor Unions when Negotiations are Pending:

Tabled;

10. Ex Parte Contacts in Quasi-Judicial Proceedings: Tabled This item was heard first, before Item 11, pursuant to the vote recorded above.

Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira gave the staff presentation, with input from City Manager Uslar, City Attorney Davi, Human Resources Director Neal, and City Clerk Klein, and together they answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was received from: Adam Pinterits, of Monterey County Association of Realtors, who encouraged the Council to keep the longer timeline on reconsideration and said that every Councilmember should be able to submit an item on a Council agenda; Jean Rasch, who echoed Mr. Pinterits' comment on reconsideration; Lorna Moffat, who asked a question about reconsideration; and Esther Malkin, who said that in the past she did not think that the Mayor reviewing all board and commission applicants was a good process.

On question from the public, City Attorney Davi stated that no questions had arisen about reconsideration, but that the topic was brought forward with other governance topics.

The Council discussed the matters as follows.

Agendizing of Council Items by Individual Councilmembers:

Argument was made in favor of two “yes” votes being sufficient to place an item on a future Council agenda, citing that requiring three “yeses” could be stifling and stating that the existing word and time limit was limiting for advocacy. It was stated that collaboration would be required.

Argument was made in favor of continuing to require a majority vote, citing the need for Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 3., Item Page 6, Packet Page 14 City Council Minutes August 15, 2023
7 consistency. It was suggested that perhaps three “yeses” would warrant a higher level of staff work and a vote of only two “yeses” could still come forward but with less staff work required.

City Manager Uslar disagreed, stating that staff would still do excellent and thorough work regardless of whether two or three “yes” votes were received.

On a motion by Councilmember Haffa, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following vote, the City Council replaced the majority vote requirement for placing an item on a future agenda with a requirement for a minimum of two “yes” votes:

AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Garcia, Haffa, Smith
NOES: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Williamson
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Appointing Members to Boards, Commissions, and Committees:

Argument was made for involving another member of Council in the interview and recommendation process instead of only the Mayor. Argument was made that the Council district-based election model made it logical for the Mayor to continue to be the one to conduct applicant interviews and make a appointment recommendations because the Mayor was the only at large elected member. It was stated that the current process was efficient and worked well. Interest was expressed in, when possible, in diversifying nominations to better represent districts.

A motion was introduced by Councilmember Haffa, and seconded by Councilmember Barber, to keep the Mayor as the sole designated party to interview and recommend applicants, and added encouragement that the Mayor and Council consider district representation with other factors in recommending (Mayor) and appointing (Council) new members.

It was stated that expediting the appointment process was important and that the Mayor did deserve a certain amount of influence due to being elected by the whole city.

The motion carried by the following vote:

AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Williamson NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
City Budget
On consensus, the Council decided not to discuss the matter of public engagement as relates to the City budget.

Councilmember Participation at Conferences, Trainings, and Events:

On consensus, the Council added to the policy a reference to Government Code section 53232.3(d).

Letterhead Policy:

On consensus, the Council agreed that Council letterhead should be used for letters representing the position of the full Council, except for social items like thank you letters which Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 3., Item Page 7, Packet Page 15 City Council Minutes August 15, 2023
8 could be sent by individual members, and stressed that individuals should not do advocacy or write about policy using City letterhead.

Strategic Planning and City Staff Work Program:

On consensus, it was agreed that semi-annual reports would continue to work for the Council, and it was noted that taking up the matter quarterly might take away from City staff's ability to actually accomplish some of their work items. It was stated that the Council needed to periodically reexamine the big picture, and consider and review the work plan when considering new projects and initiatives. It was urged that as new items come forward, when Council voted they should give direction on how to prioritize the items into the existing work plan. It was suggested to keep the work plan document always updated and provided to the Council ongoing, but City Manager Uslar said that staff preferred meaningful updates every six months.

He proposed having a workshop near the end of the year to review strategic initiatives and goal setting. Council expressed a desire to understand when a goal had been met, and expressed value in having an outside perspective for coordinating strategic planning.

City Manager and City Attorney Annual Performance Evaluation:

Interest was expressed in favor of hiring an outside consultant to assist with the City Manager and City Attorney performance evaluations, with October cited as a deadline to complete the evaluations each year. It was stated that semi-annual evaluations were a nice goal but difficult to accomplish. Comments were made in favor of Council managing the process instead of spending money on a consultant, except in the case of negotiations, citing that residents didn't want to see money wasted. In favor of a consultant, it was stated that it would be a more equitable approach, since the staff team all reports to the City Manager.

A motion was introduced by Mayor Williamson, and seconded by Councilmember Garcia, tp agendize a closed session item at the next council meeting regarding the performance evaluation process for the City Manager and City Attorney.

The mover amended the motion to instead direct staff to issue a Request for Proposals for a consultant to conduct an annual evaluation for the City Manager and City Attorney and bring it to Council as soon as possible. The seconder agreed with the amended motion.

Disagreement with the motion was expressed, citing that a consultant was unnecessary and a waste of taxpayer dollars. Comments in favor of the motion included stating that the professional distance involved in using a third party consultant was appropriate to determine and assist with the process.

The motion carried by the following vote:

AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Williamson NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Mayor Williamson asked to defer the remainder of the item to a future meeting.

A motion was introduced by Mayor Williamson, and seconded by Councilmember Haffa, to table the remainder of Item 12 (reconsideration, labor unions, and ex parte), Item 11, and the remaining closed session items.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 3., Item Page 8, Packet Page 16 City Council Minutes August 15, 2023
9 Public comment regarding the proposed tabling was received from Tom Rowley, who spoke against adding housing at Tarpey Flats near his neighborhood; Jean Rasch, who added thoughts about the Mayor not being sufficient to do board and commission interviews; Eloise Shim, who agreed with the tabling, stating twelve topics was too many too digest; and Esther Malkin, who stated public comment had not been taken regarding governance topics.

In response to public comment provided regarding tabling, Mayor Williamson noted that public comment had been received on the governance topics.

The motion passed by the following vote:

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

COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Smith noted that his birthday was on this day and said his mother's birthday would have been tomorrow and said this was always special in their family.

Councilmember Haffa said he met recently with leaders of the City's firefighters, who shared a concern about fire engines not being sufficient or fit for service. He said that a member of the Casanova Oak Knolls neighborhood community had expressed a desire to reopen the community center, citing equity.

CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Uslar said that a special closed session would be held on August 30 to hear a progress report about the exclusive negotiating agreement ("ENA") with MidPen Housing.

ADJOURNMENT
The Council adjourned at 9;56 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Tyller Williamson
City Clerk Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 3., Item Page 9, Packet Page 17 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Clementine Bonner Klein, City Clerk
SUBJECT: 1st Reading by Title Only - Ordinance Updating Provisions, Processes, and Procedures relating to the City’s Boards, Commissions, and Committees (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council waive full reading, and pass by title only, an ordinance to update Provisions, Processes, and Procedures relating to the City's Boards, Committees, and Commissions (“Council-appointed bodies”).

VALUE DRIVERS:

Foster a local government that is transparent and collaborative; and solicits, welcomes and appreciates input from all.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

It is appropriate to review and update the Monterey City Code periodically for consistency with current laws, administrative needs, and best practices.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The cost of training for Council-appointed bodies are incurred by the City and the bodies’ respective departments. There should be no fiscal impact to any of the suggested modifications, except that changing the ethics training deadline for City filers to match that dictated by the California government code could potentially result in slight cost savings.

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.

Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 4.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 1, Packet Page 18 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The Council could decline to make the suggested amendments to the City Code or could modify the ordinance.

DISCUSSION:

Staff has conducted a review of Monterey City Code Chapter 2, Administration, and recommends a number of updates.

Established Facts and Requirements to be Codified

1. Qualification. Certain appeals boards are listed in the City Code with provisions not allowing City employees to serve, but this restriction has been applied equally to all Council-appointed bodies, and should be codified.

2. Anti-Harassment Trainings. The City has required “AB 1845” anti-harassment trainings of its members pursuant to State law, and this ordinance defines good cause for removal if a member is unwilling to complete the required training within 30 calendar days after the compliance deadline. Staff recommends adding these provisions to the City Code.

3. Local Ethics Trainings. The City has required “AB 1234” local ethics trainings of its members pursuant to State law, and this is codified in the current City Code. For the sake of consistency and compliance, staff recommends adding “teeth” to the ethics training requirement and matching it with the penalty for non-compliance with the antiharassment training requirement, i.e. if a member is unwilling to complete the required training within 30 calendar days after the compliance deadline this would constitute good cause for removal.

4. Certified Local Government Program. The City participates in the State of California’s Certified Local Government Program (“CLG”) for historic preservation commissions.

Certain provisions apply to historic preservation commissions pursuant to CLG guidelines (Attachment 2), including qualification requirements and required annual educational trainings, and are recommended for codification.

5. Determination of Special Eligibility Qualifications. Current City Code requires specific experience and training as special eligibility qualifications for the membership of the Building and Housing Appeals Board and Disabled Access Appeals Board, and when interested applicants apply, the City Clerk asks that the Building Official review the application materials and applicants’ statements of qualification and provide input on whether the experience and training requirements are met. Staff recommends codification of this delegation. The City Council ultimately makes the determination on whether a candidate meets the eligibility criteria.

It is recommended that the Council review the ordinance, waive full reading, and approve it to pass to a second reading.

CBK
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 2, Packet Page 19 Attachments: 1. Ordinance

2. CLG Requirements
c: All active members of Monterey Boards, Committees, and Commissions 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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 3, Packet Page 20 ORDINANCE NO. ____ C.S.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№07/19
UPDATING PROVISIONS, PROCESSES, AND PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE CITY’S

BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY DOES ORDAIN, as follows:

SECTION 1:

WHEREAS, the City’s boards, commissions, and committees provide a valuable service to the community through their volunteer work, which includes providing advice and guidance in their various spheres, receiving, and acting on the input of the public, and advising the City Council;
WHEREAS, from time to time it is appropriate to review and update the Monterey City Code for consistency with current laws, administrative needs, and best practices; WHEREAS, it would be beneficial and appropriate to clarify and update certain provisions, processes, and procedures relating to the City’s boards, commissions, and committees;
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.

NOW THEREFORE, the Monterey City Council declares as follows:

SECTION 2: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 3, Section 2-3.04 is hereby amended as follows:

The title is hereby amended to read: “Qualification, terms, vacancies, meetings, attendance, and removal.”
Section 2-3.04(a) through (f) are hereby reorganized as 2-3.04(b) through (g).

Section 2-3.04(a) and (h) are hereby added, in the appropriate alphabetical order with existing subsections reorganized above, to read as follows:

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 4, Packet Page 21 2 a. City employees are not eligible to serve as City commissioners, board members, or committee members.

h. Cause for removal of an appointed member pursuant to Charter section 4.5(b) (1) includes, but is not limited to, three consecutive absences from a regularly scheduled meeting and the failure to complete required trainings specified under Section 2-3.10.

SECTION 3: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 3, Section 2-3.09 is hereby amended as follows:

The title is hereby amended to read: “Compensation.”
Section 2-3.09(d) and (e) are hereby deleted.

SECTION 4: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 3, Section 2-3.10 is hereby added to read as follows:
“Statutorily Required Trainings.
“a. Each member shall receive ethics and sexual harassment prevention training and education as required by State law.
b. The City Clerk shall report a member’s noncompliance with required trainings within five working days after the compliance deadline to the Finance Department and the member’s identified staff liaison. During a period of noncompliance, all meeting attendance stipends and expense reimbursements shall cease. Meeting stipends and expense reimbursement shall resume when compliance is obtained, but the member shall not be paid for any service or expense undertaken during the period of noncompliance.

SECTION 5: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 7, Section 2-7.00 is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Historic Preservation Commission.
a. The Historic Preservation Commission shall be composed of seven members. b. Special Eligibility Requirement.

The membership of the Historic Preservation Commission shall reflect the membership requirements of the multijurisdictional Certified Local Government Program (CLG), as may be amended. The Community Development Director, or their designee, shall review whether the qualifications of a member or applicant meet the eligibility requirements and make a recommendation on eligibility to the City Council.”
SECTION 6: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 7, Section 2-7.01(e) is hereby added to read as follows:
“e. Perform the responsibilities required by the multijurisdictional Certified Local Government Program (CLG), as may be amended.”
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 5, Packet Page 22 SECTION 7: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 7, Section 2-7.02 is hereby added to read as follows:
“Attendance of members at conferences, hearings, etc.

Each member of the Historic Preservation Commission is required to meet the annual educational requirements of the multijurisdictional Certified Local Government Program (CLG), as may be amended, and the reasonable traveling expenses incidental to such attendance shall be charges upon the funds allocated to the Commission.” SECTION 8: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 10, Section 2-10.00(b)(1) is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Each member and the alternate of the Board shall be qualified by experience and training to pass on matters pertaining to building construction. Experience in residential or commercial construction projects, the building trades, code enforcement, or building inspection is preferred. The Building Official, or their designee, shall review whether the qualifications of a member, alternate, or applicant, meet the experience and training requirements and make a recommendation on eligibility to the City Council.” SECTION 9: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 10, Section 2-10.00(b)(2) is hereby deleted.

SECTION 10: Monterey City Code Chapter 2, Article 11, Section 2-11.00(b)(3) is hereby deleted.

SECTION 11: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 11, Section 2-11.00(b)(1) is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Three of the Board members shall be qualified by experience and training to pass on matters pertaining to building construction and/or State or Federal disabled access regulations. The Building Official, or their designee, shall review whether the qualifications of a member or applicant meet the experience and training requirements and make a recommendation on eligibility to the City Council.” SECTION 12: All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

SECTION 13: 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:

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 6, Packet Page 23 4 APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 7, Packet Page 24 Requirements
(Excerpt from Appendix G, Certified Local Government Application and Procedures, August 1999, pp 41-47.)
Local governments may be certified to participate in the CLG program by complying with the following requirements:

I Enforce appropriate state or local legislation for the designation and protection of historic properties:

A. State enabling legislation provides for local jurisdictions to enact appropriate historic preservation legislation. California Government Code Sections 65850, 25373, and 37361 enable city and county legislative bodies to provide for “the protection, enhancement; perpetuation, or use of places, sites, buildings, structures, works of art, and other objects having a special character or special historical or aesthetic interest or value.” B. Local governments must adopt local historic preservation ordinances with provisions to enforce the designation and protection of historic and archeological resources.

C. The local legislation shall be consistent with the intent and purpose of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470).

D. The CLG will adopt a historic preservation plan or a historic preservation element for the local jurisdiction's General Plan, as authorized by the California Government Code, prior to or upon applying for a CLG grant.

E. The CLG commission will participate in the environmental review of specific federally sponsored projects, such as community development programs involving HUD Block Grant funds unless it is determined by OHP that the necessary expertise is not available to the local government. The CLG will establish programmatic agreements with the state agreeing to ensure compliance with Section 106 provisions of the NHPA.

F. The CLG commission will participate in the environment review of local projects in accordance with the requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The commission may review and comment on permit actions affecting significant listed historic properties and other resources eligible for listing, in accordance with local ordinance requirements and with CEQA. Procedural guidelines should include standards for demolition stays, design review criteria, anti-neglect requirements, and appeal strategies.

II Establish an adequate and qualified historic preservation review commission by local law:

A. The commission shall include a minimum membership of five (5) individuals with all members having demonstrated interest, competence, or knowledge in historic preservation.

B. At least two (2) Commission members are encouraged to be appointed from among professionals in the disciplines of history, architecture, architectural ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 8, Packet Page 25 history, planning, pre-historic and historic archeology, folklore, cultural anthropology, curation, conservation, and landscape architecture or related disciplines, such as urban planning, American studies, American civilization, or cultural geography, to the extent that such professionals are available in the community. Commission membership may also include lay members who have demonstrated special interests, competence, experience, or knowledge in historic preservation.

C. A local government may be certified without the minimum number or types of disciplines established in state procedures if it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the state that it has made a reasonable effort to fill those positions, or that some alternative composition of the commission best meets the needs of the protection of historic properties in the local community.

D. Commission members shall be appointed by the chief elected local official, city council, or board of supervisors consistent with the provisions of the preservation ordinance. The appointing authority shall make interim appointments to fill unexpired terms in the event of vacancies occurring during the term of members of the commission. The appointing authority shall also act within sixty (60) days to fill a vacancy. Terms of office of the commission members shall be according to the local preservation ordinance.

E. The commission shall meet at least four times a year, with meetings held in a public place, advertised in advance, and open to the public, pursuant to the Ralph M. Brown Act (G.C. Section 54950 et seq.) for open meetings.

Written minutes of commission meetings shall be kept on file, available for public inspection, and submitted to the state as a part of the CLG Annual Report.

F. Each commission member is required to attend at least one informational or educational meeting, seminar, workshop, or conference per year that pertains directly to the work and functions of the commission and would be approvable by the state. The CLG Regional Workshops sponsored by the OHP are important sources of information. The annual State Historic Preservation Conference generally provides special sessions devoted to the issues, objectives, and responsibilities of commissions. Commissions may also bring in professionals to provide training on site.

G. An annual report of the activities of the commission shall be submitted to the state at the end of each calendar year. The reports shall include, but not be limited to, such information as narrative summary of accomplishments, summaries of new and corrected survey activities, number of properties designated under local ordinance in relation to inventory for community, summaries of National Register applications reviewed, summaries of historical contexts prepared, number of federal tax certifications reviewed, number of properties on which design review was held, number of properties on which environmental project reviews were conducted, property owners of Mills Act contracts approved, summarization of local preservation activities, list of local landmark designations, description of public education activities, lists of commission members and resumes, list of staff and resumes, detailed listing of commission and staff training received, commission attendance 2 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 9, Packet Page 26 records, summary of changes in preservation laws, summary of adoption or updates of historic preservation plan or historic preservation element of your community's General Plan, commission meeting minutes and agendas, and other pertinent activities performed by the commission.

III Maintain a system for the survey and inventory of historic properties:

The CLG shall be responsible for organizing, developing, and administering an inventory of cultural resources within the entire spatial jurisdiction of the CLG.

A. The commission shall develop procedures for conducting an inventory of culture resources. Survey activities shall be coordinated with and complementary to the state program to ensure that survey results produced by the CLG will be readily integrated into the statewide comprehensive historic preservation planning process.

1. The CLG shall be responsible for overseeing the compiling, recording, and updating of inventory information on cultural resources within its jurisdiction. The information shall be based on comprehensive surveys conducted in conformance with state survey standards and procedures.

Surveys completed prior to the certification of a local government may be re-evaluated in accordance with state standards and may be submitted for inclusion in the State database.

2. As part of any ongoing survey effort, procedural requirements must allow for periodic update of survey results as buildings gain maturity and as new areas are incorporated or annexed by the CLG.

3. The commission must adopt state guidelines for conducting its inventory of historic properties. State-approved inventory forms (DPR-523, A-L) and the OHP's Instructions For Recording Historical Resources shall be used to facilitate integration into the state electronic data system and for statewide comprehensive historic preservation planning purposes. Dimitri software is available for the DPR 523 forms.

4. Standards for the evaluation of properties must be consistent with the National Register of Historic Places criteria.

A. The commission shall establish internal procedures to facilitate the use of survey results in the planning process by the CLG officials and departments.

The commission shall submit survey results to the local government for adoption, then forward to OHP. Copies of the survey should be on deposit at the local planning department, building and safety office, public works department, and redevelopment agency. Libraries, colleges, and historical societies should also receive copies. OHP will make copies available for the appropriate “California Historical Resources Information System” regional center. See IV(A)(2) below for public access requirements.

IV Provide for adequate public participation in the local historic preservation program:

A The CLG shall provide opportunities for public participation in all responsibilities delegated to the CLG, in accordance with appropriate regulations, standards, and guidelines.
3 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 10, Packet Page 27

1. Public participation shall be fully encouraged at local commission meetings. Commission meetings shall be open to the public, with published agenda and minutes in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (G.C. Section 54950 et seq.) for open meetings. The published agenda shall be mailed in advance of meetings to individuals and citizen organizations interested in the commission’s activities.

2. Public participation shall be fully encouraged in the performance of the historic survey program at all levels of responsibility to identify and inventory significant cultural resources in the jurisdiction of the CLG. The public can serve as volunteers to assist in the survey effort. Survey results shall be of public record and on file at a public institution, except in the case of sensitive resources, e.g., archeological sites subject to vandalism.

3. Public participation shall be fully encouraged in the nomination process for the National Register of Historic Places program. The CLG shall invite comments from the general public regarding National Register nominations.

4. Public participation shall be fully encouraged in all public hearings on projects related to CEQA and Section 106 processes.

V Satisfactorily perform the responsibilities delegated to the CLG:

A. The CLG shall prepare a comprehensive local historic preservation plan which would identify preservation missions, goals, and priorities. The plan would also establish preservation strategies, programs, and time schedules.

B. The CLG will participate in the review and comment on historic preservation certification applications for tax incentives. The CLG and state may establish procedures for implementation of the investment tax credit program at the local level in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Preservation.

C. Each CLG must have a local historic preservation plan prior to or upon becoming a CLG before any additional grant applications will be considered.

The state shall monitor and evaluate the performance of the CLG for consistency with the identification, evaluation, and preservation priorities of the comprehensive state historic preservation planning process.

1. Annual Review of CLGs:

The State shall conduct an annual review of CLGs to assure that each government continues to meet the minimal requirements and is satisfactorily performing its responsibilities. As part of this review, the state shall examine the annual reports submitted by the CLGs, records of the administration of funds allocated from the HPF, and other documents as necessary. The CLG shall make these records available to the state.

A more thorough review and site visit to the Certified Local Government will occur at least once every three (3) years.

2. Procedures for Decertification:

If the state evaluation indicates that the CLG no longer meets the minimal requirements or that in any other way a CLG's performance is not 4 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 11, Packet Page 28 satisfactory, the state shall document that assessment and recommend to the local government steps to bring its performance up to a satisfactory level. The CLG shall have a period of not less than 30 nor more than 180 days to implement improvements; If the state determines that sufficient improvement has not occurred, the state shall decertify the local government, citing specific reasons for the decertification. Performance shall be deemed unsatisfactory if one or more of the following conditions exist or is applicable: a) the commission fails to perform its delegated responsibilities within established time periods; b) the CLG fails to coordinate its responsibilities with the state; c) the commission substantially fails to maintain consistency of its design review decisions with the Secretary's Standards for Historic Preservation; d) the CLG fails to maintain a qualified historic preservation review commission membership; e) the CLG fails to enforce the provisions of the local preservation ordinance; f) the CLG fails to enforce its CEQA and Section 106 responsibilities; g) the CLG fails to adequately survey historical resources in its jurisdiction; and h) the CLG fails to comply adequately with proper fiscal management of HPF grants in accordance with the National Register Programs Guideline, OMB Circular A-128, and 43 CFR 12.

3. Decertification Appeal:

If the state recommends decertification, the local government may appeal to the NPS. The NPS has 45 days to respond to the appeal.

4. Decertification Without Prejudice:

CLGs may petition the OHP to be decertified voluntarily and without prejudice.

5. Financial Assistance Close-out:

The state shall conduct financial assistance close-out procedures pursuant to the National Register Program Guideline when a local government is decertified.

VI The CLG shall assume certain responsibilities for reviewing and recommending properties within its jurisdiction to the National Register of Historic Places.

A. The SHPO shall have the sole responsibility of nominating National Register properties directly to the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary).

B. The CLG shall establish local procedures for the National Register nomination process consistent with the requirements in the NHPA, Section 101(c)(2).

1. Before a property within the jurisdiction of a CLG may be considered by the state to be nominated to the National Register, the state shall notify the owner, the applicable chief elected local official, and the local historic preservation commission. The commission, after reasonable opportunity for public comment, shall prepare a report as to whether or not such property, in its opinion, meets the criteria of the National Register. Within sixty (60) days of notice from the state, the chief elected local official shall transmit the report of the commission and his/her recommendation to the state. After receipt of such report and recommendation, or if no such report and recommendation are received within sixty (60) days, the state 5 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 12, Packet Page 29 shall process the National Register nomination. The state may expedite such process with the concurrence of the CLG.

2. If both the commission and the chief elected local official recommend that a property not be nominated to the National Register, the state shall take no further action, unless within thirty (30) days of the receipt of such recommendation by the state, an appeal is filed with the state. If such an appeal is filed, the state shall follow the procedure for making a nomination pursuant to Section 101(a). Any report and recommendations made under this section shall be included with any nomination submitted by the state to the Secretary.

VII By mutual written agreement with the local governing body, the state may delegate additional responsibilities to the CLG. Local governments may be certified to participate in specific program activities under Programmatic Agreements.

A. The CLG may develop educational programs promoting historic preservation at the local level such as, but not limited to, sponsorship of preservation workshops, publication of preservation information, organizing preservation fairs, conducting walking tours, preparing preservation curricula for schools, etc.

B. Commission members may act in an advisory capacity to other officials and departments within the local government and act as a liaison on behalf of the CLG to individuals and organizations concerned with historic preservation issues at the local level.

C. The CLG may participate in the Mills Act program or other economic incentive programs to provide property-tax relief for owners of historic properties.

D. The CLG may participate in the Marks Historical Rehabilitation Act for issuance of tax-exempt industrial development bonds, providing that the commission shall serve as a part of the required citizen advisory board.

E. The CLG may assume certain responsibilities of recommending National Register of Historic Places properties, identified in the CLG jurisdiction, directly to the State Historical Resources Commission.

F. By mutual written agreement with the local governing body, the state may delegate additional responsibilities to the CLG.
6 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 4., Item Page 13, Packet Page 30 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Submitted by: Rex Van Slyke, Fleet Manager
SUBJECT: Approve the Purchase of One (1) Backhoe in the Amount of $210,764.08 from Papé Machinery, Inc. (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That City Council adopt a resolution approving the purchase of a backhoe from Papé Machinery, Inc. in the amount of $210,764.08.

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 Council’s strategic priority to carefully manage City revenues and expenditures which support the delivery of City services.

This action is also consistent with policy requiring Council approval of purchases exceeding $75,000.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Funding for this purchase is available in the Vehicle Replacement Fund 705-110-1130-3153- 4503. The purchase was approved as part of the FY24 Budget in the amount of $215,000. The backhoe will be purchased from Papé Machinery, Inc. utilizing a cooperative purchasing agreement (“Piggyback”) through the National Joint Powers Alliance John Deere Company Cooperative Procurement Bid No. 011723-JDC (Monterey City Code section 28-25(c)(d)) for $210,764.08 including tax, delivery, and extended warranty. The Finance Department approved this piggyback purchase July 27, 2023.

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 Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 5.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 5., Item Page 1, Packet Page 31 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 requested vehicle at this time. This action is not recommended as the current backhoe (#9005) is 23 years old. Typically, these vehicles have a 20-year lifecycle. The backhoe is utilized by the Streets and Utilities Division as well as the Harbor Division. Electric Vehicle (EV) options were considered, but there are currently no EV alternatives available in the heavy equipment market. The best-case scenario indicates there will not be a viable EV option for at least three to five years. Staff needs to maintain safe, reliable equipment to perform City services and, in this case, remain in compliance with the California Air Resources Board, as the current backhoe is considered a heavy polluter requiring replacement.

DISCUSSION:

Our current backhoe has reached the point where it is no longer a reliable front-line piece of equipment. This machine is needed day-to-day for both routine duties and emergency duties that arise within the scope of the Street and Utilities Division’s operations. A replacement backhoe would allow the Street and Utilities Division staff to efficiently address the many tasks currently performed without the fear of an equipment break down mid-project. Further, the Street and Utilities Division is responsible for responding to flooding and sewer spill events.

Staff needs to be able to focus solely on addressing the incident at hand without concern that the equipment will fail.

Fleet
ID
Model
Year
Type Hours
(Engine)
3 Yr.

Total
Fuel
3 Yr.

Maintenance
Costs
Total
Maintenance
Cost
9005 2000 John Deere
410 E backhoe
2,806 $806.74 $38,307.62 $256,868.33
By utilizing the John Deere Company National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA) Cooperative Procurement Bid No. 011723-JDC (Monterey City Code section 28-25(c)(d)), the City will receive a 41% discount off of the MSRP, which results in a savings of approximately $114,823 for the purchase of a new John Deere Backhoe. The Finance Department approved this piggyback on July 27, 2023. The current price quote has an expiration date of September 29, 2023, whereas pricing increases are expected to follow.

Therefore, staff recommends that Council adopt a resolution approving the purchase of one (1) backhoe from Papé Machinery, Inc in the amount of $210,764.08.

AR/rvs/dt
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Papé Machinery Quote
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 5., Item Page 2, Packet Page 32 e: Papé Machinery of Gilroy, CA
Jeff Glass, Streets and Utilities Operations Manager
Brian Nelson, Harbormaster
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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 5., Item Page 3, Packet Page 33 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/22
APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF ONE (1) BACKHOE
IN THE AMOUNT OF $210,764.08 FROM PAPÉ MACHINERY, INC.

WHEREAS, the City of Monterey wishes to purchase one (1) backhoe to replace the current John Deere Backhoe (#9005), which is currently 23 years old, and incurring increased out-of-service time due to mechanical breakdowns. The City would like to replace the backhoe with a more dependable, stronger, and newer vehicle.

WHEREAS, the backhoe will be purchased utilizing a cooperative purchasing agreement (“Piggyback”) through the National Joint Powers Alliance John Deere Company Cooperative Procurement Bid No. 011723-JDC;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey evaluated the procurement process utilized by National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA) and determined it to be an acceptable “piggyback” purchasing option allowing the City to utilize multi-agency contract pricing. This purchasing process is authorized under Monterey City Code section 28-15(c)(d) WHEREAS, the Finance Department approved the “piggyback” request on July 27, 2023;
WHEREAS, sufficient funds are available in the Vehicle Replacement Fund Account (705-110-1130-3153-4503) for this purchase; 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 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 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.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 5., Item Page 4, Packet Page 34 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby approves the purchase of a backhoe from Papé Machinery, Inc. in the amount of $210,764.08 and the City Manager, or designee, may sign any documents required for the purchase transaction.

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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 5., Item Page 5, Packet Page 35 Salesperson : X ______________ Accepted By : X ______________ Confidential
Quote Summary
Prepared For:

CITY OF MONTEREY FLEET SERVICES
25 RYAN RANCH RD
MONTEREY, CA 93940
Prepared By:

TONY HUNHOFF
Pape Machinery, Inc.
415 E 9th Street
Gilroy, CA 95020
Phone: 408-848-4150
[email protected]
This sale is subject to Papé’s Terms and Conditions of Sale effective on the date hereof, which are incorporated in full by this reference. The Terms and Conditions of Sale are available at www. pape.com/terms , and will also be sent by mail or e-mail to the purchaser upon request.

Quote Id: 28203020
10 February 2023
27 July 2023
Created On:

Last Modified On:

Expiration Date: 29 September 2023
Equipment Summary Selling Price Qty Extended
New 2023 John Deere 410 P-Tier
Backhoe Loader
$ 192,912.66 X 1 = $ 192,912.66
Equipment Total $ 192,912.66
Quote Summary
Equipment Total $ 192,912.66
CA Tire Fee $ 7.00
SubTotal $ 192,919.66
Sales Tax - (9.25%) $ 17,844.42
Total $ 210,764.08
Down Payment (0.00)
Rental Applied (0.00)
Balance Due $ 210,764.08
FDD - January/February 2024
Date:_________
Sourcewell Contract # 011723 - JDC
City of Monterey - Sourcewell ID# 18219
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 5., Item Page 6, Packet Page 36 Selling Equipment
Quote Id: 28203020 Customer: CITY OF MONTEREY FLEET SERVICES Confidential
New 2023 John Deere 410 P-Tier Backhoe Loader
Hours:

Stock Number:

Code Description Qty
17E0T 410 P-tier Backhoe Loader 1
Standard Options - Per Unit
183E JDLink™ 1
0202 United States 1
0259 English 1
0351 Translated Text Labels 1
1003 Cab 1
3009 Autoshift Transmission - Mechanical
Front Wheel Drive (MFWD) with
Limited Slip Differential
1 4006 John Deere 4.5L - FT4/Stage IV 1
5250 Galaxy 21L-24 12PR Rear &

12.5/80-18 10PR Front
1 6154 Dual Batteries with Disconnect, Jump
Post, and Engine Block Heater
1 6576 1000 lb. (454 kg.) Front Counterweight 1
6752 Extendible Dipperstick 1
7002 Auxiliary Hydraulics with One & Two
Way Flow (Hammer & Thumb/Swinger)
1 7028 Pilot Controls, Two Lever, with Pattern
Selection
1 7040 Three-Function Loader Hydraulics,
Single Lever
1 7714 Rear Hydraulic Coupler for Pin-on
Buckets - 42 in. Thumb Ready
1 7810 24 in. (611 mm.) Heavy-Duty Bucket,

8.1 cu. ft. (0.23 cu. m.)
1 7861 Multi-Purpose Bucket 1
8027 Thumb - 42 in. 4 Tine 1
8062 Backhoe Boom Protection Plate 1
8075 Diagnostic Oil Sampling Ports 1
8096 Premium Mirror Option - Exterior Rear
View Mirrors (2) and Front View Mirror
(1)
1 8109 Sun Visor 1
8115 MFWD Driveshaft Guard 1
8126 Heavy-Duty Grille Frame 1
8142 LED Light Package 1
$165,233.66
List Price - $280,057.05
Sourcewell Discount = 41%
Discount = $114,823.39
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 5., Item Page 7, Packet Page 37 Selling Equipment
Quote Id: 28203020 Customer: CITY OF MONTEREY FLEET SERVICES Confidential
8146 Left Side Console Storage with Cup
Holders
1 8165 Auto Ride Control 1
8183 Radio, Bosch Premium Package 1
8207 Seat, Cloth Air-Suspension 1
8213 Chrome Exhaust Extension 1
8226 Strobe Light with Magnetic Mount 1
Dealer Attachments
AT437338 12 in (309 mm) Heavy Duty Bucket, 3.1
cu. ft. (0.09 cu. m.)
1 AT436333 36 in (919 mm) Heavy Duty Bucket,

10.9 cu. ft. (0.31 cu. m.)
1 Bucket Pin Sets (2) 1
Other Charges
Sourcewell ID# 1
Freight 1
Extended Warranty - 60/2000 Comp 1
Setup 1
Followup 1
Deliver Charge 1
$5,978.00
$21,701.00
Factory Freight
Comprehensive Extended Warranty
Pre-Delivery, Fuel, DEF & Manuals
Orientation and Walk Around
Local Delivery
#18219
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 5., Item Page 8, Packet Page 38 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Brette Neal, Human Resources Director
Prepared By: Gina Russo, Assistant Human Resources Director SUBJECT: Reclassify Maintenance Technician to Administrative Services Technician, Approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Monterey Executive Management Employees’ Association, and Update the Salary Schedule (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:

1. Amend Resolution 23-067, the 2023-24 Position Control List, by reclassifying the Maintenance Technician position to an Administrative Services Technician;

2. Approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Monterey Executive Management Employees’ Association (“MEMEA”) for the period of July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024; and

3. Amend and restate Resolution 23-068, the FY 23/24 Salary Schedule to add the salary for the Administrative Services Technician, and to increase the salaries of the Police Chief and the Fire Chief.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Maintenance Technician Reclassification to Administrative Services Technician The City periodically reviews job descriptions to determine if an incumbent is properly classified and if the job description is reflective of the duties being performed.

MEMEA MOU
The Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) of 1968 established collective bargaining for California’s municipal, county and local special district employers and employees. Under MMBA, the governing body of a public agency is required to meet and confer over wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment. Approval of an agreement concluding labor negotiations with represented employees in a closed session must be reported after the agreement is final and has been accepted or ratified by the other party. (Government Code sections 54957.1(a)(6) and 3505.1.) Once the City Council votes to accept an MOU, it becomes a binding agreement.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Maintenance Technician Reclassification to Administrative Services Technician There are no fiscal implications for the Maintenance Technician Reclassification as the proposed recommendation is cost-neutral.

Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 6.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 1, Packet Page 39

MEMEA MOU
The increased annualized ongoing salary and benefits cost for the MEMEA agreement is $91,500 in year one and $115,368 in year two of the contract term. The annualized cost will be allocated to and absorbed by the specific funds staff are assigned to for both the FY 22/23 and FY 23/24 budgets.

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:

Maintenance Technician Reclassification to Administrative Services Technician One alternative is to remain status quo. This alternative is not recommended as it is important to continually review, and if appropriate, revise job specifications to reflect City needs and the work performed by our employees.

MEMEA MOU
No alternatives to reaching a successor agreement for MEMEA were considered. The MEMEA members and City of Monterey staff contributed to the development of the MOU as presented.

DISCUSSION:

Maintenance Technician Reclassification to Administrative Services Technician Since 2018, it has been difficult to retain employees in the Maintenance Technician position.

The Maintenance Technician classification was originally created to do administrative work, as well as maintenance work. The position has evolved to only perform administrative work. The job title has made it difficult to recruit for this position because it deceptively attracts candidates with maintenance and construction backgrounds, rather than an administrative one. Staff recommends changing the title to Administrative Services Technician and updating the job description. Staff recommends no changes to the pay grade.

MEMEA MOU
MEMEA ratified a Tentative Agreement (TA) with the City of Monterey which was considered and approved by City Council in closed session on June 29, 2022. The TA provided for a twoyear agreement with salary increases of four percent (4%) in FY 22/23 and four percent (4%) in FY 23/24 and for the health insurance plan year January 1, 2024 only, the City shall increase its contributions for health insurance, not to exceed 9% to the new PERS Gold premiums. These provisions are applicable to all members of MEMEA. In addition, the TA included language for a reopener to discuss compaction concerns related to other increase and incentives provided to Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 2, Packet Page 40 other represented public safety positions. Negotiators for the City and MEMEA representatives met and conferred in good faith on the issue of compaction for public safety positions. City Council provided direction to negotiators in closed session on August 1, 2023. On August 2, 2023, the City of Monterey and MEMEA tentatively agreed to salary increases of one percent (1%) for the Fire Chief effective July 1, 2023, and seven and a half percent (7.5%) for the Police Chief effective July 1, 2023. The full MOU is presented for formal approval action.

BN/gr
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Res. Exhibit A – Salary Schedule

3. Administrative Services Technician Class Specification

4. MEMEA MOU 7/1/2022 – 6/30/2024
e: Christine Davi, City Attorney
Rafaela King, Finance 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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 3, Packet Page 41 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

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

RECLASSIFYING MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN TO ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES

TECHNICIAN , APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) FOR THE MONTEREY EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION, AND UPDATING

THE SALARY SCHEDULE
WHEREAS, the City would be better served by amending Resolution 23-067, the Position Control List, by reclassifying the Maintenance Technician classification to a new Administrative Services Technician classification in the Public Works Department and Parks and Recreation Department;
WHEREAS, the Meyers-Milias Brown Act requires the City to meet and confer over wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment; WHEREAS, the City Council approved a Tentative Agreement with the Monterey Executive Management Employees’ Association on June 29, 2022 in closed session; WHEREAS, approval of an agreement concluding labor negotiations with represented employees in a closed session must be reported after the agreement is final and has been accepted or ratified by the other party. (Government Code sections 54957.1(a)(6) and 3505.1.) Once the City Council votes to accept the MOU, it becomes a binding agreement; WHEREAS, MEMEA approved the Tentative Agreement on June 29, 2022; WHEREAS, the parties jointly prepared a written MOU to memorialize the Tentative Agreement. The terms of the MOU will become binding as an enforceable contract once the City Council votes to accept the MOU;
WHEREAS, the Monterey Executive Management Employees’ Association (“MEMEA”) MOU provides for a two-year agreement with salary increases of four percent (4%) in FY 22/23 and four percent (4%) in FY 23/24. In addition, for the health insurance plan year January 1, 2024 only, the City shall increase its contributions for health insurance, not to exceed 9% to the new PERS Gold premiums; and
WHEREAS, the Tentative Agreement included language for a reopener for compaction concerns related to other increase and incentives provided to other represented public safety positions; and
WHEREAS, City Council provided direction to negotiators in closed session on August 1, 2023 and the City of Monterey and MEMEA tentatively agreed on August 2, 2023 for a one percent (1%) salary increase for the Fire Chief and a seven and a half percent (7.5%) salary increase for the Police Chief, effective July 1, 2023;
WHEREAS, the City would be better served by amending and restating Resolution 23- 068, the adopted Full-time Salary Schedule, to include the newly created Administrative Services Technician classification and the increased salaries for the Police Chief and Fire Chief; Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 4, Packet Page 42 2 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 the Administrative Services Technician Class Specification is hereby approved, and that Resolution 23-067 contained in the City of Monterey Budget for fiscal year 2023/2024 is hereby amended as follows:

Department Adopted Amended
Public Works Department
Building Maintenance (101-3152)
Maintenance Technician .25 0
Administrative Services Specialist 0 .25
Presidio Maintenance (650-3152)
Maintenance Technician .75 0
Administrative Services Specialist 0 .75
Parks and Recreation Department
Parks Maintenance (101-5210)
Maintenance Technician .75 0
Administrative Services Specialist 0 .75
Vets Park / Urban Forestry (101-5220/5230)
Maintenance Technician .25 0
Administrative Services Specialist 0 .25

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby approves the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the Monterey Executive Management Employees’ Association for the period of July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 5, Packet Page 43 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it amends and restates Resolution 23-068, the updated FY 23-24 Full-Time Salary Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated by reference as Exhibit A.

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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 6, Packet Page 44 City of Monterey
Full-Time Salary Schedule and
Regular Part-Time Hourly Schedule
FY 23/24
Effective: 07-01-23 to 06-30-24

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 7, Packet Page 45 12/13/2022 CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (COUNC) Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 8101 COUNCIL MEMBER ft counc Step: 1301 215.00 5,160.00 301 8101 MAYOR ft counc Step: 1300 338.00 8,112.00 300
oll General Info\CRYSTAL REPORTS\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 1 of 1

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 8, Packet Page 46 8/22/2023 CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (MEMEA) Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 1122 ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER ft exec Step: 5010 10,005.00 240,120.00 010 9201 CITY ATTORNEY pt exec Step: 5002 10,650.00 255,600.00 002 1101 CITY MANAGER ft exec Step: 5001 11,329.00 271,896.00 001 1110 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ft exec Step: 5006 8,427.00 202,248.00 006 1128 DIR OF INFO RES/CITY CLERK ft exec Step: 5283 7,027.00 168,648.00 283 1106 FINANCE DIRECTOR ft exec Step: 5004 8,427.00 202,248.00 004 9200 FIRE CHIEF pt exec Step: 5 10,005.00 240,120.00 005 1112 HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR ft exec Step: 5277 8,427.00 202,248.00 277 1105 LIBRARY DIRECTOR ft exec Step: 5003 8,427.00 202,248.00 003 1292 PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR ft exec Step: 5014 8,427.00 202,248.00 014 1111 POLICE CHIEF ft exec Step: 5007 10,649.00 255,576.00 007 1116 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ft exec Step: 5009 9,160.00 219,840.00 009 General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 1 of 1

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 9, Packet Page 47 8/16/2023 CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (MEA) Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 1203 ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST ft mea Step: 1015 3,780.00 90,720.00 015 1203 ft mea Step: 2015 3,971.00 95,304.00
1203 ft mea Step: 3015 4,168.00 100,032.00
1203 ft mea Step: 4015 4,377.00 105,048.00
1203 ft mea Step: 5015 4,596.00 110,304.00
1207 ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY ft mea Step: 1200 7,150.00 171,600.00 200 1207 ft mea Step: 2200 7,527.00 180,648.00
1207 ft mea Step: 3200 7,923.00 190,152.00
1207 ft mea Step: 4200 8,340.00 200,160.00
1207 ft mea Step: 5200 8,779.00 210,696.00
1264 ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR ft mea Step: 1263 5,931.00 142,344.00 263 1264 ft mea Step: 2263 6,228.00 149,472.00
1264 ft mea Step: 3263 6,540.00 156,960.00
1264 ft mea Step: 4263 6,867.00 164,808.00
1264 ft mea Step: 5263 7,211.00 173,064.00
1298 ASSISTANT HR DIRECTOR ft mea Step: 1370 5,931.00 142,344.00 370 1298 ft mea Step: 2370 6,228.00 149,472.00
1298 ft mea Step: 3370 6,540.00 156,960.00
1298 ft mea Step: 4370 6,867.00 164,808.00
1298 ft mea Step: 5370 7,211.00 173,064.00
1208 ASSOCIATE CIVIL ENGINEER ft mea Step: 1018 4,590.00 110,160.00 018 1208 ft mea Step: 2018 4,818.00 115,632.00
1208 ft mea Step: 3018 5,060.00 121,440.00
1208 ft mea Step: 4018 5,311.00 127,464.00
1208 ft mea Step: 5018 5,577.00 133,848.00
ASST DIR OF INFO RESOURCES mea Step: 1 5,931.00 142,344.00 357 mea Step: 2 6,228.00 149,472.00
mea Step: 3 6,540.00 156,960.00
mea Step: 4 6,867.00 164,808.00
mea Step: 5 7,211.00 173,064.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 1 of 8

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 10, Packet Page 48 8/16/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 1300 CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER ft mea Step: 1011 6,641.00 159,384.00 011 1300 ft mea Step: 2011 6,973.00 167,352.00
1300 ft mea Step: 3011 7,322.00 175,728.00
1300 ft mea Step: 4011 7,688.00 184,512.00
1300 ft mea Step: 5011 8,072.00 193,728.00
1270 CHIEF OF INSPCT SRVC/BLDG OFF. ft mea Step: 1311 6,326.00 151,824.00 311 1270 ft mea Step: 2311 6,639.00 159,336.00
1270 ft mea Step: 3311 6,976.00 167,424.00
1270 ft mea Step: 4311 7,323.00 175,752.00
1270 ft mea Step: 5311 7,688.00 184,512.00
1221 CITY CLERK ft mea Step: 1031 4,891.00 117,384.00 031 1221 ft mea Step: 2031 5,196.00 124,704.00
1221 ft mea Step: 3031 5,503.00 132,072.00
1221 ft mea Step: 4031 5,807.00 139,368.00
1221 ft mea Step: 5031 6,113.00 146,712.00
1254 CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER ft mea Step: 1050 5,931.00 142,344.00 050 1254 ft mea Step: 2050 6,228.00 149,472.00
1254 ft mea Step: 3050 6,540.00 156,960.00
1254 ft mea Step: 4050 6,867.00 164,808.00
1254 ft mea Step: 5050 7,211.00 173,064.00
1299 COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER ft mea Step: 1048 4,294.00 103,056.00 048 1299 ft mea Step: 2048 4,509.00 108,216.00
1299 ft mea Step: 3048 4,734.00 113,616.00
1299 ft mea Step: 4048 4,971.00 119,304.00
1299 ft mea Step: 5048 5,220.00 125,280.00
1266 CONFERENCE CENTER GENERAL MGR ft mea Step: 1303 5,603.00 134,472.00 303 1266 ft mea Step: 2303 5,884.00 141,216.00
1266 ft mea Step: 3303 6,177.00 148,248.00
1266 ft mea Step: 4303 6,488.00 155,712.00
1266 ft mea Step: 5303 6,809.00 163,416.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 2 of 8

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (MEA)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 11, Packet Page 49 8/16/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 1287 CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGER ft mea Step: 1345 4,591.00 110,184.00 345 1287 ft mea Step: 2345 4,825.00 115,800.00
1287 ft mea Step: 3345 5,063.00 121,512.00
1287 ft mea Step: 4345 5,311.00 127,464.00
1287 ft mea Step: 5345 5,577.00 133,848.00
1121 DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY II ft mea Step: 1037 4,750.00 114,000.00 037 1121 ft mea Step: 2037 4,987.00 119,688.00
1121 ft mea Step: 3037 5,237.00 125,688.00
1121 ft mea Step: 4037 5,497.00 131,928.00
1121 ft mea Step: 5037 5,770.00 138,480.00
1294 DEPUTY PW DIRECTOR/ADMIN ft mea Step: 1017 5,931.00 142,344.00 017 1294 ft mea Step: 2017 6,228.00 149,472.00
1294 ft mea Step: 3017 6,540.00 156,960.00
1294 ft mea Step: 4017 6,867.00 164,808.00
1294 ft mea Step: 5017 7,211.00 173,064.00
1247 DEPUTY PW DIRECTOR/CITY ENGNR ft mea Step: 1046 6,290.00 150,960.00 046 1247 ft mea Step: 2046 6,605.00 158,520.00
1247 ft mea Step: 3046 6,935.00 166,440.00
1247 ft mea Step: 4046 7,279.00 174,696.00
1247 ft mea Step: 5046 7,645.00 183,480.00
1286 ENGINEERING PROJECTS MANAGER ft mea Step: 1344 4,590.00 110,160.00 344 1286 ft mea Step: 2344 4,818.00 115,632.00
1286 ft mea Step: 3344 5,060.00 121,440.00
1286 ft mea Step: 4344 5,311.00 127,464.00
1286 ft mea Step: 5344 5,577.00 133,848.00
4108 ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS MGR. ft mea Step: 1334 4,476.00 107,424.00 334 4108 ft mea Step: 2334 4,702.00 112,848.00
4108 ft mea Step: 3334 4,931.00 118,344.00
4108 ft mea Step: 4334 5,182.00 124,368.00
4108 ft mea Step: 5334 5,443.00 130,632.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 3 of 8

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (MEA)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 12, Packet Page 50 8/16/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 1252 FINANCE ANALYST ft mea Step: 1294 3,780.00 90,720.00 294 1252 ft mea Step: 2294 3,971.00 95,304.00
1252 ft mea Step: 3294 4,167.00 100,008.00
1252 ft mea Step: 4294 4,377.00 105,048.00
1252 ft mea Step: 5294 4,596.00 110,304.00
1277 FINANCE MANAGER ft mea Step: 1051 5,389.00 129,336.00 051 1277 ft mea Step: 2051 5,660.00 135,840.00
1277 ft mea Step: 3051 5,943.00 142,632.00
1277 ft mea Step: 4051 6,241.00 149,784.00
1277 ft mea Step: 5051 6,546.00 157,104.00
6307 FLEET MANAGER ft mea Step: 1360 4,292.00 103,008.00 360 6307 ft mea Step: 2360 4,507.00 108,168.00
6307 ft mea Step: 3360 4,732.00 113,568.00
6307 ft mea Step: 4360 4,971.00 119,304.00
6307 ft mea Step: 5360 5,220.00 125,280.00
1272 GENERAL SRVC SUPERINTENDENT ft mea Step: 1313 5,751.00 138,024.00 313 1272 ft mea Step: 2313 6,034.00 144,816.00
1272 ft mea Step: 3313 6,340.00 152,160.00
1272 ft mea Step: 4313 6,656.00 159,744.00
1272 ft mea Step: 5313 6,988.00 167,712.00
3602 GEO INFO SYS (GIS) COORDINATOR ft mea Step: 1248 4,141.00 99,384.00 248 3602 ft mea Step: 2248 4,348.00 104,352.00
3602 ft mea Step: 3248 4,566.00 109,584.00
3602 ft mea Step: 4248 4,793.00 115,032.00
3602 ft mea Step: 5248 5,034.00 120,816.00
1210 HARBORMASTER ft mea Step: 1020 5,389.00 129,336.00 020 1210 ft mea Step: 2020 5,660.00 135,840.00
1210 ft mea Step: 3020 5,943.00 142,632.00
1210 ft mea Step: 4020 6,241.00 149,784.00
1210 ft mea Step: 5020 6,546.00 157,104.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 4 of 8

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (MEA)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 13, Packet Page 51 8/16/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 1289 HOUSING MANAGER ft mea Step: 1368 4,292.00 103,008.00 368 1289 ft mea Step: 2368 4,507.00 108,168.00
1289 ft mea Step: 3368 4,732.00 113,568.00
1289 ft mea Step: 4368 4,971.00 119,304.00
1289 ft mea Step: 5368 5,220.00 125,280.00
1250 HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST ft mea Step: 1267 3,780.00 90,720.00 267 1250 ft mea Step: 2267 3,971.00 95,304.00
1250 ft mea Step: 3267 4,168.00 100,032.00
1250 ft mea Step: 4267 4,377.00 105,048.00
1250 ft mea Step: 5267 4,596.00 110,304.00
IT NETWORK ENGINEER I mea Step: 1 4,775.00 114,600.00 380 mea Step: 2 5,012.00 120,288.00
mea Step: 3 5,259.00 126,216.00
mea Step: 4 5,526.00 132,624.00
mea Step: 5 5,796.00 139,104.00
1255 LIBRARY MANAGER ft mea Step: 1028 4,557.00 109,368.00 028 1255 ft mea Step: 2028 4,784.00 114,816.00
1255 ft mea Step: 3028 5,020.00 120,480.00
1255 ft mea Step: 4028 5,275.00 126,600.00
1255 ft mea Step: 5028 5,535.00 132,840.00
1249 MANAGEMENT ANALYST I ft mea Step: 1187 3,781.00 90,744.00 187 1249 ft mea Step: 2187 3,970.00 95,280.00
1249 ft mea Step: 3187 4,168.00 100,032.00
1249 ft mea Step: 4187 4,377.00 105,048.00
1249 ft mea Step: 5187 4,596.00 110,304.00
MANAGEMENT ANALYST II mea Step: 1 4,587.00 110,088.00 047 mea Step: 2 4,817.00 115,608.00
mea Step: 3 5,058.00 121,392.00
mea Step: 4 5,311.00 127,464.00
mea Step: 5 5,577.00 133,848.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 5 of 8

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (MEA)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 14, Packet Page 52 8/16/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 1284 NETWORK ENGINEER ft mea Step: 1338 4,590.00 110,160.00 338 1284 ft mea Step: 2338 4,818.00 115,632.00
1284 ft mea Step: 3338 5,060.00 121,440.00
1284 ft mea Step: 4338 5,311.00 127,464.00
1284 ft mea Step: 5338 5,577.00 133,848.00
1283 PARK OPERATIONS MANAGER ft mea Step: 1337 4,292.00 103,008.00 337 1283 ft mea Step: 2337 4,507.00 108,168.00
1283 ft mea Step: 3337 4,732.00 113,568.00
1283 ft mea Step: 4337 4,971.00 119,304.00
1283 ft mea Step: 5337 5,220.00 125,280.00
1212 PARKING SUPERINTENDENT ft mea Step: 1022 5,389.00 129,336.00 022 1212 ft mea Step: 2022 5,660.00 135,840.00
1212 ft mea Step: 3022 5,943.00 142,632.00
1212 ft mea Step: 4022 6,241.00 149,784.00
1212 ft mea Step: 5022 6,546.00 157,104.00
1215 PLANNING MANAGER ft mea Step: 1025 5,931.00 142,344.00 025 1215 ft mea Step: 2025 6,228.00 149,472.00
1215 ft mea Step: 3025 6,540.00 156,960.00
1215 ft mea Step: 4025 6,867.00 164,808.00
1215 ft mea Step: 5025 7,211.00 173,064.00
1267 PRINCIPAL PLANNER ft mea Step: 1307 4,814.00 115,536.00 307 1267 ft mea Step: 2307 5,057.00 121,368.00
1267 ft mea Step: 3307 5,307.00 127,368.00
1267 ft mea Step: 4307 5,574.00 133,776.00
1267 ft mea Step: 5307 5,852.00 140,448.00
1259 PROPERTY MANAGER ft mea Step: 1030 4,891.00 117,384.00 030 1259 ft mea Step: 2030 5,196.00 124,704.00
1259 ft mea Step: 3030 5,503.00 132,072.00
1259 ft mea Step: 4030 5,807.00 139,368.00
1259 ft mea Step: 5030 6,113.00 146,712.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 6 of 8

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (MEA)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 15, Packet Page 53 8/16/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 1234 PW ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES MGR pt mea Step: 1036 5,389.00 129,336.00 036 1234 pt mea Step: 2036 5,660.00 135,840.00
1234 pt mea Step: 3036 5,943.00 142,632.00
1234 pt mea Step: 4036 6,241.00 149,784.00
1234 pt mea Step: 5036 6,546.00 157,104.00
1230 RECREATION MANAGER ft mea Step: 1291 5,389.00 129,336.00 291 1230 ft mea Step: 2291 5,660.00 135,840.00
1230 ft mea Step: 3291 5,943.00 142,632.00
1230 ft mea Step: 4291 6,241.00 149,784.00
1230 ft mea Step: 5291 6,546.00 157,104.00
9205 RISK MANAGER pt mea Step: 1052 4,320.00 103,680.00 052 9205 pt mea Step: 2052 4,534.00 108,816.00
9205 pt mea Step: 3052 4,758.00 114,192.00
9205 pt mea Step: 4052 4,996.00 119,904.00
9205 pt mea Step: 5052 5,246.00 125,904.00
1263 SENIOR ACCOUNTANT ft mea Step: 1262 4,320.00 103,680.00 262 1263 ft mea Step: 2262 4,534.00 108,816.00
1263 ft mea Step: 3262 4,758.00 114,192.00
1263 ft mea Step: 4262 4,996.00 119,904.00
1263 ft mea Step: 5262 5,246.00 125,904.00
1265 SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST ft mea Step: 1284 4,320.00 103,680.00 284 1265 ft mea Step: 2284 4,534.00 108,816.00
1265 ft mea Step: 3284 4,758.00 114,192.00
1265 ft mea Step: 4284 4,996.00 119,904.00
1265 ft mea Step: 5284 5,246.00 125,904.00
1246 SENIOR ENGINEER ft mea Step: 1256 5,479.00 131,496.00 256 1246 ft mea Step: 2256 5,768.00 138,432.00
1246 ft mea Step: 3256 6,072.00 145,728.00
1246 ft mea Step: 4256 6,391.00 153,384.00
1246 ft mea Step: 5256 6,727.00 161,448.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 7 of 8

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (MEA)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 16, Packet Page 54 8/16/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE SENIOR HUMAN RESOURCS ANALYST mea Step: 1 4,320.00 103,680.00 376 mea Step: 2 4,534.00 108,816.00
mea Step: 3 4,758.00 114,192.00
mea Step: 4 4,996.00 119,904.00
mea Step: 5 5,246.00 125,904.00
1258 SPORTS CENTER MANAGER ft mea Step: 1217 5,389.00 129,336.00 217 1258 ft mea Step: 2217 5,658.00 135,792.00
1258 ft mea Step: 3217 5,942.00 142,608.00
1258 ft mea Step: 4217 6,237.00 149,688.00
1258 ft mea Step: 5217 6,546.00 157,104.00
9214 STREETS & UTILITIES OPERAT MGR ft mea Step: 1363 4,292.00 103,008.00 363 9214 ft mea Step: 2363 4,507.00 108,168.00
9214 ft mea Step: 3363 4,732.00 113,568.00
9214 ft mea Step: 4363 4,971.00 119,304.00
9214 ft mea Step: 5363 5,220.00 125,280.00
1295 SUSTAINABILITY MANAGER ft mea Step: 1365 4,292.00 103,008.00 365 1295 ft mea Step: 2365 4,507.00 108,168.00
1295 ft mea Step: 3365 4,732.00 113,568.00
1295 ft mea Step: 4365 4,971.00 119,304.00
1295 ft mea Step: 5365 5,220.00 125,280.00
1291 SYSTEMS AND NETWORK ADMIN ft mea Step: 1358 5,182.00 124,368.00 358 1291 ft mea Step: 2358 5,442.00 130,608.00
1291 ft mea Step: 3358 5,714.00 137,136.00
1291 ft mea Step: 4358 6,001.00 144,024.00
1291 ft mea Step: 5358 6,294.00 151,056.00
1253 URBAN FORESTER ft mea Step: 1321 3,974.00 95,376.00 321 1253 ft mea Step: 2321 4,174.00 100,176.00
1253 ft mea Step: 3321 4,381.00 105,144.00
1253 ft mea Step: 4321 4,599.00 110,376.00
1253 ft mea Step: 5321 4,832.00 115,968.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 8 of 8

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (MEA)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 17, Packet Page 55 8/22/2023 CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM) Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 3310 ACCOUNTANT/AUDITOR ft gem Step: 1076 3,300.00 79,200.00 076 3310 ft gem Step: 2076 3,466.00 83,184.00
3310 ft gem Step: 3076 3,641.00 87,384.00
3310 ft gem Step: 4076 3,821.00 91,704.00
3310 ft gem Step: 5076 4,011.00 96,264.00
3313 ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT ft gem Step: 1268 2,362.00 56,688.00 268 3313 ft gem Step: 2268 2,480.00 59,520.00
3313 ft gem Step: 3268 2,604.00 62,496.00
3313 ft gem Step: 4268 2,735.00 65,640.00
3313 ft gem Step: 5268 2,873.00 68,952.00
3320 ACCOUNTING SPECIALIST ft gem Step: 1285 2,902.00 69,648.00 285 3320 ft gem Step: 2285 3,045.00 73,080.00
3320 ft gem Step: 3285 3,195.00 76,680.00
3320 ft gem Step: 4285 3,357.00 80,568.00
3320 ft gem Step: 5285 3,525.00 84,600.00
3307 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT ft gem Step: 1373 2,142.00 51,408.00 373 3307 ft gem Step: 2373 2,250.00 54,000.00
3307 ft gem Step: 3373 2,362.00 56,688.00
3307 ft gem Step: 4373 2,480.00 59,520.00
3307 ft gem Step: 5373 2,604.00 62,496.00
3307 ft gem Step: 6373 2,735.00 65,640.00
3307 ft gem Step: 7373 2,873.00 68,952.00
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES TECH gem Step: 1 2,817.00 67,608.00 731 gem Step: 2 2,959.00 71,016.00
gem Step: 3 3,104.00 74,496.00
gem Step: 4 3,261.00 78,264.00
gem Step: 5 3,425.00 82,200.00
5303 AQUATICS COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1114 3,219.00 77,256.00 114 5303 ft gem Step: 2114 3,380.00 81,120.00
5303 ft gem Step: 3114 3,550.00 85,200.00
5303 ft gem Step: 4114 3,727.00 89,448.00
5303 ft gem Step: 5114 3,913.00 93,912.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 1 of 21

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 18, Packet Page 56 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 5301 AQUATICS SPECIALIST II ft gem Step: 1302 2,100.00 50,400.00 302 5301 ft gem Step: 2302 2,204.00 52,896.00
5301 ft gem Step: 3302 2,314.00 55,536.00
5301 ft gem Step: 4302 2,429.00 58,296.00
5301 ft gem Step: 5302 2,550.00 61,200.00
6722 ASSISTANT URBAN FORESTER ft gem Step: 1320 3,384.00 81,216.00 320 6722 ft gem Step: 2320 3,553.00 85,272.00
6722 ft gem Step: 3320 3,732.00 89,568.00
6722 ft gem Step: 4320 3,917.00 94,008.00
6722 ft gem Step: 5320 4,115.00 98,760.00
4202 ASSOCIATE PLANNER ft gem Step: 1097 3,820.00 91,680.00 097 4202 ft gem Step: 2097 4,012.00 96,288.00
4202 ft gem Step: 3097 4,213.00 101,112.00
4202 ft gem Step: 4097 4,424.00 106,176.00
4202 ft gem Step: 5097 4,647.00 111,528.00
6301 AUTOMOTIVE MECHANIC ft gem Step: 1132 2,996.00 71,904.00 132 6301 ft gem Step: 2132 3,144.00 75,456.00
6301 ft gem Step: 3132 3,307.00 79,368.00
6301 ft gem Step: 4132 3,468.00 83,232.00
6301 ft gem Step: 5132 3,643.00 87,432.00
6501 BUILDING MAINT. CRAFTSWORKER ft gem Step: 1135 2,784.00 66,816.00 135 6501 ft gem Step: 2135 2,922.00 70,128.00
6501 ft gem Step: 3135 3,073.00 73,752.00
6501 ft gem Step: 4135 3,220.00 77,280.00
6501 ft gem Step: 5135 3,382.00 81,168.00
6502 BUILDING MAINT. SUPERVISOR ft gem Step: 1136 3,544.00 85,056.00 136 6502 ft gem Step: 2136 3,723.00 89,352.00
6502 ft gem Step: 3136 3,909.00 93,816.00
6502 ft gem Step: 4136 4,103.00 98,472.00
6502 ft gem Step: 5136 4,309.00 103,416.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 2 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 19, Packet Page 57 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 6503 BUILDING MAINTENANCE WORKER ft gem Step: 1137 2,130.00 51,120.00 137 6503 ft gem Step: 2137 2,237.00 53,688.00
6503 ft gem Step: 3137 2,348.00 56,352.00
6503 ft gem Step: 4137 2,466.00 59,184.00
6503 ft gem Step: 5137 2,589.00 62,136.00
6503 ft gem Step: 6137 2,718.00 65,232.00
6503 ft gem Step: 7137 2,854.00 68,496.00
4306 BUILDING TECHNICIAN ft gem Step: 1196 3,390.00 81,360.00 196 4306 ft gem Step: 2196 3,560.00 85,440.00
4306 ft gem Step: 3196 3,740.00 89,760.00
4306 ft gem Step: 4196 3,926.00 94,224.00
4306 ft gem Step: 5196 4,125.00 99,000.00
BUSINESS LICENSE INSPECTOR gem Step: 1 3,144.00 75,456.00 247 gem Step: 2 3,307.00 79,368.00
gem Step: 3 3,468.00 83,232.00
gem Step: 4 3,643.00 87,432.00
gem Step: 5 3,822.00 91,728.00
6702 CEMETERY COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1157 3,219.00 77,256.00 157 6702 ft gem Step: 2157 3,380.00 81,120.00
6702 ft gem Step: 3157 3,550.00 85,200.00
6702 ft gem Step: 4157 3,727.00 89,448.00
6702 ft gem Step: 5157 3,913.00 93,912.00
6710 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE WORKER ft gem Step: 1165 2,562.00 61,488.00 165 6710 ft gem Step: 2165 2,692.00 64,608.00
6710 ft gem Step: 3165 2,827.00 67,848.00
6710 ft gem Step: 4165 2,968.00 71,232.00
6710 ft gem Step: 5165 3,116.00 74,784.00
4308 CODE COMPLIANCE COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1326 3,729.00 89,496.00 326 4308 ft gem Step: 2326 3,916.00 93,984.00
4308 ft gem Step: 3326 4,112.00 98,688.00
4308 ft gem Step: 4326 4,317.00 103,608.00
4308 ft gem Step: 5326 4,535.00 108,840.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 3 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 20, Packet Page 58 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 6805 COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER ft gem Step: 1353 2,526.00 60,624.00 353 6805 ft gem Step: 2353 2,655.00 63,720.00
6805 ft gem Step: 3353 2,787.00 66,888.00
6805 ft gem Step: 4353 2,925.00 70,200.00
6805 ft gem Step: 5353 3,074.00 73,776.00
6510 CUSTODIAN ft gem Step: 1143 1,666.00 39,984.00 143 6510 ft gem Step: 2143 1,751.00 42,024.00
6510 ft gem Step: 3143 1,838.00 44,112.00
6510 ft gem Step: 4143 1,928.00 46,272.00
6510 ft gem Step: 5143 2,028.00 48,672.00
6203 ELECTRICIAN ft gem Step: 1124 3,219.00 77,256.00 124 6203 ft gem Step: 2124 3,380.00 81,120.00
6203 ft gem Step: 3124 3,550.00 85,200.00
6203 ft gem Step: 4124 3,727.00 89,448.00
6203 ft gem Step: 5124 3,913.00 93,912.00
6727 ENGINEERING ASSISTANT I ft gem Step: 1343 3,300.00 79,200.00 343 6727 ft gem Step: 2343 3,466.00 83,184.00
6727 ft gem Step: 3343 3,641.00 87,384.00
6727 ft gem Step: 4343 3,821.00 91,704.00
6727 ft gem Step: 5343 4,011.00 96,264.00
6728 ENGINEERING ASSISTANT II ft gem Step: 1364 3,731.00 89,544.00 364 6728 ft gem Step: 2364 3,914.00 93,936.00
6728 ft gem Step: 3364 4,117.00 98,808.00
6728 ft gem Step: 4364 4,317.00 103,608.00
6728 ft gem Step: 5364 4,535.00 108,840.00
1297 ENGINEERING PROGRAMS ANALYST ft gem Step: 1040 3,820.00 91,680.00 040 1297 ft gem Step: 2040 4,012.00 96,288.00
1297 ft gem Step: 3040 4,213.00 101,112.00
1297 ft gem Step: 4040 4,424.00 106,176.00
1297 ft gem Step: 5040 4,647.00 111,528.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 4 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 21, Packet Page 59 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 6725 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN ft gem Step: 1090 2,997.00 71,928.00 090 6725 ft gem Step: 2090 3,145.00 75,480.00
6725 ft gem Step: 3090 3,304.00 79,296.00
6725 ft gem Step: 4090 3,468.00 83,232.00
6725 ft gem Step: 5090 3,643.00 87,432.00
1276 ENVIRONMENTAL REG ANALYST ft gem Step: 1329 3,820.00 91,680.00 329 1276 ft gem Step: 2329 4,012.00 96,288.00
1276 ft gem Step: 3329 4,213.00 101,112.00
1276 ft gem Step: 4329 4,424.00 106,176.00
1276 ft gem Step: 5329 4,647.00 111,528.00
6517 EVENT & SALES ASSISTANT ft gem Step: 1086 2,362.00 56,688.00 086 6517 ft gem Step: 2086 2,480.00 59,520.00
6517 ft gem Step: 3086 2,604.00 62,496.00
6517 ft gem Step: 4086 2,735.00 65,640.00
6517 ft gem Step: 5086 2,873.00 68,952.00
6507 EVENT COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1140 3,219.00 77,256.00 140 6507 ft gem Step: 2140 3,380.00 81,120.00
6507 ft gem Step: 3140 3,550.00 85,200.00
6507 ft gem Step: 4140 3,727.00 89,448.00
6507 ft gem Step: 5140 3,913.00 93,912.00
6513 EVENT SUPERVISOR ft gem Step: 1144 3,545.00 85,080.00 144 6513 ft gem Step: 2144 3,723.00 89,352.00
6513 ft gem Step: 3144 3,909.00 93,816.00
6513 ft gem Step: 4144 4,103.00 98,472.00
6513 ft gem Step: 5144 4,309.00 103,416.00
3318 EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT I ft gem Step: 1288 2,600.00 62,400.00 288 3318 ft gem Step: 2288 2,732.00 65,568.00
3318 ft gem Step: 3288 2,869.00 68,856.00
3318 ft gem Step: 4288 3,012.00 72,288.00
3318 ft gem Step: 5288 3,165.00 75,960.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 5 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 22, Packet Page 60 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 3324 EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT II ft gem Step: 1289 2,993.00 71,832.00 289 3324 ft gem Step: 2289 3,141.00 75,384.00
3324 ft gem Step: 3289 3,301.00 79,224.00
3324 ft gem Step: 4289 3,465.00 83,160.00
3324 ft gem Step: 5289 3,640.00 87,360.00
5209 FACILITIES MAINT. COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1305 3,820.00 91,680.00 305 5209 ft gem Step: 2305 4,012.00 96,288.00
5209 ft gem Step: 3305 4,212.00 101,088.00
5209 ft gem Step: 4305 4,424.00 106,176.00
5209 ft gem Step: 5305 4,647.00 111,528.00
6504 FACILITY ATTENDANT ft gem Step: 1138 2,347.00 56,328.00 138 6504 ft gem Step: 2138 2,465.00 59,160.00
6504 ft gem Step: 3138 2,589.00 62,136.00
6504 ft gem Step: 4138 2,719.00 65,256.00
6504 ft gem Step: 5138 2,854.00 68,496.00
5205 FACILITY COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1111 3,219.00 77,256.00 111 5205 ft gem Step: 2111 3,380.00 81,120.00
5205 ft gem Step: 3111 3,550.00 85,200.00
5205 ft gem Step: 4111 3,727.00 89,448.00
5205 ft gem Step: 5111 3,913.00 93,912.00
3109 FIELD ASSISTANT ft gem Step: 1172 2,362.00 56,688.00 172 3109 ft gem Step: 2172 2,480.00 59,520.00
3109 ft gem Step: 3172 2,604.00 62,496.00
3109 ft gem Step: 4172 2,735.00 65,640.00
3109 ft gem Step: 5172 2,873.00 68,952.00
FIRE INSPECTOR I gem Step: 1 3,106.00 74,544.00 178
gem Step: 2 3,262.00 78,288.00
gem Step: 3 3,425.00 82,200.00
gem Step: 4 3,596.00 86,304.00
gem Step: 5 3,776.00 90,624.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 6 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 23, Packet Page 61 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE FIRE INSPECTOR II gem Step: 1 3,417.00 82,008.00 182
gem Step: 2 3,588.00 86,112.00
gem Step: 3 3,767.00 90,408.00
gem Step: 4 3,956.00 94,944.00
gem Step: 5 4,153.00 99,672.00
FIRE PREV PLANS EXAM/INSPECTOR gem Step: 1 3,916.00 93,984.00 369 gem Step: 2 4,112.00 98,688.00
gem Step: 3 4,317.00 103,608.00
gem Step: 4 4,534.00 108,816.00
gem Step: 5 4,758.00 114,192.00
3329 FIRE PREVENTION TECHNICIAN ft gem Step: 1324 2,855.00 68,520.00 324 3329 ft gem Step: 2324 2,997.00 71,928.00
3329 ft gem Step: 3324 3,145.00 75,480.00
3329 ft gem Step: 4324 3,304.00 79,296.00
3329 ft gem Step: 5324 3,468.00 83,232.00
5212 FITNESS SUPERVISOR ft gem Step: 1375 3,766.00 90,384.00 375 5212 ft gem Step: 2375 3,952.00 94,848.00
5212 ft gem Step: 3375 4,149.00 99,576.00
5212 ft gem Step: 4375 4,356.00 104,544.00
5212 ft gem Step: 5375 4,573.00 109,752.00
6810 FUND DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1356 3,268.00 78,432.00 356 6810 ft gem Step: 2356 3,432.00 82,368.00
6810 ft gem Step: 3356 3,602.00 86,448.00
6810 ft gem Step: 4356 3,781.00 90,744.00
6810 ft gem Step: 5356 3,971.00 95,304.00
6720 GREENBELT COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1115 2,771.00 66,504.00 115 6720 ft gem Step: 2115 2,910.00 69,840.00
6720 ft gem Step: 3115 3,053.00 73,272.00
6720 ft gem Step: 4115 3,212.00 77,088.00
6720 ft gem Step: 5115 3,371.00 80,904.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 7 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 24, Packet Page 62 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE GUEST SERVICE SPECIALIST gem Step: 1 2,190.00 52,560.00 372 gem Step: 2 2,302.00 55,248.00
gem Step: 3 2,417.00 58,008.00
gem Step: 4 2,538.00 60,912.00
gem Step: 5 2,663.00 63,912.00
6111 HARBOR COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1359 3,219.00 77,256.00 359 6111 ft gem Step: 2359 3,380.00 81,120.00
6111 ft gem Step: 3359 3,550.00 85,200.00
6111 ft gem Step: 4359 3,727.00 89,448.00
6111 ft gem Step: 5359 3,913.00 93,912.00
6110 HARBOR MAINT. CRAFTSWORKER ft gem Step: 1269 2,784.00 66,816.00 269 6110 ft gem Step: 2269 2,922.00 70,128.00
6110 ft gem Step: 3269 3,073.00 73,752.00
6110 ft gem Step: 4269 3,220.00 77,280.00
6110 ft gem Step: 5269 3,382.00 81,168.00
6102 HARBOR MAINTENANCE LEADWORKER ft gem Step: 1186 2,996.00 71,904.00 186 6102 ft gem Step: 2186 3,144.00 75,456.00
6102 ft gem Step: 3186 3,307.00 79,368.00
6102 ft gem Step: 4186 3,468.00 83,232.00
6102 ft gem Step: 5186 3,643.00 87,432.00
6105 HARBOR SECURITY WORKER ft gem Step: 1120 2,526.00 60,624.00 120 6105 ft gem Step: 2120 2,653.00 63,672.00
6105 ft gem Step: 3120 2,788.00 66,912.00
6105 ft gem Step: 4120 2,926.00 70,224.00
6105 ft gem Step: 5120 3,074.00 73,776.00
4208 HCD COORDINATOR-PROJ &PROGRAMS ft gem Step: 1230 3,399.00 81,576.00 230 4208 ft gem Step: 2230 3,567.00 85,608.00
4208 ft gem Step: 3230 3,746.00 89,904.00
4208 ft gem Step: 4230 3,934.00 94,416.00
4208 ft gem Step: 5230 4,131.00 99,144.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 8 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 25, Packet Page 63 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 6512 HISTORIC FAC. SR. CRAFTSWORKER ft gem Step: 1203 3,138.00 75,312.00 203 6512 ft gem Step: 2203 3,297.00 79,128.00
6512 ft gem Step: 3203 3,464.00 83,136.00
6512 ft gem Step: 4203 3,639.00 87,336.00
6512 ft gem Step: 5203 3,818.00 91,632.00
HOMELESS NAVIGATOR gem Step: 1 3,300.00 79,200.00 198
gem Step: 2 3,465.00 83,160.00
gem Step: 3 3,638.00 87,312.00
gem Step: 4 3,820.00 91,680.00
gem Step: 5 4,011.00 96,264.00
HUMAN RESOURCES ASSISTANT gem Step: 1 2,362.00 56,688.00 335 gem Step: 2 2,480.00 59,520.00
gem Step: 3 2,604.00 62,496.00
gem Step: 4 2,735.00 65,640.00
gem Step: 5 2,873.00 68,952.00
HUMAN RESOURCES COORDINATOR gem Step: 1 3,219.00 77,256.00 361 gem Step: 2 3,380.00 81,120.00
gem Step: 3 3,550.00 85,200.00
gem Step: 4 3,727.00 89,448.00
gem Step: 5 3,913.00 93,912.00
3322 HUMAN RESOURCES SPECIALIST ft gem Step: 1280 2,902.00 69,648.00 280 3322 ft gem Step: 2280 3,045.00 73,080.00
3322 ft gem Step: 3280 3,195.00 76,680.00
3322 ft gem Step: 4280 3,357.00 80,568.00
3322 ft gem Step: 5280 3,525.00 84,600.00
4307 HVAC SENIOR TECHNICIAN ft gem Step: 1306 3,237.00 77,688.00 306 4307 ft gem Step: 2306 3,400.00 81,600.00
4307 ft gem Step: 3306 3,567.00 85,608.00
4307 ft gem Step: 4306 3,747.00 89,928.00
4307 ft gem Step: 5306 3,934.00 94,416.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 9 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 26, Packet Page 64 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 3107 INFORMATION TECH SPECIALIST ft gem Step: 1378 3,219.00 77,256.00 378 3107 ft gem Step: 2378 3,380.00 81,120.00
3107 ft gem Step: 3378 3,551.00 85,224.00
3107 ft gem Step: 4378 3,727.00 89,448.00
3107 ft gem Step: 5378 3,913.00 93,912.00
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ANALYST gem Step: 1 3,820.00 91,680.00 377 gem Step: 2 4,012.00 96,288.00
gem Step: 3 4,213.00 101,112.00
gem Step: 4 4,424.00 106,176.00
gem Step: 5 4,647.00 111,528.00
4301 INSPECTOR ft gem Step: 1100 3,731.00 89,544.00 100 4301 ft gem Step: 2100 3,914.00 93,936.00
4301 ft gem Step: 3100 4,117.00 98,808.00
4301 ft gem Step: 4100 4,317.00 103,608.00
4301 ft gem Step: 5100 4,535.00 108,840.00
3206 IT APPLICATION ENGINEER I ft gem Step: 1255 3,673.00 88,152.00 069 3206 ft gem Step: 2255 3,858.00 92,592.00
3206 ft gem Step: 3255 4,051.00 97,224.00
3206 ft gem Step: 4255 4,254.00 102,096.00
3206 ft gem Step: 5255 4,468.00 107,232.00
3609 IT APPLICATION ENGINEER II ft gem Step: 1038 4,413.00 105,912.00 038 3609 ft gem Step: 2038 4,633.00 111,192.00
3609 ft gem Step: 3038 4,865.00 116,760.00
3609 ft gem Step: 4038 5,107.00 122,568.00
3609 ft gem Step: 5038 5,362.00 128,688.00
IT APPLICATION ENGINEER III gem Step: 1 4,774.00 114,576.00 080 gem Step: 2 5,012.00 120,288.00
gem Step: 3 5,262.00 126,288.00
gem Step: 4 5,526.00 132,624.00
gem Step: 5 5,799.00 139,176.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 10 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 27, Packet Page 65 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 6508 LAUNDRY ATTENDANT ft gem Step: 1250 1,261.00 30,264.00 250 6508 ft gem Step: 2250 1,326.00 31,824.00
6508 ft gem Step: 3250 1,388.00 33,312.00
6508 ft gem Step: 4250 1,461.00 35,064.00
6508 ft gem Step: 5250 1,530.00 36,720.00
6518 LEAD CUSTODIAN ft gem Step: 1142 2,347.00 56,328.00 142 6518 ft gem Step: 2142 2,465.00 59,160.00
6518 ft gem Step: 3142 2,589.00 62,136.00
6518 ft gem Step: 4142 2,719.00 65,256.00
6518 ft gem Step: 5142 2,854.00 68,496.00
6304 LEAD MECHANIC ft gem Step: 1254 3,144.00 75,456.00 254 6304 ft gem Step: 2254 3,307.00 79,368.00
6304 ft gem Step: 3254 3,468.00 83,232.00
6304 ft gem Step: 4254 3,643.00 87,432.00
6304 ft gem Step: 5254 3,822.00 91,728.00
3316 LEGAL SECRETARY ft gem Step: 1078 2,600.00 62,400.00 078 3316 ft gem Step: 2078 2,732.00 65,568.00
3316 ft gem Step: 3078 2,869.00 68,856.00
3316 ft gem Step: 4078 3,012.00 72,288.00
3316 ft gem Step: 5078 3,165.00 75,960.00
5101 LIBRARIAN ft gem Step: 1104 3,081.00 73,944.00 104 5101 ft gem Step: 2104 3,232.00 77,568.00
5101 ft gem Step: 3104 3,396.00 81,504.00
5101 ft gem Step: 4104 3,563.00 85,512.00
5101 ft gem Step: 5104 3,741.00 89,784.00
3101 LIBRARY ASSISTANT I ft gem Step: 1063 2,252.00 54,048.00 063 3101 ft gem Step: 2063 2,363.00 56,712.00
3101 ft gem Step: 3063 2,481.00 59,544.00
3101 ft gem Step: 4063 2,606.00 62,544.00
3101 ft gem Step: 5063 2,736.00 65,664.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 11 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 28, Packet Page 66 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 3102 LIBRARY ASSISTANT II ft gem Step: 1064 2,362.00 56,688.00 064 3102 ft gem Step: 2064 2,480.00 59,520.00
3102 ft gem Step: 3064 2,604.00 62,496.00
3102 ft gem Step: 4064 2,735.00 65,640.00
3102 ft gem Step: 5064 2,873.00 68,952.00
3104 LIBRARY ASSISTANT III ft gem Step: 1066 2,600.00 62,400.00 066 3104 ft gem Step: 2066 2,732.00 65,568.00
3104 ft gem Step: 3066 2,869.00 68,856.00
3104 ft gem Step: 4066 3,012.00 72,288.00
3104 ft gem Step: 5066 3,165.00 75,960.00
6718 MAINTENANCE SPECIALIST ft gem Step: 1299 2,347.00 56,328.00 299 6718 ft gem Step: 2299 2,465.00 59,160.00
6718 ft gem Step: 3299 2,589.00 62,136.00
6718 ft gem Step: 4299 2,714.00 65,136.00
6718 ft gem Step: 5299 2,853.00 68,472.00
6109 MAINTENANCE TECHNICIAN ft gem Step: 1216 2,817.00 67,608.00 216 6109 ft gem Step: 2216 2,959.00 71,016.00
6109 ft gem Step: 3216 3,104.00 74,496.00
6109 ft gem Step: 4216 3,261.00 78,264.00
6109 ft gem Step: 5216 3,425.00 82,200.00
3328 MARINA HARBOR ASSISTANT ft gem Step: 1298 2,993.00 71,832.00 298 3328 ft gem Step: 2298 3,141.00 75,384.00
3328 ft gem Step: 3298 3,301.00 79,224.00
3328 ft gem Step: 4298 3,465.00 83,160.00
3328 ft gem Step: 5298 3,640.00 87,360.00
MEDIA SPECIALIST gem Step: 1 2,362.00 56,688.00 094
gem Step: 2 2,480.00 59,520.00
gem Step: 3 2,604.00 62,496.00
gem Step: 4 2,735.00 65,640.00
gem Step: 5 2,873.00 68,952.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 12 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 29, Packet Page 67 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE MEDICAL RECORDS ASSISTANT gem Step: 1 2,362.00 56,688.00 711 gem Step: 2 2,480.00 59,520.00
gem Step: 3 2,604.00 62,496.00
gem Step: 4 2,735.00 65,640.00
gem Step: 5 2,873.00 68,952.00
6515 OPERATIONS COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1322 3,219.00 77,256.00 322 6515 ft gem Step: 2322 3,380.00 81,120.00
6515 ft gem Step: 3322 3,550.00 85,200.00
6515 ft gem Step: 4322 3,727.00 89,448.00
6515 ft gem Step: 5322 3,913.00 93,912.00
6506 OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR ft gem Step: 1139 3,545.00 85,080.00 139 6506 ft gem Step: 2139 3,723.00 89,352.00
6506 ft gem Step: 3139 3,909.00 93,816.00
6506 ft gem Step: 4139 4,103.00 98,472.00
6506 ft gem Step: 5139 4,309.00 103,416.00
6703 PARK ATTENDANT ft gem Step: 1158 2,526.00 60,624.00 158 6703 ft gem Step: 2158 2,655.00 63,720.00
6703 ft gem Step: 3158 2,787.00 66,888.00
6703 ft gem Step: 4158 2,925.00 70,200.00
6703 ft gem Step: 5158 3,074.00 73,776.00
6704 PARK MAINTENANCE CRAFTSWORKER ft gem Step: 1194 2,589.00 62,136.00 194 6704 ft gem Step: 2194 2,719.00 65,256.00
6704 ft gem Step: 3194 2,854.00 68,496.00
6704 ft gem Step: 4194 2,996.00 71,904.00
6704 ft gem Step: 5194 3,144.00 75,456.00
6705 PARK MAINTENANCE LEADWORKER ft gem Step: 1160 2,853.00 68,472.00 160 6705 ft gem Step: 2160 2,995.00 71,880.00
6705 ft gem Step: 3160 3,141.00 75,384.00
6705 ft gem Step: 4160 3,298.00 79,152.00
6705 ft gem Step: 5160 3,466.00 83,184.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 13 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 30, Packet Page 68 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 6701 PARK MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR ft gem Step: 1156 3,300.00 79,200.00 156 6701 ft gem Step: 2156 3,466.00 83,184.00
6701 ft gem Step: 3156 3,641.00 87,384.00
6701 ft gem Step: 4156 3,821.00 91,704.00
6701 ft gem Step: 5156 4,011.00 96,264.00
6706 PARK MAINTENANCE WORKER ft gem Step: 1161 2,130.00 51,120.00 161 6706 ft gem Step: 2161 2,237.00 53,688.00
6706 ft gem Step: 3161 2,348.00 56,352.00
6706 ft gem Step: 4161 2,466.00 59,184.00
6706 ft gem Step: 5161 2,589.00 62,136.00
6706 ft gem Step: 6161 2,718.00 65,232.00
6706 ft gem Step: 7161 2,854.00 68,496.00
6606 PARKING CONTROLS TECHNICIAN ft gem Step: 1274 2,939.00 70,536.00 274 6606 ft gem Step: 2274 3,085.00 74,040.00
6606 ft gem Step: 3274 3,238.00 77,712.00
6606 ft gem Step: 4274 3,404.00 81,696.00
6606 ft gem Step: 5274 3,571.00 85,704.00
6601 PARKING ENFORCEMENT OFFICER ft gem Step: 1145 2,526.00 60,624.00 145 6601 ft gem Step: 2145 2,655.00 63,720.00
6601 ft gem Step: 3145 2,787.00 66,888.00
6601 ft gem Step: 4145 2,925.00 70,200.00
6601 ft gem Step: 5145 3,074.00 73,776.00
6605 PARKING ENFORCEMENT SUPERVISOR ft gem Step: 1149 3,544.00 85,056.00 149 6605 ft gem Step: 2149 3,723.00 89,352.00
6605 ft gem Step: 3149 3,909.00 93,816.00
6605 ft gem Step: 4149 4,103.00 98,472.00
6605 ft gem Step: 5149 4,309.00 103,416.00
6615 PARKING MAINTENANCE LEADWORKER ft gem Step: 1159 2,996.00 71,904.00 159 6615 ft gem Step: 2159 3,144.00 75,456.00
6615 ft gem Step: 3159 3,307.00 79,368.00
6615 ft gem Step: 4159 3,468.00 83,232.00
6615 ft gem Step: 5159 3,643.00 87,432.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 14 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 31, Packet Page 69 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 6604 PARKING MAINTENANCE SUPERVISOR ft gem Step: 1148 3,544.00 85,056.00 148 6604 ft gem Step: 2148 3,723.00 89,352.00
6604 ft gem Step: 3148 3,909.00 93,816.00
6604 ft gem Step: 4148 4,103.00 98,472.00
6604 ft gem Step: 5148 4,309.00 103,416.00
6608 PARKING MAINTENANCE WORKER ft gem Step: 1151 2,130.00 51,120.00 151 6608 ft gem Step: 2151 2,237.00 53,688.00
6608 ft gem Step: 3151 2,348.00 56,352.00
6608 ft gem Step: 4151 2,466.00 59,184.00
6608 ft gem Step: 5151 2,589.00 62,136.00
6608 ft gem Step: 6151 2,718.00 65,232.00
6608 ft gem Step: 7151 2,854.00 68,496.00
6616 PARKING SERVICES COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1116 3,823.00 91,752.00 116 6616 ft gem Step: 2116 4,012.00 96,288.00
6616 ft gem Step: 3116 4,212.00 101,088.00
6616 ft gem Step: 4116 4,424.00 106,176.00
6616 ft gem Step: 5116 4,647.00 111,528.00
6617 PARKING SERVICES REPRESENTATIV ft gem Step: 1117 2,348.00 56,352.00 117 6617 ft gem Step: 2117 2,466.00 59,184.00
6617 ft gem Step: 3117 2,589.00 62,136.00
6617 ft gem Step: 4117 2,718.00 65,232.00
6617 ft gem Step: 5117 2,854.00 68,496.00
6618 PARKING SERVICES SPECIALIST ft gem Step: 1118 2,902.00 69,648.00 118 6618 ft gem Step: 2118 3,045.00 73,080.00
6618 ft gem Step: 3118 3,195.00 76,680.00
6618 ft gem Step: 4118 3,357.00 80,568.00
6618 ft gem Step: 5118 3,525.00 84,600.00
6711 PARKS CRAFTS LEADWORKER ft gem Step: 1264 2,853.00 68,472.00 264 6711 ft gem Step: 2264 2,995.00 71,880.00
6711 ft gem Step: 3264 3,141.00 75,384.00
6711 ft gem Step: 4264 3,298.00 79,152.00
6711 ft gem Step: 5264 3,466.00 83,184.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 15 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 32, Packet Page 70 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 6305 PARTS CLERK ft gem Step: 1253 2,348.00 56,352.00 253 6305 ft gem Step: 2253 2,466.00 59,184.00
6305 ft gem Step: 3253 2,589.00 62,136.00
6305 ft gem Step: 4253 2,718.00 65,232.00
6305 ft gem Step: 5253 2,854.00 68,496.00
4305 PLANS EXAMINER ft gem Step: 1258 3,916.00 93,984.00 258 4305 ft gem Step: 2258 4,112.00 98,688.00
4305 ft gem Step: 3258 4,317.00 103,608.00
4305 ft gem Step: 4258 4,534.00 108,816.00
4305 ft gem Step: 5258 4,758.00 114,192.00
3201 POLICE RECORDS/DETENTION SUP. ft gem Step: 1191 3,820.00 91,680.00 191 3201 ft gem Step: 2191 4,012.00 96,288.00
3201 ft gem Step: 3191 4,213.00 101,112.00
3201 ft gem Step: 4191 4,424.00 106,176.00
3201 ft gem Step: 5191 4,647.00 111,528.00
3209 POLICE SERVICES ASSISTANT ft gem Step: 1346 2,362.00 56,688.00 346 3209 ft gem Step: 2346 2,480.00 59,520.00
3209 ft gem Step: 3346 2,604.00 62,496.00
3209 ft gem Step: 4346 2,735.00 65,640.00
3209 ft gem Step: 5346 2,873.00 68,952.00
3205 POLICE SERVICES TECHNICIAN ft gem Step: 1068 2,855.00 68,520.00 068 3205 ft gem Step: 2068 2,997.00 71,928.00
3205 ft gem Step: 3068 3,145.00 75,480.00
3205 ft gem Step: 4068 3,304.00 79,296.00
3205 ft gem Step: 5068 3,468.00 83,232.00
4105 PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR ft gem Step: 1092 3,398.00 81,552.00 092 4105 ft gem Step: 2092 3,566.00 85,584.00
4105 ft gem Step: 3092 3,747.00 89,928.00
4105 ft gem Step: 4092 3,936.00 94,464.00
4105 ft gem Step: 5092 4,132.00 99,168.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 16 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 33, Packet Page 71 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 4102 QUALITY CONTROL INSPECTOR ft gem Step: 1234 3,731.00 89,544.00 234 4102 ft gem Step: 2234 3,914.00 93,936.00
4102 ft gem Step: 3234 4,117.00 98,808.00
4102 ft gem Step: 4234 4,317.00 103,608.00
4102 ft gem Step: 5234 4,535.00 108,840.00
5208 RECREATION COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1292 3,219.00 77,256.00 292 5208 ft gem Step: 2292 3,380.00 81,120.00
5208 ft gem Step: 3292 3,550.00 85,200.00
5208 ft gem Step: 4292 3,727.00 89,448.00
5208 ft gem Step: 5292 3,913.00 93,912.00
9581 RECREATION SPECIALIST ft gem Step: 1323 2,190.00 52,560.00 323 9581 ft gem Step: 2323 2,302.00 55,248.00
9581 ft gem Step: 3323 2,417.00 58,008.00
9581 ft gem Step: 4323 2,538.00 60,912.00
9581 ft gem Step: 5323 2,663.00 63,912.00
5201 RECREATION SUPERVISOR ft gem Step: 1259 3,766.00 90,384.00 259 5201 ft gem Step: 2259 3,952.00 94,848.00
5201 ft gem Step: 3259 4,149.00 99,576.00
5201 ft gem Step: 4259 4,356.00 104,544.00
5201 ft gem Step: 5259 4,573.00 109,752.00
RISK SPECIALIST gem Step: 1 2,902.00 69,648.00 371
gem Step: 2 3,045.00 73,080.00
gem Step: 3 3,195.00 76,680.00
gem Step: 4 3,357.00 80,568.00
gem Step: 5 3,525.00 84,600.00
6516 SALES COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1081 3,219.00 77,256.00 081 6516 ft gem Step: 2081 3,380.00 81,120.00
6516 ft gem Step: 3081 3,550.00 85,200.00
6516 ft gem Step: 4081 3,727.00 89,448.00
6516 ft gem Step: 5081 3,913.00 93,912.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 17 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 34, Packet Page 72 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 4201 SENIOR ASSOCIATE PLANNER ft gem Step: 1251 4,185.00 100,440.00 251 4201 ft gem Step: 2251 4,395.00 105,480.00
4201 ft gem Step: 3251 4,615.00 110,760.00
4201 ft gem Step: 4251 4,842.00 116,208.00
4201 ft gem Step: 5251 5,086.00 122,064.00
4302 SENIOR BUILDING INSPECTOR ft gem Step: 1101 3,916.00 93,984.00 101 4302 ft gem Step: 2101 4,112.00 98,688.00
4302 ft gem Step: 3101 4,317.00 103,608.00
4302 ft gem Step: 4101 4,534.00 108,816.00
4302 ft gem Step: 5101 4,758.00 114,192.00
6511 SENIOR CRAFTSWORKER ft gem Step: 1205 3,138.00 75,312.00 205 6511 ft gem Step: 2205 3,297.00 79,128.00
6511 ft gem Step: 3205 3,464.00 83,136.00
6511 ft gem Step: 4205 3,639.00 87,336.00
6511 ft gem Step: 5205 3,818.00 91,632.00
6514 SENIOR CUSTODIAN ft gem Step: 1257 1,917.00 46,008.00 257 6514 ft gem Step: 2257 2,012.00 48,288.00
6514 ft gem Step: 3257 2,114.00 50,736.00
6514 ft gem Step: 4257 2,221.00 53,304.00
6514 ft gem Step: 5257 2,334.00 56,016.00
6505 SENIOR FACILITY ATTENDANT ft gem Step: 1211 2,894.00 69,456.00 211 6505 ft gem Step: 2211 3,039.00 72,936.00
6505 ft gem Step: 3211 3,188.00 76,512.00
6505 ft gem Step: 4211 3,348.00 80,352.00
6505 ft gem Step: 5211 3,518.00 84,432.00
3607 SENIOR INFORMATION TECH SPECIA ft gem Step: 1084 3,585.00 86,040.00 084 3607 ft gem Step: 2084 3,764.00 90,336.00
3607 ft gem Step: 3084 3,952.00 94,848.00
3607 ft gem Step: 4084 4,150.00 99,600.00
3607 ft gem Step: 5084 4,358.00 104,592.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 18 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 35, Packet Page 73 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE SENIOR LOCKSMITH gem Step: 1 3,138.00 75,312.00 331
gem Step: 2 3,297.00 79,128.00
gem Step: 3 3,464.00 83,136.00
gem Step: 4 3,639.00 87,336.00
gem Step: 5 3,818.00 91,632.00
6707 SENIOR PARK MAINTENANCE WORKER ft gem Step: 1162 2,589.00 62,136.00 162 6707 ft gem Step: 2162 2,719.00 65,256.00
6707 ft gem Step: 3162 2,854.00 68,496.00
6707 ft gem Step: 4162 2,996.00 71,904.00
6707 ft gem Step: 5162 3,144.00 75,456.00
6613 SENIOR PARKING CONTROLS TECH. ft gem Step: 1275 3,219.00 77,256.00 275 6613 ft gem Step: 2275 3,380.00 81,120.00
6613 ft gem Step: 3275 3,551.00 85,224.00
6613 ft gem Step: 4275 3,728.00 89,472.00
6613 ft gem Step: 5275 3,913.00 93,912.00
6611 SENIOR PARKING ENFOR. OFFICER ft gem Step: 1154 2,894.00 69,456.00 154 6611 ft gem Step: 2154 3,039.00 72,936.00
6611 ft gem Step: 3154 3,189.00 76,536.00
6611 ft gem Step: 4154 3,351.00 80,424.00
6611 ft gem Step: 5154 3,518.00 84,432.00
6803 SENIOR PARTS CLERK ft gem Step: 1347 2,784.00 66,816.00 347 6803 ft gem Step: 2347 2,922.00 70,128.00
6803 ft gem Step: 3347 3,073.00 73,752.00
6803 ft gem Step: 4347 3,220.00 77,280.00
6803 ft gem Step: 5347 3,382.00 81,168.00
3207 SENIOR POLICE SERVICES TECH. ft gem Step: 1070 2,997.00 71,928.00 070 3207 ft gem Step: 2070 3,145.00 75,480.00
3207 ft gem Step: 3070 3,304.00 79,296.00
3207 ft gem Step: 4070 3,468.00 83,232.00
3207 ft gem Step: 5070 3,643.00 87,432.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 19 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 36, Packet Page 74 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 4104 SENIOR PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR ft gem Step: 1093 3,731.00 89,544.00 093 4104 ft gem Step: 2093 3,914.00 93,936.00
4104 ft gem Step: 3093 4,117.00 98,808.00
4104 ft gem Step: 4093 4,317.00 103,608.00
4104 ft gem Step: 5093 4,535.00 108,840.00
6206 SENIOR STREET MAINT. WORKER ft gem Step: 1126 2,589.00 62,136.00 126 6206 ft gem Step: 2126 2,719.00 65,256.00
6206 ft gem Step: 3126 2,854.00 68,496.00
6206 ft gem Step: 4126 2,996.00 71,904.00
6206 ft gem Step: 5126 3,144.00 75,456.00
6212 SIGN CRAFTSWORKER ft gem Step: 1183 2,784.00 66,816.00 183 6212 ft gem Step: 2183 2,922.00 70,128.00
6212 ft gem Step: 3183 3,073.00 73,752.00
6212 ft gem Step: 4183 3,220.00 77,280.00
6212 ft gem Step: 5183 3,382.00 81,168.00
SPECIAL EVENT COORDINATOR gem Step: 1 3,219.00 77,256.00 106 gem Step: 2 3,380.00 81,120.00
gem Step: 3 3,550.00 85,200.00
gem Step: 4 3,727.00 89,448.00
gem Step: 5 3,913.00 93,912.00
5102 SPECIAL SERVICES COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1199 3,400.00 81,600.00 199 5102 ft gem Step: 2199 3,567.00 85,608.00
5102 ft gem Step: 3199 3,747.00 89,928.00
5102 ft gem Step: 4199 3,934.00 94,416.00
5102 ft gem Step: 5199 4,132.00 99,168.00
5204 SPORTS COORDINATOR ft gem Step: 1110 3,219.00 77,256.00 110 5204 ft gem Step: 2110 3,380.00 81,120.00
5204 ft gem Step: 3110 3,550.00 85,200.00
5204 ft gem Step: 4110 3,727.00 89,448.00
5204 ft gem Step: 5110 3,913.00 93,912.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 20 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 37, Packet Page 75 8/22/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 6204 STREET & UTILITIES SUPERVISOR ft gem Step: 1252 3,144.00 75,456.00 252 6204 ft gem Step: 2252 3,300.00 79,200.00
6204 ft gem Step: 3252 3,466.00 83,184.00
6204 ft gem Step: 4252 3,641.00 87,384.00
6204 ft gem Step: 5252 3,821.00 91,704.00
6208 STREET MAINTENANCE LEADWORKER ft gem Step: 1128 2,853.00 68,472.00 128 6208 ft gem Step: 2128 2,995.00 71,880.00
6208 ft gem Step: 3128 3,141.00 75,384.00
6208 ft gem Step: 4128 3,298.00 79,152.00
6208 ft gem Step: 5128 3,466.00 83,184.00
6209 STREET MAINTENANCE WORKER ft gem Step: 1129 2,130.00 51,120.00 129 6209 ft gem Step: 2129 2,237.00 53,688.00
6209 ft gem Step: 3129 2,348.00 56,352.00
6209 ft gem Step: 4129 2,466.00 59,184.00
6209 ft gem Step: 5129 2,589.00 62,136.00
6209 ft gem Step: 6129 2,718.00 65,232.00
6209 ft gem Step: 7129 2,854.00 68,496.00
5308 SUSTAINABILITY ASSISTANT ft gem Step: 1374 3,300.00 79,200.00 374 5308 ft gem Step: 2374 3,466.00 83,184.00
5308 ft gem Step: 3374 3,641.00 87,384.00
5308 ft gem Step: 4374 3,821.00 91,704.00
5308 ft gem Step: 5374 4,011.00 96,264.00
3103 TECHNOLOGY SVCS. SPECIALIST ft gem Step: 1271 2,902.00 69,648.00 271 3103 ft gem Step: 2271 3,045.00 73,080.00
3103 ft gem Step: 3271 3,195.00 76,680.00
3103 ft gem Step: 4271 3,357.00 80,568.00
3103 ft gem Step: 5271 3,525.00 84,600.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 21 of 21

CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (GEM)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 38, Packet Page 76 6/1/2023 CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (MFCOA) Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 2205 ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF ft fma Step: 1325 7,839.00 188,136.00 325 2205 ft fma Step: 2325 8,227.00 197,448.00
2205 ft fma Step: 3325 8,642.00 207,408.00
2205 ft fma Step: 4325 9,074.00 217,776.00
2205 ft fma Step: 5325 9,526.00 228,624.00
1209 DIVISION CHIEF ft fma Step: 1019 6,686.00 160,464.00 019 1209 ft fma Step: 2019 7,021.00 168,504.00
1209 ft fma Step: 3019 7,373.00 176,952.00
1209 ft fma Step: 4019 7,740.00 185,760.00
1209 ft fma Step: 5019 8,128.00 195,072.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 1 of 1

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 39, Packet Page 77 8/16/2023 CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (PLMA) Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 6724 ASSISTANT POLICE CHIEF ft plma Step: 1340 7,762.00 186,288.00 340 6724 ft plma Step: 2340 8,148.00 195,552.00
6724 ft plma Step: 3340 8,557.00 205,368.00
6724 ft plma Step: 4340 8,985.00 215,640.00
6724 ft plma Step: 5340 9,434.00 226,416.00
1214 POLICE LIEUTENANT ft plma Step: 1024 6,735.00 161,640.00 024 1214 ft plma Step: 2024 7,072.00 169,728.00
1214 ft plma Step: 3024 7,430.00 178,320.00
1214 ft plma Step: 4024 7,801.00 187,224.00
1214 ft plma Step: 5024 8,189.00 196,536.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 1 of 1

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 40, Packet Page 78 8/16/2023 CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (MFFA) Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 2204 DEPUTY FIRE MARSHALL ft mffa Step: 1209 4,741.00 113,784.00 209 2204 ft mffa Step: 2209 4,978.00 119,472.00
2204 ft mffa Step: 3209 5,228.00 125,472.00
2204 ft mffa Step: 4209 5,485.00 131,640.00
2204 ft mffa Step: 5209 5,760.00 138,240.00
2201 FIRE CAPTAIN ft mffa Step: 1059 4,514.00 108,336.00 059 2201 ft mffa Step: 2059 4,739.00 113,736.00
2201 ft mffa Step: 3059 4,976.00 119,424.00
2201 ft mffa Step: 4059 5,222.00 125,328.00
2201 ft mffa Step: 5059 5,484.00 131,616.00
2203 FIRE ENGINEER ft mffa Step: 1060 3,898.00 93,552.00 060 2203 ft mffa Step: 2060 4,092.00 98,208.00
2203 ft mffa Step: 3060 4,298.00 103,152.00
2203 ft mffa Step: 4060 4,514.00 108,336.00
2203 ft mffa Step: 5060 4,739.00 113,736.00
2206 FIREFIGHTER ft mffa Step: 1062 3,535.00 84,840.00 062 2206 ft mffa Step: 2062 3,711.00 89,064.00
2206 ft mffa Step: 3062 3,898.00 93,552.00
2206 ft mffa Step: 4062 4,092.00 98,208.00
2206 ft mffa Step: 5062 4,298.00 103,152.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 1 of 1

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 41, Packet Page 79 6/1/2023 CITY OF MONTEREY FULL-TIME SALARY SCHEDULE (MPA) Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024
POS # POSITION TITLE Group Semi-Monthly Rate Annual Rate GRADE 2103 POLICE OFFICER ft mpa Step: 1057 4,350.00 104,400.00 057 2103 ft mpa Step: 2057 4,568.00 109,632.00
2103 ft mpa Step: 3057 4,800.00 115,200.00
2103 ft mpa Step: 4057 5,035.00 120,840.00
2103 ft mpa Step: 5057 5,284.00 126,816.00
2105 POLICE SERGEANT ft mpa Step: 1058 5,310.00 127,440.00 058 2105 ft mpa Step: 2058 5,573.00 133,752.00
2105 ft mpa Step: 3058 5,854.00 140,496.00
2105 ft mpa Step: 4058 6,145.00 147,480.00
2105 ft mpa Step: 5058 6,458.00 154,992.00
General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch-Annual2.rpt Page 1 of 1

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 42, Packet Page 80 8/16/2023 CITY OF MONTEREY PART-TIME HOURLY SCHEDULE (RPT) Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024
POS # POSITION TITLE GRADE Group
9373 ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT rpt rpt 673Step: 1 27.27 673
9373 rpt rpt 673Step: 2 28.63
9373 rpt rpt 673Step: 3 30.07
9373 rpt rpt 673Step: 4 31.57
9373 rpt rpt 673Step: 5 33.17
9329 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT rpt rpt 643Step: 1 24.72 643 9329 rpt rpt 643Step: 2 25.96
9329 rpt rpt 643Step: 3 27.26
9329 rpt rpt 643Step: 4 28.63
9329 rpt rpt 643Step: 5 30.07
9329 rpt rpt 643Step: 6 31.57
9329 rpt rpt 643Step: 7 33.17
9999 AQUATICS SPECIALIST I ptrpt 000Step: 1 20.22 475
9999 ptrpt 000Step: 2 21.23
9999 ptrpt 000Step: 3 22.29
9999 ptrpt 000Step: 4 23.41
9999 ptrpt 000Step: 5 24.61
9534 ARTIFACT SPECIALIST rpt rpt 485Step: 1 27.27 485
9534 rpt rpt 485Step: 2 28.63
9534 rpt rpt 485Step: 3 30.06
9534 rpt rpt 485Step: 4 31.56
9534 rpt rpt 485Step: 5 33.15
CULTURAL ARTS ASSISTANT rpt Step: 1 27.27 639
rpt Step: 2 28.63
rpt Step: 3 30.07
rpt Step: 4 31.57
rpt Step: 5 33.17
roll\402-01-Payroll General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch Part-time.rpt Page 1 of 4

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 43, Packet Page 81 8/16/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE GRADE Group
9339 CUSTODIAN rpt rpt 471Step: 1 19.21 471
9339 rpt rpt 471Step: 2 20.20
9339 rpt rpt 471Step: 3 21.20
9339 rpt rpt 471Step: 4 22.27
9339 rpt rpt 471Step: 5 23.40
9664 FACILITY ATTENDANT rpt rpt 545Step: 1 27.06 545
9664 rpt rpt 545Step: 2 28.44
9664 rpt rpt 545Step: 3 29.84
9664 rpt rpt 545Step: 4 31.34
9664 rpt rpt 545Step: 5 32.89
9615 HARBOR SECURITY WORKER rpt rpt 713Step: 1 29.16 713 9615 rpt rpt 713Step: 2 30.60
9615 rpt rpt 713Step: 3 32.15
9615 rpt rpt 713Step: 4 33.74
9615 rpt rpt 713Step: 5 35.43
LAUNDRY ATTENDANT rpt Step: 1 14.58 580
rpt Step: 2 15.26
rpt Step: 3 16.05
rpt Step: 4 16.81
rpt Step: 5 17.65
9526 LEAD PRESCHOOL INSTRUCTOR rpt rpt 525Step: 1 23.34 525 9526 rpt rpt 525Step: 2 24.48
9526 rpt rpt 525Step: 3 25.72
9526 rpt rpt 525Step: 4 27.01
9526 rpt rpt 525Step: 5 28.34
LIBRARIAN rpt Step: 1 30.61 546
rpt Step: 2 32.16
rpt Step: 3 33.76
rpt Step: 4 35.45
rpt Step: 5 37.22
roll\402-01-Payroll General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch Part-time.rpt Page 2 of 4

CITY OF MONTEREY PART-TIME HOURLY SCHEDULE (RPT)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 44, Packet Page 82 8/16/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE GRADE Group
9515 LIBRARY ASSISTANT I rpt rpt 547Step: 1 25.97 547
9515 rpt rpt 547Step: 2 27.29
9515 rpt rpt 547Step: 3 28.63
9515 rpt rpt 547Step: 4 30.09
9515 rpt rpt 547Step: 5 31.57
9513 LIBRARY ASSISTANT II rpt rpt 548Step: 1 27.29 548
9513 rpt rpt 548Step: 2 28.63
9513 rpt rpt 548Step: 3 30.07
9513 rpt rpt 548Step: 4 31.57
9513 rpt rpt 548Step: 5 33.17
9524 LIFEGUARD rpt rpt 492Step: 1 16.41 492
9524 rpt rpt 492Step: 2 17.15
9524 rpt rpt 492Step: 3 18.07
9524 rpt rpt 492Step: 4 18.95
9524 rpt rpt 492Step: 5 19.91
9665 PARKING ENFORCEMENT OFFICER rpt rpt 482Step: 1 29.16 482 9665 rpt rpt 482Step: 2 30.60
9665 rpt rpt 482Step: 3 32.15
9665 rpt rpt 482Step: 4 33.74
9665 rpt rpt 482Step: 5 35.43
9662 PARKING SERVICES REPRESENTATIV rpt rpt 714Step: 1 27.09 714 9662 rpt rpt 714Step: 2 28.45
9662 rpt rpt 714Step: 3 29.86
9662 rpt rpt 714Step: 4 31.35
9662 rpt rpt 714Step: 5 32.93
9518 PHYSICAL THERAPIST rpt rpt 535Step: 1 51.36 535
9518 rpt rpt 535Step: 2 53.92
9518 rpt rpt 535Step: 3 56.63
9518 rpt rpt 535Step: 4 59.45
9518 rpt rpt 535Step: 5 62.42
roll\402-01-Payroll General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch Part-time.rpt Page 3 of 4

CITY OF MONTEREY PART-TIME HOURLY SCHEDULE (RPT)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 45, Packet Page 83 8/16/2023
POS # POSITION TITLE GRADE Group
3206 POLICE RECRUIT rpt rpt 255Step: 1 43.64 255
9528 RECREATION SPECIALIST rpt rpt 476Step: 1 25.26 476 9528 rpt rpt 476Step: 2 26.53
9528 rpt rpt 476Step: 3 27.86
9528 rpt rpt 476Step: 4 29.25
9528 rpt rpt 476Step: 5 30.74
9519 SITE DIRECTOR/AFTERSCHOOL rpt rpt 513Step: 1 18.31 513 9519 rpt rpt 513Step: 2 19.23
9519 rpt rpt 513Step: 3 20.20
9519 rpt rpt 513Step: 4 21.19
9519 rpt rpt 513Step: 5 22.27
TOT ACTIVITY LEADER rpt Step: 1 18.31 491
rpt Step: 2 19.23
rpt Step: 3 20.20
rpt Step: 4 21.19
rpt Step: 5 22.27
9716 WHARF ATTENDANT rpt rpt 707Step: 1 27.10 707
9716 rpt rpt 707Step: 2 28.43
9716 rpt rpt 707Step: 3 29.85
9716 rpt rpt 707Step: 4 31.35
9716 rpt rpt 707Step: 5 32.92
roll\402-01-Payroll General Info\SALARY SCHEDULES\SalarySch Part-time.rpt Page 4 of 4

CITY OF MONTEREY PART-TIME HOURLY SCHEDULE (RPT)
Effective 7/01/2023 Through 6/30/2024

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 46, Packet Page 84 ATTACHMENT 3

CLASS SPECIFICATION
Administrative Services Technician City of Monterey, CA 1 of 3

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES TECHNICIAN
DEPARTMENT: Multiple DATE: August 2023
SALARY GROUP: Full-Time
FLSA Status: Non-Exempt
SUMMARY: Under general supervision, coordinates and performs administrative functions including the development and maintenance of work systems and procedures for a division within an assigned City department. Responsible for contract management, development, and maintenance of record systems; maintenance of cost and other records on work projects using databases; preparation of bids on general repair and preventive maintenance; supervision of personnel; and related work as required.

DISTINGUISHING CHARACTERISTICS: This position may oversee administrative support personnel and receives general direction from the supervisor and management level positions within the assigned department.

ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS: Essential functions, as defined under the Americans with Disabilities Act, may include any of the following representative duties, knowledge, and skills. Factors such as regular attendance at the job are not routinely listed in job descriptions, but are an essential function. Essential duties and responsibilities may include, but are not limited to, the following:
● Function as the front office lead in work order management procedures, accounts payable, payroll and credit card processing;
● Track contract lifecycle and associated costs; and assist in the development of contract specifications. ● Maintain records of maintenance and repair costs;
● Explain City policies and procedures to employees and the public; ● Order and purchase from supervised accounts; receive, store and issue parts and expendable supplies;
● Prepare or assist in the preparation of requests for quotation and bid specifications; ● Type memos and letters; consolidate information for submission of monthly or annual reports; ● Maintain appropriate files and records of personnel, maintenance activities, and permits; ● Answer phones and radio control;
● Receive and record requests or complaints and refer them to the appropriate supervisor for appropriate action;
● Design, implement, and maintain systems for the tracking of project costs, materials/supplies, and work type using a database;
● May be assigned to supervise, directly or indirectly, field service personnel; ● Supervise administrative support personnel;
● Reviews and evaluates work methods and procedures, recommends changes in work processes and workflow to ensure efficient operations in accordance with policies and procedures. ● Implement general and preventive maintenance work schedules; ● Support the relationship between the City of Monterey and the general public by demonstrating courteous and cooperative behavior when interacting with citizens, visitors, and City staff; ● Maintain confidentiality of work-related issues and City information; ● Perform other job-related duties within the scope of this job classification as assigned.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 47, Packet Page 85 ATTACHMENT 3

CLASS SPECIFICATION
Administrative Services Technician City of Monterey, CA 2 of 3 KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS:

Knowledge of:
● Municipal purchasing procedures;
● Methods and systems for tracking project cost and costing using a database; ● Office management techniques and working in a fast paced environment; ● Use of databases, email programs, Microsoft Office Suite (or similar); ● Providing administrative and technical support to field staff, supervisors, and other management staff.

Skill in:
● Working independently with minimal supervision;
● Maintaining accurate financial records and following established procedures; ● Supervising the work of others;
● Planning, budgeting, and executing projects using a database; ● Time management;
● Tact, discretion, initiative and independent judgment; ● Communicating with members of the public and City stakeholders; ● Written and oral communication;
● Following oral and written instructions;
● Effectively organize, direct, and review the work of other administrative staff; ● Working with a high volume of details; detail oriented, strong follow up skills.

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS:

Education: Graduation from high school or GED equivalent.

Experience: Three (3) years of responsible clerical experience, including one year of lead or supervisory responsibility;
OR
Successful completion of one year of college-level course work in Business or Public Administration or a related field and two years of responsible general office experience including one year of lead or supervisory responsibility;
An equivalent combination of education and experience may be considered.

LICENSE AND CERTIFICATIONS:
● Must possess a valid California Driver’s License upon time of appointment and be insurable with the City’s standard insurance rate, unless otherwise approved by appointing authority.

Physical Demands
● Standing & Walking – Primarily sedentary classification although standing in work areas and walking between work areas may be required.
● Sitting - Ability to work in a seated position at a computer station for extended periods of time ● Lifting - Ability to safely lift up to 20 pounds; this requirement include bending at knees to facilitate proper lifting techniques:
●
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 48, Packet Page 86 ATTACHMENT 3

CLASS SPECIFICATION
Administrative Services Technician City of Monterey, CA 3 of 3 ● Manual Dexterity - Ability to perform multiple work activities requiring a significant level of physical and mental coordination, such as operating a computer keyboard; copying, and adding machines; writing:
● Visual – Ability to read printed materials and view a computer screen for long periods:
● Hearing and Speech - Ability to communicate in person, before groups, and over the telephone. ● Mobility – Ability to work in a standard office setting and operate a motor vehicle to visit various meeting sites, reach, carry, push, pull, stoop, and bend.

Environmental Elements
Employees work in an office environment with moderate noise levels, controlled temperature conditions and no direct exposure to hazardous physical substances. Employees may interact with upset staff and/or public and private representatives in interpreting and enforcing departmental policies and procedures.

DISASTER SERVICE WORKERS
All City of Monterey employees are designated Disaster Service Workers through state and local law (California Government Code Section 3100-3109). Employment with the City requires the affirmation of a loyalty oath to this effect. Employees are required to complete all Disaster Service Worker-related training as assigned, and to return to work as ordered in the event of an emergency.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 49, Packet Page 87 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 1 of 20

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
between the

CITY OF MONTEREY
and the

MONTEREY EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION
JULY 1, 2022 – JUNE 30, 2024
DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 50, Packet Page 88 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 2 of 16
Table of Contents
SECTION 1 IMPLEMENTATION .....................................................................................................3 SECTION 2 TERM AND EFFECT OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING...........................3 SECTION 3 REOPENER .................................................................................................................3 SECTION 4 COVERED CLASSIFICATIONS ..................................................................................3 SECTION 5 SALARY.......................................................................................................................4 SECTION 6 DEFERRED COMPENSATION – MATCH PROGRAM...............................................4 SECTION 7 LONGEVITY PAY ........................................................................................................4 SECTION 8 VACATION SCHEDULE AND MAXIMUM ACCRUAL................................................4 SECTION 9 MANAGEMENT LEAVE ..............................................................................................5 SECTION 10 SICK LEAVE................................................................................................................5 SECTION 11 MATERNITY AND PARENTAL LEAVE ......................................................................7 SECTION 12 INSURANCE PLAN .....................................................................................................7 SECTION 13 RETIREMENT ............................................................................................................10 SECTION 14 BENEFITS DURING WORKERS COMPENSATION LEAVE AND SHORT TERM / LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN (STD/LTD)............................................................12 SECTION 15 GROUP LEGAL SERVICES......................................................................................12 SECTION 16 SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT PAY...................................................................................12 SECTION 17 FLOATING HOLIDAY................................................................................................12 SECTION 18 MINIMUM LEAVE EVENTS.......................................................................................12 SECTION 19 VOLUNTARY UNPAID LEAVE .................................................................................13 SECTION 20 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM.................................................................13 SECTION 21 WELLNESS PROGRAM............................................................................................13 SECTION 22 FITNESS ACTIVITY PLAN ........................................................................................14 SECTION 23 EMPLOYEE PARKING..............................................................................................14 SECTION 24 CALL-BACK VEHICLES ...........................................................................................14 SECTION 25 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE ..........................................................................................14 SECTION 26 CITY RECREATION PROGRAM FEES ....................................................................14 SECTION 27 SEVERANCE .............................................................................................................15 SECTION 28 PROVISIONS OF LAW..............................................................................................15 SECTION 29 FULL UNDERSTANDING, MODIFICATION AND WAIVER .....................................15 DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 51, Packet Page 89 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 3 of 16

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
between
City of Monterey
and
Monterey Executive Management Employees' Association
July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2024
This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU or Agreement) is entered into pursuant to the MeyersMilias-Brown Act (Government Code Sections 3500-3510) and the Employer-Employee Relations Resolution of the City of Monterey and is made by and between authorized representatives of the City of Monterey (hereinafter referred to as "City"), and the Monterey Executive Management Employees' Association (hereinafter referred to as "Association").

SECTION 1 IMPLEMENTATION
It is agreed that this Memorandum of Understanding shall not be binding upon the parties either in whole or in part unless and until ratified by the Association's membership, and by the City Council by a four-fifths (4/5) vote.

SECTION 2 TERM AND EFFECT OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING This MOU is effective July 1, 2022 and shall remain in full force and effect through June 30, 2024.

The terms, conditions, wages, and all provisions of this MOU shall continue in effect until a new MOU is negotiated and subsequently ratified by the Association and the City Council, until this MOU is superseded in accordance with City Code Section 25-16.12 (e), Impasse Procedure, as may be amended, or until the Association dissolves pursuant to City Code Section 15-16.10 (Decertification of Recognized Employee Organizations), as may be amended.

SECTION 3 REOPENER
The City reserves the right to reopen this MOU on the issue of wages for any classification that becomes vacant during the term of this Agreement.

SECTION 4 COVERED CLASSIFICATIONS
The classifications represented by this bargaining unit are as follows:
 Community Development Director
 Fire Chief
 Library Director
 Parks & Recreation Director
 Police Chief
 Public Works Director
DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 52, Packet Page 90 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 4 of 16
SECTION 5 SALARY

5.1. For 2022-2023 fiscal year:

5.1.1. Effective either July 1, 2022 or following Council ratification (whichever is later), salary schedules shall increase by 4.0%.
a. If an agreement is signed and ratified by July 11, 2022 the pay increases will be effective July 1, 2022.

5.2. For 2023-2024 fiscal year:

5.2.1. First full pay period following July 1, 2023, salary schedules increase by 4.0%.

5.2.2. Effective July 1, 2023, the base salary for the Fire Chief shall increase by one percent (1%).

5.2.3. Effective July 1, 2023 the base salary for the Police Chief shall increase by seven and one half percent (7.5).

SECTION 6 DEFERRED COMPENSATION – MATCH PROGRAM
The City will match up to $50.00 per pay period ($100.00 per month) of an employee's contribution to a City authorized Deferred Compensation Plan authorized under Internal Revenue Code Section 457.

SECTION 7 LONGEVITY PAY

7.1. Employees will receive longevity pay the first full pay period following the anniversary date that meets the following required years of continuous full-time service:

7.1.1. For those with at least twenty (20) years of continuous full-time City of Monterey service or more, a 5.0% longevity pay, calculated from the base rate of pay set forth in the adopted salary schedule, will be provided.

7.1.2. For those with at least twenty-five (25) years of continuous full-time City of Monterey service or more, a total of ten 10.0% longevity pay, calculated from the base rate of pay set forth in the adopted salary schedule, will be provided.

7.1.3. For those with at least thirty (30) years of continuous full-time City of Monterey service or more, a total of 15.0% longevity pay, calculated from the base rate of pay set forth in the adopted salary schedule, will be provided.

7.2. Employees hired on or after July 1, 2016, shall not be eligible for Longevity Pay.

7.3. Employees receiving stacked longevity pay in effect at the time of ratification will continue receiving such compounded 10% and 15% pay. For example, an employee currently receiving longevity for twenty-five (25) years will continue to receive 10.25% and those currently receiving longevity for thirty (30) years will continue to receive

15.763%. If an employee becomes eligible for longevity pay, or additional longevity pay, the flat rates of 10% and 15% as described above will apply.

SECTION 8 VACATION SCHEDULE AND MAXIMUM ACCRUAL

8.1. The vacation accrual shall be as follows:

8.1.1. All employees who have been employed continuously for less than five (5) years shall receive eighty (80) hours vacation accrual per year whether DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 53, Packet Page 91 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 5 of 16
assigned to a forty (40) hour work week or other duty schedule.

8.1.2. All employees who have been employed continuously for more than five (5) years but less than ten (10) years shall receive 120 hours vacation accrual per year whether assigned to a forty (40) hour work week or other duty schedule.

8.1.3. All employees who have been employed continuously for more than ten (10) years but less than fifteen (15) years shall receive 136 hours vacation accrual per year whether assigned to a forty (40) hour work week or other duty schedule.

8.1.4. All employees who have been employed continuously for more than fifteen (15) years but less than twenty (20) years shall receive 160 vacation accrual per year whether assigned to a forty (40) hour work week or other duty schedule.

8.1.5. All employees who have been employed continuously for more than twenty (20) years shall receive 184 hours vacation accrual per year whether assigned to a forty (40) hour work week or other duty schedule.

8.2. Vacation scheduling shall be subject to the current City Rules and Regulations in effect at the time of application.

8.3. Vacation shall not accrue in excess of 320 hours. Once an employee reaches this accrual limit of 320 hours, the employee shall not accrue additional vacation. Vacation accrual based on the employee’s accrual rates shall commence only after an employee has utilized vacation and accrual banks are below the 320 maximum allowed.

Employees may cash-out vacation accrual in excess of 280 hours at the end of the calendar year in accordance with a procedure set by the Finance Director. Vacation accruals may be cashed out upon separation from City employment.

8.4. The City Manager shall provide executive managers with vacation accrual based on the years of public service that is relevant to their current position, as determined by the City Manager. If provided by the City Manager, this prior service will count as years of service with the City of Monterey for determination of Vacation accrual.

SECTION 9 MANAGEMENT LEAVE

9.1. Employees shall be provided with forty (40) hours of “use it or lose it” management leave at the beginning of each calendar year. Unused time may not rollover to the next year, and there shall be no cash value for management leave time.

9.2. For those employees who are new to Association (for example—promotion from another employee group, or one who is hired to an Association classification from another agency), the amount of provided management leave in the initial calendar year of appointment shall be prorated based on the following schedule according to hire date:
 If hired January 1 to March 31 40 hours of Management Leave  If hired April 1 to June 30 30 hours of Management Leave  If hired July 1 to September 30 20 hours of Management Leave  If hired October 1 to November 30 10 hours of Management Leave  If hired December 1 to December 31 0 hours of Management Leave SECTION 10 SICK LEAVE
All full-time personnel shall be provided paid sick leave as set forth below.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 54, Packet Page 92 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 6 of 16

10.1. Sick Leave Accrual

10.1.1. Full-time employees shall accrue sick leave credits at the rate of eight (8) hours per month or major portion thereof.

10.1.2. All full-time personnel may accrue sick leave without limitation.

10.1.3. For purposes of this section, Family Member means children (biological, stepchildren, adopted, foster, legal wards, or a child to whom the employee stands in loco parentis), Parents (biological, adopted, step, foster, guardian, wards, or in-laws), Spouse, Domestic Partner registered with the State and submitted to Human Resources, Grandparent, Grandchild, Brother, Sister.

10.2. Sick Leave Usage for Employee and Family Members

10.2.1. Accrued sick leave may be utilized if the employee is required to be absent from work on account of non-job related illness or injury; routine medical or dental appointments; or for the care related to the illness or injury of the employee’s Family Member.

10.2.2. Accrued sick leave may also be used in accordance with Monterey City Code Section 25-12.11, Catastrophic Leave, as may be amended.

10.2.3. When utilizing the sick leave benefit, the employee shall notify the City Manager or his/her designee, in accordance with departmental regulations and Monterey City Code Section 25-11.01(b), Attendance, as may be amended.

10.2.4. Where the period of absence due to illness or injury is not known at the outset, it shall be the responsibility of the employee to remain in contact with the City Manager or his/her designee, on a daily basis if deemed necessary by the City Manager or his/her designee.

Usage of sick leave shall be charged to the employee's balance on an hourfor-hour basis in one-fourth (1/4) hour increments or in accordance with current law.

10.3. Sick Leave Usage for Death of a Family Member (Bereavement)

10.3.1. All employees may be authorized to use up to forty (40) hours of accrued sick leave per calendar year for the death of a family member or close relation. The maximum combined allowable use of sick leave for the above purposes shall not exceed eighty (80) hours in any calendar year.

10.3.2. At the City Manager or his/her designee’s discretion, the employee may be required to provide evidence that the leave was used for the purposes intended by this section.

10.4. Sick Leave Abuse

10.4.1. Sick leave abuse shall mean: “Any use of sick leave, for purposes other than those identified in this section.” Sick leave abuse may subject the employee to disciplinary actions.

10.4.2. When the City Manager or his/her designee has reason to suspect that an employee has abused sick leave benefits, the City Manager or his/her designee may require that employee to file a personal affidavit or physician’s affidavit excusing the absence due to illness or injury. The City Manager or his/her designee, at their discretion, may establish methods of verification as deemed appropriate. These means may include, but are not limited to, examination by a physician selected by and paid for by the City. If an DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 55, Packet Page 93 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 7 of 16
employee is required to be examined by a physician selected by the City, the employee will be paid for the time, if off duty, and will be given reimbursement for mileage to attend the examination.

10.4.3. Employees may be subject to discipline when the City substantiates that absences taken and sick leave accruals used on a given day or days are the result of a concerted action on the part of two (2) or more employees which is related to a labor dispute with the City directly, or one in which the City is involved as a third party.

10.5. Sick Leave Used as Personal Leave

10.5.1. Up to twenty-four (24) hours of accrued sick leave may be taken as Personal Leave during the calendar year so long as the employee has a minimum of 160 hours of accrued sick leave on the books at the time the Personal Leave is taken. Approval for the use of Personal Leave shall otherwise be subject to the same use rules as vacation and requires advance approval by the employee’s supervisor.

10.6. Exhaustion of Sick Leave

10.6.1. An employee anticipating exhaustion of sick leave may request advance approval from the City Manager or his/her designee for the use of discretionary leaves (i.e., vacation, holiday and compensatory time off) in the event of illness or injury, with the City Manager or his/her designee having discretion to either deny or approve the request.

10.7. Cash Out of Unused Sick Leave

10.7.1. A sworn employee with at least twenty (20) years of Monterey Fire Department or Monterey Police Department service who retires on a regular, non-disability retirement may “sell back” up to 50% of the employee’s unused accumulated sick leave. The City shall pay for the sick leave at the base rate of pay on the day of retirement.

10.7.2. Any sick leave days an employee “sells back” under this section shall not be converted to additional service credit with CalPERS.

SECTION 11 MATERNITY AND PARENTAL LEAVE

11.1. Employees are entitled to leaves of absence for maternity, parental bonding, and pregnancy-related disability. All such leaves of absence shall be granted and compensated in accordance with state and federal laws covering these topics, including the Pregnancy Disability Leave, Family Medical Leave Act, California Family Rights Act (CFRA) and the Fair Employment and Housing Act.

Employees taking an approved unpaid leave of absence for CFRA eligible baby-bonding are entitled to utilize accrued leave, including use of sick leave.

SECTION 12 INSURANCE PLAN
The following is a brief summary of insurance benefits. To the extent that the insurance programs detailed below continue to be available, the City will continue to offer these programs. Employees should refer to the plan documents for a complete description of benefits, coverage and limitations.

If, during the term of this Agreement, a change in insurance plans or coverage is necessary, the City shall provide notice thirty (30) days in advance, and, upon request, meet with representatives DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 56, Packet Page 94 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 8 of 16
of the Association. The City contribution towards the Insurance Plan premium(s) is defined in Section 12.4.1 of this Agreement.

12.1. Dental / Orthodontia Insurance

12.1.1. The City shall pay the full cost for employee dental insurance administered by Coastal or an equivalent third party administrator up to the annual maximums described in the plan description. The City will afford eligible employee dependents the opportunity to participate in an open enrollment every three years. An employee electing coverage for dependent(s) shall pay the full cost for dependent dental premiums rounded up to the nearest dollar.

12.2. Vision Care

12.2.1. The City will continue to provide vision care insurance, and pay the full cost of premiums, for employees and dependents. The plan will provide for expenses incurred up to the annual maximums described in the plan description.

12.3. Life Insurance

12.3.1. The City will provide a basic $65,000 Term Life Insurance and Accidental Death and Dismemberment Policy for each employee covered by this Agreement.

12.3.2. Additional Term Life Insurance (supplemental) may be purchased by each employee through payroll deductions in increments of $10,000.00 up to a maximum of at least $100,000.00, subject to the conditions of the life insurance carrier. In accordance with IRS regulations, only premiums for up to $50,000.00 of combined basic and supplemental coverage may be paid on a pre-tax basis. The purchase of additional insurance shall be in accordance with payroll deduction procedures established by the Finance Director and the underwriting requirements of the insurance carrier.

12.3.3. Subject to the conditions of the City’s life insurance carrier, the City shall offer to employees at the time of their retirement the option to convert their life insurance policy (both City-paid and employee-purchased supplemental insurance) to individual coverage at the employees’ expense.

12.4. Health Insurance – Cafeteria Plan

12.4.1. The provisions of this Agreement require participation by the Association in the Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA). The City shall continue the existing flexible benefits plan for employees through the term of this Agreement.

12.5. CalPERS Medical Benefits

12.5.1. The City provides health insurance through the California Public Employee’s Retirement System (CalPERS). The City shall make a direct contribution equal to the minimum employer contribution for agencies participating in the PEMHCA on behalf of each active employee and qualified retiree. a. For the plan year beginning January 1, 2023, the City shall make a nonelective employer contribution to the flexible benefits plan on behalf of each active employee in an amount which, inclusive of the minimum PEMHCA contribution, up to the following amounts:
 $2,540.00 per month – family coverage
 $2,040.00 per month – employee + 1
DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 57, Packet Page 95 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 9 of 16
 $899.00 per month – employee only
i. EXAMPLE: For 2023, the PEMHCA minimum contribution is $151.00; the City shall make a flexible benefits plan contribution of $2,389.00 per month for family coverage, $1,889.00 per month for two (2)-person coverage and $748.00 per month for single coverage.
ii. This contribution is known as the Health Plan Spending Fund (“HPSF”).

In no event will employees be credited with cash from any remainder of the HPSF.
b. For the plan year January 1, 2024 only, if amounts in subsection a. above are less than the total premiums for PERS Gold, the City shall increase its contribution, not to exceed 9.0% to the new PERS Gold premiums. c. Medical Waiver
i. During the term of this MOU, employees who opt out of a CalPERS plan for health insurance, and provide proof of alternate group medical insurance will be entitled to $ 300.00 per month. To qualify, an employee must provide proof of alternate group coverage to Human Resources. Alternate coverage must be acceptable by the City and compliant with the Affordable Care Act, as may be amended.

12.6. Cafeteria Plan and Optional Benefits

12.6.1. In accordance with IRS Code Section 125, the City will provide a Flexible Benefits Plan (“Cafeteria Plan”) to all eligible employees. Employees may elect to participate in the following three (3) Section 125 programs offered by the City:
 Premium Conversion;
 Dependent Care (IRS contribution limits apply); and
 Flexible Spending Account (IRS contribution limits apply).

12.6.2. Each of these programs will be administered in accordance with the IRS Code.

12.6.3. Consistent with applicable laws and regulations, each employee may use his/her HPSF for any benefits permitted by law and provided for in the Cafeteria Plan document. Those benefits include:
 Health insurance in accordance with CalPERS regulations and Federal law;
 Dependent dental coverage;
 Additional life insurance, provided by the City’s insurance carrier, up to the maximum allowed by the City’s carrier;
 Dependent Care Assistance Plan (DCAP), Employees will pay any administration fee for this service through payroll deductions; and  Flexible Spending Account (FSA), Employees will pay any administration fee for this service through payroll deductions.

12.7. Retiree Medical Premiums

12.7.1. Covered employees who retire under the provisions of the City’s contract with CalPERS, are currently eligible to continue CalPERS medical coverage. The City will make the mandatory minimum employer health premium contribution for City retirees participating in the Public Employees Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA). The mandatory monthly rate is established by CalPERS DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 58, Packet Page 96 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 10 of 16
annually, and is effective on January 1st of each calendar year pursuant to Government Code Section 22892.

SECTION 13 RETIREMENT

13.1. Non-Sworn Miscellaneous Classic Members

13.1.1. For all non-sworn miscellaneous members hired prior to January 1, 2013, the City will continue to provide the 2.7% @ 55 Public Employees’ Retirement System (PERS) Miscellaneous Members Retirement for each employee covered by this Agreement. The same 2.7% @ 55 will be provided to new employees, subject to CalPERS determination, who were previously employed by the City of Monterey as a full-time employee, or who were employed fulltime by another PERS (or reciprocal) agency within six (6) months from date of hire by the City of Monterey. This policy is in keeping with the California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act (PEPRA). As of July 1, 2013, the City's contract with PERS for the 2.7% @ 55 plan contains the following plan amendments allowed by the Public Employees’ Retirement Law (PERL):
a. Highest twelve (12) consecutive months for purposes of determining final compensation (PERL Section 20042).
b. Sick leave credit/conversion to service time (PERL Section 20965). c. 1959 Survivor Benefit Level 4 (Perl Section 21574). The employer's cost for this benefit will be paid by the employees through payroll deduction.

This amount is set by CalPERS each fiscal year.
d. Exclusion of hourly rated employees (Perl Section 20305). e. Military Service Credit (Perl Section 21024).
f. Partial Service Retirement (Perl Section 21118).
g. Employees Sharing Cost of Additional Benefits (Perl Section 21354.5)

13.1.2. The City shall pay for any increase in the employer rate and shall retain any savings from a decrease in the employer rate and/or contribution credits (rebates) from PERS.

13.1.3. Classic employees contribute on a pre-tax basis the 8% employee contribution amount established by CalPERS. Effective July 1, 2011, Classic employees contribute on a pre-tax basis a 3% costshare towards the Employer Contribution to CalPERS. The total contribution, which is memorialized by a 2018 contract amendment with CalPERS, is 11%. The City shall maintain the IRS 414(h)(2) provision allowing employees to defer State and Federal Income taxes on their CalPERS contributions.

13.2. Non-Sworn Miscellaneous PEPRA Members

13.2.1. For employees hired on or after January 1, 2013 who have not been previously employed by the City of Monterey as a full-time employee, or who were employed full-time by another PERS (or reciprocal) agency and had a break in service greater than six (6) months from date of hire by the City of Monterey, subject to CalPERS determination, will be placed on a second PERS Plan tier. The second tier for these employees is the 2.0% @ 62 and contains the same plan amendments as the 2.7% @ 55 plan described above, except that PEPRA requires the 2.0% @ 62 retirement formula to be based on a thirty-six (36)-month average of annual pensionable compensation earned (rather than a twelve (12)-month average) and employees on the second tier contribute 50% of the normal cost of the plan as established by CalPERS and DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 59, Packet Page 97 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 11 of 16
are not required to participate in any cost-sharing of the Employers’ Contribution to CalPERS. The City shall maintain the IRS 414(h)(2) provision allowing employees to defer State and Federal Income taxes on their CalPERS contributions.

13.3. Sworn Fire and Police Safety Classic Members

13.3.1. For all sworn safety members hired prior to January 1, 2013, that are defined as “Classic” members by PEPRA, the City will provide the 3.0% @ 50 retirement formula. The same 3% @ 50 will be provided to new employees, subject to CalPERS determination, who were previously employed by the City of Monterey as a full-time employee, or who were employed full-time by another PERS (or reciprocal) agency within six (6) months from date of hire by the City of Monterey. This policy is in keeping with the California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act (PEPRA). As of July 1, 2013, the City's contract with PERS for the 3% @ 50 plan contains the following plan amendments:
a. Highest twelve (12) consecutive months for purposes of determining final compensation (Section 20042).
b. Sick leave credit/conversion to service time (Section 20965). c. 1959 Survivor Benefit Level 4(Section 21574). The employer's cost for this benefit will be paid by the employees through payroll deduction. This amount is set by CalPERS each fiscal year.
d. Exclusion of hourly rated employees (Section 20305). e. Military Service Credit (Section 21024).
f. Partial Service Retirement (Section 21118).
g. Employees Sharing Cost of Additional Benefits (Section 21354.5)

13.3.2. The Fire Chief and Police Chief contribute on a pre-tax basis the 9% employee contribution amount established by CalPERS. Effective July 1, 2011, Classic employees contribute on a pre-tax basis a 3% costshare towards the Employer Contribution to CalPERS. The total contribution, which is memorialized by a 2018 contract amendment with CalPERS, is 12%. The City shall maintain the IRS 414(h)(2) provision allowing employees to defer State and Federal Income taxes on their CalPERS contributions.

13.3.3. The employer's cost for the Indexed Level of 1959 Survivor Benefit Level 4 (Section 21574.5) will be paid by the employees through payroll deduction.

13.4. Sworn Fire and Police Safety PEPRA Members

13.4.1. Employees hired on or after January 1, 2013 who do not meet the definition of a “Classic” member as referenced above, will be placed in Option Plan 2 and considered a new member of the retirement system. Option Plan 2 for these employees is the 2.7% @ 57 formula. PEPRA requires the member retirement formula to be based on a thirty-six (36)-month average of annual pensionable compensation earned (rather than a twelve (12)-month average) and employees in Option Plan 2 are not required to participate in cost-sharing of the employers’ contribution to CalPERS. Employees are responsible for paying 50% of the total “normal cost” rate. The “normal cost” rate is subject to change on a fiscal year basis as determined by CalPERS.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 60, Packet Page 98 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 12 of 16
SECTION 14 BENEFITS DURING WORKERS COMPENSATION LEAVE AND SHORT

TERM / LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN (STD/LTD)
The City shall provide a City-paid combined insured Short Term Disability / Long Term Disability Plan (STD/LTD). During the term of this Agreement, the City will pay any increase in costs and will retain any savings resulting from a decrease in cost for this plan.

14.1. Maintenance of Benefits

14.1.1. The City will provide the employee on an industrial or non-industrial disability protected leave of absence with benefits for up to a maximum of one (1) year per incident in accordance with state and federal law.

14.2. Leave Accrual

14.2.1. If, due to an industrial injury or illness, an employee is in a pay status (either City pay or Workers Compensation payment) for the majority of the month, leave accruals (sick leave, vacation, and holidays) shall continue for the first six (6) months of the disability.

14.2.2. If, due to a non-industrial injury or illness, an employee receives disability payments for what constitutes the majority of the month, the employee shall not accrue leave (sick leave, vacation, and holiday).

SECTION 15 GROUP LEGAL SERVICES
Subject to provider limitations, the City will continue to provide a Group Legal Services Plan for employees represented by Association through an employee-paid premium. Participation in the program shall be voluntary and consistent with the provider's requirements that the potential pool of participants must include a minimum of 200 employees.

SECTION 16 SPECIAL ASSIGNMENT PAY
City Code Section 25-5.12 addresses Special Assignment Pay, with the range for the City Manager or designee to authorize not less than 2.0% and not more than 5.0% in a temporary pay adjustment. This section modifies that range as addressed in City Code Section 25-5.12 to be not less than 2.0% and not more than 20.0%.

SECTION 17 FLOATING HOLIDAY

17.1. The Association's holiday schedule shall include one (1) floating holiday per fiscal year, per employee. This floating holiday may be carried over into the following year, but in no case shall an employee be allowed to accrue more than forty (40) hours of accrued floating holiday time. There shall be no cash value to the accrued floating holiday hours.

The scheduling is at the discretion of the employee subject to approval by the City Manager.

If an employee is at the forty (40)-hour maximum accrual, in a pay period when an additional holiday is accrued, the employee may utilize accrued holiday hours in the same pay period in order to obtain the holiday accrual. Otherwise, the employee forfeits that floating holiday.

SECTION 18 MINIMUM LEAVE EVENTS
The minimum leave that can be taken by an employee for all leave events shall be fifteen (15) DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 61, Packet Page 99 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 13 of 16
minutes, except for voluntary unpaid leave pursuant to this Agreement, Section 19.

SECTION 19 VOLUNTARY UNPAID LEAVE

19.1. With advance City Manager approval, an employee may take up to eighty (80) hours of management unpaid leave per calendar year. Such leave may be taken in one (1) hour minimum increments. Further, so long as the employee is in a paid status at least half of the month, such unpaid leave shall not result in a loss of benefits or leave accruals.

19.2. Employees exceeding this amount of unpaid leave may be disciplined for excessive leave of absence. Excluded from discipline are absences certified as protected leave of absence under state or federal law or leave approved as a reasonable accommodation for a disability under state or federal law.

SECTION 20 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM
The Tuition Reimbursement allowance shall be $1000.00 per year per employee. The program shall include reimbursement for seminars, conferences and other accredited courses that are job related and for course textbooks.

SECTION 21 WELLNESS PROGRAM

21.1. The Association and the City agree that employee health and fitness are important factors in maintaining an optimal work environment. In addition to the existing Employee Assistance Program, employees may receive passes to the Monterey Sports Center, valued at the current rates, and subject to rate increases, in order to implement their personal fitness programs. The Internal Revenue Service views the employee membership as taxable income.

21.2. Upon complying with membership requirements, employees shall receive annual, renewable and nontransferable employee-only passes to the Monterey Sports Center in order to implement their personal fitness programs.

21.3. Employees may apply the dollar value of the employee-only pass to the Monterey Sports Center towards the purchase of a family pass to this facility. The employee shall be responsible for the cost differential between the credit value of the employee-only pass and the family pass. During open enrollment, the employee shall be afforded the opportunity to make an election to continue crediting the value of the employee-only pass towards the family pass which shall be irrevocable for the next twelve (12) months.

21.4. Employees electing to receive a family pass under this program shall have a payroll deduction for the cost of maintaining the family pass active from month to month based on the difference between the cost of the family pass and the employee-only pass. Upon separation from the City, the family pass shall be cancelled unless the separated employee elects to maintain the pass under the same conditions available to the general public.

21.5. New hires can enroll in the Fitness Program upon hire, and then during open enrollment thereafter. Employees can cancel enrollment in the Fitness Program during open enrollment.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 62, Packet Page 100 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 14 of 16
SECTION 22 FITNESS ACTIVITY PLAN

22.1. All members will be eligible to participate in a Fitness Plan where they workout off-duty (not considered work time for purposes of Workers’ Compensation injury or illness) in exchange for leave time accrued in a fitness bank.

22.2. Conditions for Qualifying

22.1.1. Employees are required to work out a minimum of 1170 minutes per quarter in order to accrue ten (10) hours of leave. A session is considered to be any moderate or higher intensity physical activity lasting a minimum of fifteen (15) minutes. Participants will sign a form demonstrating completion of each workout, which is based on the honor system. At the end of each quarter the form will be turned into the employee’s department for verification and the ten (10) hours of leave will be credited to the exercise incentive time bank as soon as practical and will be available for immediate use by the employee.

22.1.2. Each calendar year a maximum of forty (40) hours can be accrued in a separate exercise incentive time bank, with a maximum of eighty (80) hours allowed in the bank. The exercise incentive time bank has no cash value and the time accrued in this bank has no expiration date.

22.1.3. Leave time must be coordinated and approved in advance by the employee’s supervisor.

22.1.4. Participation is voluntary and for those electing to participate, an annual physical fitness assessment at the Monterey Sports Center, which can be used as a thirty (30)-minute workout session, is encouraged. Individual results of the physical fitness assessment will be confidential between the Monterey Sports Center and the employee.

22.1.5. Submitting a Fitness Plan Waiver form to Human Resources is required to participate in this program.

SECTION 23 EMPLOYEE PARKING
The parties acknowledge that the City has not provided free parking for all on duty personnel.

SECTION 24 CALL-BACK VEHICLES
The Fire Chief and Police Chief will each be provided with a vehicle for emergency response during off-duty time.

SECTION 25 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE
The City will contribute the following monthly uniform allowance for the following sworn members:

Fire Chief: $90
Police Chief: $100
SECTION 26 CITY RECREATION PROGRAM FEES
The Resident Rates for City Recreation classes and programs shall be afforded to employees and immediate family household members (spouse, domestic partner and dependent children twenty (20) years of age and younger) of active City employees.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 63, Packet Page 101 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 15 of 16
SECTION 27 SEVERANCE
Should the City Charter be amended during the term of this Agreement to reflect that employees covered by this Agreement are “at will” employees subject to termination without cause or appeal rights, then the parties will reopen the contract to discuss severance and release terms.

SECTION 28 PROVISIONS OF LAW
This Agreement is subject to all current and future applicable federal and state laws and regulations. If any part or provision of this Agreement is in conflict or inconsistent with such applicable laws or regulation, or is otherwise held to be invalid or unenforceable by any tribunal of competent jurisdiction, such part or provision shall be suspended and superseded by such applicable law or regulation and the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby.

SECTION 29 FULL UNDERSTANDING, MODIFICATION AND WAIVER

29.1. This Agreement sets forth the full and entire understanding of the parties regarding the matters set forth herein, and any other prior or existing understanding or agreements by the parties, whether formal or informal, regarding any such matters contained herein are hereby superseded or terminated in their entirety. No other understandings or agreements are encompassed in this Agreement. Existing benefits not changed herein shall remain in full force.

29.2. Except as specifically provided herein, it is agreed and understood that each party hereto voluntarily and unqualifiedly waives its right, and agrees that the other shall not be required to negotiate with respect to any subject or matter covered herein or with respect to any other matters within the scope of representation during the term of this Agreement.

29.3. No agreement, alteration, understanding, variation, waiver or modification of any of the terms or provisions contained herein shall in any manner be binding upon the parties hereto unless made and executed by all parties.

29.4. In the event any new practice, subject or matter arises during the term of this Agreement that is within the scope of meet and confer, and an action is proposed by the City, the Association shall be afforded all possible advance notice and shall have the right to meet and confer upon request. In the absence of an agreement on such a proposed action, the City reserves the right to take necessary action by management direction.

29.5. Nothing herein shall limit the authority of the City to make necessary and reasonable changes during emergencies. Emergency shall mean the actual or threatened existence of conditions of disaster or of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the City caused by such conditions as air pollution, fire, flood, storm, epidemic, riot or earthquake, or other conditions, including conditions resulting from war or imminent threat of war. However, the City shall notify the Association of such changes as soon as practicable. Such emergency assignments shall not extend beyond the period of the emergency.

29.6. The waiver of any breach, term or condition of this MOU by either party shall not constitute a precedent in the future enforcement of all its terms and provisions.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 64, Packet Page 102 MEMEA MOU July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2024 Page 16 of 16
****
The parties hereto have caused their duly authorized representatives to execute this Memorandum of Understanding the day, month and year noted below.

CITY OF MONTEREY MONTEREY EXECUTIVE

MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION

Dated: _________________________ Dated: __________________________ _________________________________ _________________________________ Hans Uslar, City Manager Gaudenz Panholzer, MEMEA President

Dated: __________________________ Dated: ___________________________ _________________________________ _________________________________ Brette Neal, Human Resources Director Dave Hober, MEMEA Vice President DocuSign Envelope ID: 41336F72-984A-452B-BCF9-3803E6D02178 8/22/2023 | 1:13 PM PDT 8/22/2023 | 3:14 PM PDT
8/22/2023 | 1:49 PM PDT 8/22/2023 | 12:58 PM PDT
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 65, Packet Page 103 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Janna Aldrete, Property Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize Staff to Administratively Approve Consent to Sublease Requests for Allowed Uses Under the Primary Leases for the Properties Located at 560-570 Munras Avenue; 700 Cannery Row; and 720 Cannery Row (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

Authorize staff to administratively approve consent to sublease requests for allowed uses under the primary leases for the properties located at 560-570 Munras Avenue; 700 Cannery Row; and 720 Cannery Row.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The recommended action is consistent with prior City Council action for ground lease properties located at 32 Cannery Row, 20 Ryan Ranch Road, 640 Wave Street and 95 Prescott Street.

The ground leases for the properties located at 560-570 Munras Avenue, 700 Cannery Row and 720 Cannery Row allow subleases with City consent. Requirements for granting consent to a sublease are established in the various lease agreements.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no direct fiscal implications from this action. There will be a reduction in staff time if future consent to sublease agreements are administratively approved.

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.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 7., Item Page 1, Packet Page 104 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 decide to continue to review and approve consent to sublease agreements at the City Council level for these properties. This is not recommended by staff. The primary lease agreements specify allowed uses at the properties and staff is capable to review proposed sublease agreements for compliance with the primary lease.

DISCUSSION:
560-570 Munras Avenue
The property located at 560-570 is subject to a 25-year ground lease, dated October 18, 2006, between the City and ROIC Monterey, LLC (“ROIC”). The City owns the entire site. The ground lease provides 8 consecutive 5-year options to extend the lease. ROIC’s predecessor, GLC/Foothill Monterey, LLC, redeveloped the site in 2007 with Trader Joe’s as the anchor subtenant. Other subtenants include Chipotle, Peet’s Coffee & Tea, and Ike’s Sandwiches, to name a few. The ground lease contemplates subleasing, and the City’s consent may not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed.
560-570 Munras Avenue
700 Cannery Row
The building located at 700 Cannery Row is owned by The Cannery Row Company. A portion of the building is built within the Tidelands boundary and this portion of the building is subject to a lease with the City. The lease contemplates subleasing, requiring the City’s written consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. The lease is scheduled to expire December 31, 2054. There are currently over twenty businesses located at 700 Cannery Row. However, only two businesses, The Fish Hopper and A Taste of Monterey, are subject to a sublease requiring the City’s consent due to their location within the Tidelands boundary.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 7., Item Page 2, Packet Page 105 720 Cannery Row
The building located at 720 Cannery Row is owned by The Cannery Row Company. A portion of the building is built within the Tidelands boundary and this portion of the building is subject to a lease with the City. The lease contemplates subleasing, requiring the City’s written consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. The current lease is scheduled to expire December 31, 2054. The entire building is leased to Bubba Gump Shrimp Co. Restaurants, Inc. However, only a portion of the building is subject to a sublease due to its location within the Tidelands boundary.

Analysis
Previous City Council direction authorized staff administrative approval for consent to sublease requests for properties located at 20 Ryan Ranch Road (McGraw-Hill), 32 Cannery Row (Monterey Bay Boatworks Company), 640 Wave Street (Edgewater Packing Company) and 95 Prescott Avenue (Warehouse Building). Authorizing staff administrative authority to consent to subleases provides a timelier review process for these ground leases that contemplate subleases.

To facilitate the requests in a timely manner, for the City to consent to sublease agreements at 560-570 Munras Avenue, 700 Cannery Row, and 720 Cannery Row, staff recommends Council grant administrative authority to consent to any future sublease agreements. If administrative authority is granted, staff will carefully review the proposed request to ensure the use is Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 7., Item Page 3, Packet Page 106 compliant with the primary lease and no policy or fiscal issues are presented in the proposal.

Any request that presents policy or fiscal concerns will be submitted to the City Council for deliberation and decision.

JA/ad
e: Mike Zimmerman, Cannery Row Company
April Sheffield, ROIC Monterey, LLC
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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 7., Item Page 4, Packet Page 107 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

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

AUTHORIZING STAFF TO ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE CONSENT TO SUBLEASE

REQUESTS FOR ALLOWED USES UNDER THE PRIMARY LEASES FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 560-570 MUNRAS AVENUE; 700 CANNERY ROW; AND 720 CANNERY ROW
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey, as landlord, entered into a ground lease, dated October 18, 2006, for the property located at 560-570 Munras Avenue (“Munras Avenue Ground Lease”);
WHEREAS, the Munras Avenue Ground Lease allows subleases with City of Monterey consent;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey may not unreasonably withhold, condition or delay its consent to a sublease under the Munras Avenue Ground Lease; WHEREAS, the City of Monterey, as landlord, entered into a ground lease, dated March 23, 1988, for a portion of the property located at 700 Cannery Row (“700 Cannery Row Lease”); WHEREAS, the 700 Cannery Row Lease allows subleases with City of Monterey consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld; WHEREAS, the City of Monterey, as landlord, entered into a ground lease, dated March 23, 1988, for a portion of the property located at 720 Cannery Row (“720 Cannery Row Lease”); WHEREAS, the 720 Cannery Row Lease allows subleases with City of Monterey consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld; WHEREAS, requirements for granting consent to a sublease are established in the various lease agreements;
WHEREAS, staff is capable to review proposed sublease agreements for compliance with the primary lease agreements;
WHEREAS, previous City Council direction authorized staff administrative approval for consent to sublease requests for 20 Ryan Ranch Road (McGraw-Hill); 32 Cannery Row (Monterey Bay Boatworks Company); 640 Wave Street (Edgewater Packing Company) and 95 Prescott Avenue (Warehouse Building); 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 Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 7., Item Page 5, Packet Page 108 2 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 it hereby authorizes staff to administratively approve consent to subleases for properties located at 560-570 Munras Avenue; 700 Cannery Row and 720 Cannery Row, when it is determined upon careful review that the proposed use is compliant with the primary lease and there are no policy or fiscal concerns presented in the proposed sublease.

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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 7., Item Page 6, Packet Page 109 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Submitted by: Rex Van Slyke, Fleet Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize the Purchase of One (1) Parking Lot/Parking Garage Sweeper in the Amount of $162,676.11 from NiteHawk Sweepers (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the purchase of a parking lot/parking garage sweeper from NiteHawk Sweepers in the amount of $162,676.11.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action is consistent with Council’s strategic priority to carefully manage City revenues and expenditures which support the delivery of City services.

This action is also consistent with policy requiring Council approval of purchases exceeding $75,000.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Funding for this purchase is available in the Vehicle Replacement Fund [705-110-1130-6520- 4503]. The purchase was approved as part of the FY24 Vehicle Replacement Budget. The sweeper will be purchased from NiteHawk Sweepers utilizing a cooperative purchasing agreement (“Piggyback”) through Sourcewell Cooperative Contract #093021-SWZ (Monterey City Code 28-25(c)(d)) for $162,676.11 including tax and delivery. The Finance Department approved this piggyback purchase August 9, 2023.

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 Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 8.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 8., Item Page 1, Packet Page 110 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 authorize this purchase; however, this is not recommended.

Without this approval for purchase, Staff cannot replace the current sweeper which has reached the end of its life cycle and is costing the City an average of $29,820 annually in operational costs.

DISCUSSION:

The current Parking Maintenance Division sweeper is a 2015 NiteHawk Osprey model mounted on a 2015 GMC chassis. This vehicle is operated seven (7) days a week and is responsible for sweeping all the City’s parking garages and parking lots. Currently, this vehicle has 86,925 miles on the chassis combined with 12,726.3 PTO (Power Take-Off) hours with an equivalent mileage of 763,578 (PTO hours x 60 = equivalent mileage, which is the standard calculation for identifying engine use for vehicles that have high engine usage, but not chassis usage). Staff determined that a total vehicle replacement is necessary; the vehicle has already sustained one engine replacement, and the usage rates are considered extremely high.

The possibility of an electric vehicle (EV) replacement was considered, however the only EV sweeper options available are too expensive and oversized for this application. In addition, current estimated delivery for EV models is approximately 16-18 months.

Therefore, staff recommends that Council adopt a resolution approving the purchase of one (1) sweeper from NiteHawk Sweepers in the amount of $162,676.11.

RVS/dt
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. NiteHawk Sweepers Quote
e: Paul Dyer, NiteHawk Sweepers
Cristie Steffy, Parking Superintendent
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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 8., Item Page 2, Packet Page 111 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/22
AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF ONE (1) PARKING LOT/PARKING GARAGE SWEEPER IN THE AMOUNT OF $162,676.11 FROM NITEHAWK SWEEPERS
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey wishes to purchase one (1) parking lot/parking garage sweeper to replace the current sweeper which has reached the end of its life cycle; WHEREAS, the sweeper will be purchased utilizing a cooperative purchasing agreement (“Piggyback”) through Sourcewell Contract #093021-SWZ;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey evaluated the procurement process utilized by Sourcewell and determined it to be an acceptable “piggyback” purchasing option, allowing the City to utilize multi-agency contract pricing. This purchasing process is authorized under Monterey City Code section 28-14(a);
WHEREAS, the Finance Department approved the “piggyback” request on August 9, 2023;
WHEREAS, sufficient funds are available in the Vehicle Replacement Fund Account [705-110-1130-6520-4503] for this purchase; 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 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 it hereby authorizes the purchase of one (1) new parking lot/parking Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 8., Item Page 3, Packet Page 112 2 garage sweeper in the amount of $162,676.11 from NiteHawk Sweepers and for the City Manager or designee to sign documents necessary to effectuate this purchase.

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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 8., Item Page 4, Packet Page 113 Osprey II Specialized (Sourcewell Pricing)
Qty Name Description Retail Retail Ext. Sourcewell
1 OSPREY II 2023 Osprey II - 2023 Chevrolet 2500HD (Gas) $149,447 $149,447 $141,974.65 1 Shipping Surcharge 2023 Required Shipping Surcharge $709.87 1 Dust Suppression Dust Suppression Water System - 45 Gallon Tank $2,099 $2,099 $1,994.05 0 Passenger Broom Passenger Side Curb Broom - Vertical Digger, Independant Controls $5,999 $0 $0.00 0 Side Blower Hose 3" Side Blower Hose - Fan Powered, Driver Side Access $299 $0 $0.00 0 Side Suction Hose 6" Side Suction Hose - 8' Reach, Aluminum Nozzle and Handle $1,299 $0 $0.00 1 Exterior Fire Ext Fire Extinguisher - Exterior Mount, 10lb, A/B/C Rated, Cover 1 HD Front Bumper Heavy Duty Safey Bumper - 3/16" High Strength Steel, Padded $1,499 $1,499 $1,424.05 0 Magnet - Front Front Magnet Bar - Front Bumper Mounted, 72" $1,599 $0 $0.00 0 Magnets - Rear 16" Magnet Trays, Mounted to Rear of Sweeping Head $998 $0 $0.00 1 Bumper Strobes High Visibility Amber LED Flashers - 2 Front, 2 Rear 1 LED Flasher Bar High Visibility Amber LED Light Bar, Center Mounted 0 Multi View Camera Multi View Camera System - Dashboard Display, 3 Cameras $1,999 $0 $0.00 0 Traffic Advisor Low Profile SUPER LED Direction Flasher Bar, 30", In Cab Control $1,679 $0 $0.00 0 Work Light - Front Front Work Light - Wide Angle View 15" White LED Light Bar $649 $0 $0.00 0 Work Light - Rear Rear Work Light - Wide Angle View 15" White LED Light Bar $649 $0 $0.00 0 Custom - Paint Custom Color - Paint - Call for Price, Enter Price, Detail in Notes Below $0 $0 $0.00 0 Custom - Wrap Custom Color/Design Wrap - Call for Price, Enter Price, Detail in Notes Below $0 $0 $0.00 0 Custom Options Custom Options - Call for Pricing - Call for Price, Enter Price, Detail in Notes Below $0 $0 $0.00 0 Factory Training Factory Maintenance and Operations Training $4,500 $0 $0.00 none Shipping Region Shipping Cost $2,800.00
West Coast Customer Name City of Monterey Terms - FOB Factory Midwest
East Coast City / St Monterey, CA $156,554.87
Sales Rep Paul Dyer $148,902.62
PO / Reference #
Email [email protected]
Custom Details
• Specifications Page
• Shipping Region Map
PERFORMANCE • Click for Performance Option Details
PROTECTION • Click for Protection Option Details
VISIBILITY • Click for Visibility Option Details
CUSTOM
Options

RETAIL TOTAL

SOURCEWELL TOTAL
West Coast
Standard on Osprey II Specialized
Standard on Osprey II Specialized
Standard on Osprey II Specialized
Sourcewell Contract #093021-SWZ
Alamo Group Inc.
dba - Schwarze Sweepers
dba - Nitehawk Sweepers
Sales Tax $13,773.49
Quote Total $162,676.11
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 8., Item Page 5, Packet Page 114 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Megan Beckman, Administrative Analyst
SUBJECT: Award a Contract in the Amount of $78,018.40 to Duke's Root Control, Inc. for Annual Sewer Root Foaming 2023 (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the attached resolution:

1. Approving the use of the bid amounts supplied by Duke’s Root Control, Inc. as the lowest responsive, responsible bidder for Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC), as authorized by the City of Monterey’s Purchasing Ordinance’s exception to competitive procurement requirements (Monterey Code 28-14(a);

2. Awarding a contract to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, Duke’s Root Control, Inc, in the amount of $78,018.40;

3. Authorizing the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the contract upon the receipt of information required by the contract; and,

4. Authorizing staff to expend up to an additional $5,000 for unforeseen conditions in the field.

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.

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This Project is consistent with the City Council’s Value Drivers and Strategic Priorities of Quality of Life – “Respond effectively to neighborhood concerns” and Protecting our Environment – “Protect the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and our environmental assets from pollution.”
This action is also consistent with policy requiring Council approval of agreements exceeding $75,000.

Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 9.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 9., Item Page 1, Packet Page 115 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The contract cost of $85,724.90 is based on the following City sewer pipe sizes and approximate quantities to be foamed:

Pipe Size Unit Price Quantity Total
4–9 inch $1.96/ft. 35,172 feet $68,937.12
10–12 inch $2.36/ft. 3,848 feet $9,081.28
39,020 feet $78,018.40
The award of this contract utilizes an accepted exception to competitive procurement requires by purchasing through a cooperative purchase contract. (Monterey Code 28-14(a)) from the Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC), approved by Finance on August 15, 2023.

Total Project Estimate:

Total Bid $ 78,018.40
Contingency, $5,000 $ 5,000
Total Project Estimate (This Authorization) $ 83,018.40 Funding Sources:

Citywide Root Foaming Project account (35c1501) $ 92,441.85 As of August 16, 2023, there are sufficient funds available to complete this project.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) because the project proposes sewer main root foaming in existing sanitary sewer lines to control root growth.

This is a minor maintenance activity of an existing facility. Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

Exception a - Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located - a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies. Exception a – Location – does not apply to Class 1.

Exception b - Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. There would be no cumulative impact because the project is a minor maintenance activity of an existing facility.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 9., Item Page 2, Packet Page 116 Exception c - Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. There are no unusual circumstances because the project is a standard maintenance method for root growth control.

Exception d - Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The project is underground; therefore, damages to scenic resources will not occur.

Exception e - Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project is not located on a hazardous waste site pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project area is limited to the inside of the sanitary sewer lines.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City could choose not to perform sewer line root foaming. This is not recommended, as root mitigation is an essential maintenance method to help prevent SSOs (sanitary sewer overflows).

DISCUSSION:

The purpose of this project is to apply a chemical root control agent to the sanitary sewer lines to kill the root growth that may be present in the lines and to inhibit re-growth. This standard maintenance method does not permanently damage the vegetation producing the roots. Root control treatment helps to address sanitary sewer maintenance problems in the City’s sewer system. The chemical root foaming agent is approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for this use. The foam is pumped through the sewer main from manhole to manhole to compress it against all pipe surfaces. Roots in the sewer stop growing and eventually die upon contact with the herbicide foam; trees are not otherwise harmed with this method. The treatment inhibits re-growth for three to five years. The locations to be treated include various locations throughout the City.

Staff chose to expedite the bidding portion of the project by utilizing an accepted exemption to competitive procurement requirements (Monterey Code 28-14(a)). The lowest responsive, responsible bidder for the Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC) is Duke’s Root Control, Inc. The exception from competitive bidding requirements was approved by Finance on August 15, 2023. Duke’s Root Control, Inc. has performed sewer root foaming for the City in the past and staff is confident in their ability to perform the scope of services.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 9., Item Page 3, Packet Page 117 Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution:

2. Awarding a contract to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, Duke’s Root Control, Inc, in the amount of $78,018.40;

3. Authorizing the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the contract upon the receipt of information required by the contract; and,

4. Authorizing staff to expend up to an additional $5,000 for unforeseen conditions in the field.

AR/mb
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Bid Schedule
e: Tricia Wotan, Environmental Regulations Manager
Duke’s Root Control, Inc.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№08/22
AWARD A CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $78,018.40 TO DUKE'S ROOT CONTROL, INC.

FOR ANNUAL SEWER ROOT FOAMING 2023
WHEREAS, root control treatment helps to address sanitary sewer maintenance problems in the City’s sewer system;
WHEREAS, the award of this contract utilizes an accepted exception to competitive procurement requirements (Monterey Code 28-14(a)) from the Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC), approved by Finance on August 15, 2023;
WHEREAS, Duke’s Root Control, Inc. is the lowest responsive, responsible bidder for Houston-Galveston Area Council (H-GAC);
WHEREAS, sufficient funding is available to complete the project in the Citywide Root Foaming Project account (35c1501); and,
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) because the project proposes sewer main root foaming in existing sanitary sewer lines to control root growth. This is a minor maintenance activity of an existing facility. Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

Exception c - Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. There are no unusual circumstances because the project is a standard maintenance method for root growth control.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 9., Item Page 5, Packet Page 119 2 Exception e - Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project is not located on a hazardous waste site pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project area is limited to the inside of the sanitary sewer lines.

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

1. Approves the use of the bid amounts supplied by Duke’s Root Control, Inc. as the lowest responsive, responsible bidder for Houston-Galveston Area Council (HGAC), as authorized by the City of Monterey’s Purchasing section 28-14(a);

2. Awards a contract to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, Duke’s Root Control, Inc., in the amount of $78,018.40;

3. Authorizes the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the contract upon the receipt of information required by the contract; and,

4. Authorizes staff to expend up to an additional $5,000 for unforeseen conditions in the field.

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 _____ 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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 9., Item Page 6, Packet Page 120 Contract
No.: SC01-21 Date
Prepared: 29-Aug
Buying
Agency: Contractor:

Contact
Person:

Prepared
By:

Phone: Phone:

Fax: Fax:

Email: Email:

Quan Unit Pr Total
35172 1.96 68937.12
3848 2.36 9081.28
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
78018.4
Quan Unit Pr Total
0 0
0 0
0 0%
0 78018.4

CONTRACT PRICING WORKSHEET
For Catalog & Price Sheet Type Purchases
General Description
of Product: RAZOR ROOTER II CHEMICAL ROOT CONTROL
[email protected]
DUKE'S ROOT CONTROL, INC.

Tom Edwards
951-264-4212
[email protected] / [email protected]
This Worksheet is prepared by Contractor and given to End User. If a PO is issued, both documents MUST be faxed to H-GAC @ 713-993-4548. Therefore please type or print legibly.

City of Monterey, CA
Delivery Date: 10/31/2023 D. Total Purchase Price (A+B+C):

B. Unpublished Options, Accessory or Service items - Itemize Below - Attach Additional Sheet If Necessary (Note: Unpublished Items are any which were not submitted and priced in contractor's bid.) C. Trade-Ins / Special Discounts / Other Allowances / Freight / Installation / Miscellaneous Charges Subtotal C:

For this transaction the percentage is:

Kevin Anderson
831-646-3746
SC211003 RAZOROOTER II CHEMICAL ROOT CONTROL 4" THRU 9" Catalog / Price Sheet
Name: SEWER CLEANING, HYDRO EXCAVATING, INSPECTION EQIPMENT,AND MISCELLIOUS SERVICES Subtotal A:

Check: Total cost of Unpublished Options (B) cannot exceed 25% of the total of the Base Unit Price plus Published Options (A+B).

Description
A. Catalog / Price Sheet Items being purchased - Itemize Below - Attach Additional Sheet If Necessary SC211004 RAZOROOTER II CHEMICAL ROOT CONTROL 10" THRU 12" Subtotal B:

Total From Other Sheets, If Any:

Description
Total From Other Sheets, If Any:

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 9., Item Page 7, Packet Page 121 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Matthew Buggert, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Adopt Findings in Support of Decision to Grant Appeal Application AP-23-0135 and Approve Sign Permit Application SI-23-0051 for Six Rotating Projecting Signs (Flags) and Four Wall Signs at 611 Lighthouse Avenue; Property Owner Anna C Vermi Tr.; Planned Community – Lighthouse (PC-LH) Zoning District; Commercial General Plan Land Use Designation (Exempt from CEQA Requirements per Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1 and Section 15311, Class 11)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the draft resolution confirming the findings made by the City Council at the August 1, 2023, meeting in support of its decision to grant the appeal and approve the sign permit application to allow six rotating projection signs and four wall signs at 611 Lighthouse Avenue.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Required findings for approval of Sign Permits are set forth in City Code section 31-7:

1. The proposal achieves the purposes and objectives of Chapter 31 of the City Code;

2. The proposal is consistent with all applicable sign guidelines or has been determined by the Architectural Review Committee to better achieve the purpose and objectives of this chapter than the strict application of said sign guidelines; and

3. The proposal is consistent with any other adopted land use document including, but not limited to, the Monterey general plan, area or neighborhood plans, design guidelines, or specific plans.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

None
Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 10.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 10., Item Page 1, Packet Page 122 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1 and Section 15311, Class 11 because the project proposes to install on-premise signs on an existing commercial building. Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

Exception a - Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located - a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies. The signs would be placed on an existing structure in a developed land area and would not otherwise affect sensitive environmental areas.

Exception b - Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. The signs would not cause cumulative impacts because they would be installed at a developed site with an existing building.

Exception c - Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. The signs would not have a significant effect on the environment because there are no unusual circumstances at the site. The signs would not include any up-lighting. The signs would be installed on the façade of an existing building that is potentially historic. However, the installation method would not cause adverse impacts to the building and these changes to the building façade would be reversible.

Exception d - Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The proposed signs would not be visible from a scenic highway.

Exception e - Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project site is not a hazardous waste site pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.

Exception f - Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.

The project site does not contain historic structures. The site is developed with a commercial building and paved parking lot. According to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report, the site is located in an archaeologically sensitive area; however, no ground disturbance is proposed as a part of the project. The subject building is potentially historic.

However, the signs’ installation method on the building façade would be reversible and will Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 10., Item Page 2, Packet Page 123 not cause adverse impacts to the building. Therefore, impacts to historical resources would be less than significant.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council may direct staff to revise the findings if Council determines that its intent from the prior hearing was not fully captured in the draft resolution.

DISCUSSION:

The City Council, at a properly noticed public hearing on August 1, 2023, carefully considered all of the information presented to it, including the agenda report and information submitted at the public hearing by interested persons. Council then granted the appeal and approved Sign Permit Application SI-23-0051 for six rotating projecting signs (flags) and four wall signs at 611 Lighthouse Avenue. Staff recommends approval of the draft resolution confirming the findings made by the City Council at the August 1, 2023 meeting.

MB
Attachments: 1. Resolution Granting Appeal Application AP 23-0135 e: Christine Kerr, Applicant
Anna Vermi, Property Owner
New Monterey Neighborhood Association
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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 10., Item Page 3, Packet Page 124 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/22
ADOPT FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF DECISION TO GRANT APPEAL APPLICATION AP23-0135 AND APPROVE SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION SI-23-0051 FOR SIX ROTATING PROJECTING SIGNS (FLAGS) AND FOUR WALL SIGNS AT 611 LIGHTHOUSE AVENUE WHEREAS, 611 Lighthouse Avenue (the “Property”) is designated Commercial in the General Plan Land Use Map and zoned PC-LH (Planned Community-Lighthouse District); WHEREAS, the Bulldog Sports Pub operates at the Property and proposed six rotating projection signs (flags) and four wall signs to be installed on the exterior (the “Project”);
WHEREAS, the Project is subject to Architectural Review per City Code Chapter 31, Article 5;
WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Committee (ARC), at a properly noticed public hearing on May 17, 2023, considered all the evidence and approved application SI-23-0051 to approve signage at the property, with conditions to reduce the number of wall signs to two, to reduce the number of installed flags to two, and to raise the mounting height of the flags.; WHEREAS, Christine Kerr (“Appellant”) filed an appeal application (AP-23-0110) to appeal the Architectural Review Committee’s decision of approval of SI-23-0051; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a properly noticed hearing on June 13, 2023, heard the appeal, received additional public testimony, considered all the evidence, and approved application SI-23-0051. The permit conditions were revised to only reduce the number of installed flags from six to two and to raise the height of the flags; all four wall signs could remain as proposed. As new information was provided to the Planning Commission that was not available to the Architectural Review Committee, specifically in the form of additional public testimony and the applicant’s presentation, the Planning Commission determined that deviation from the City’s Citywide Sign Guidelines was appropriate; WHEREAS, Appellant filed application AP-23-0135 appealing the Planning Commission’s decision of approval of SI-23-0051 to the City Council; WHEREAS, the City Council, at a properly noticed public hearing on August 1, 2023, carefully considered all of the information presented to it, including the agenda report and information submitted at the public hearing by interested persons; WHEREAS, the City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1 and Section 15331, Class 11 because the project proposes to install on-premise signs on an existing commercial building. Furthermore, the project Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 10., Item Page 4, Packet Page 125 2 does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

Exception a - Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located - a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies. The signs would be placed on an existing structure in a developed land area and would not otherwise affect sensitive environmental areas.

Exception b - Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. The signs would not cause cumulative impacts because they would be installed at a developed site with an existing building.

Exception c - Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. The signs would not have a significant effect on the environment because there are no unusual circumstances at the site. The signs would not include any up-lighting. The signs would be installed on the façade of an existing building that is potentially historic. However, the installation method would not cause adverse impacts to the building and these changes to the building façade would be reversible.

Exception d - Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The proposed signs would not be visible from a scenic highway.

Exception e - Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project site is not a hazardous waste site pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.

Exception f - Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The project site does not contain historic structures. The site is developed with a commercial building and paved parking lot. According to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report, the site is located in an archaeologically sensitive area; however, no ground disturbance is proposed as a part of the project. The subject building is potentially historic. However, the signs’ installation method on the building façade would be reversible and will not cause adverse impacts to the building. Therefore, impacts to historical resources would be less than significant; and WHEREAS, notice of this hearing was posted and published, and included the notice requirements set forth in Government Code section 65009(b)(2).

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 10., Item Page 5, Packet Page 126 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the forgoing recitals are true and correct and have served, together with the supporting documents, as the basis for the findings and approvals set forth below.

Sign Permit Findings in support of Granting of Appeal
Monterey City Code section 31-7(A)(1) requires that “…The proposal achieves the purposes and objectives of this chapter.”
As approved by the City Council, the total number of wall signs will be four, and rotating projecting signs will be six, for a total of ten signs. The subject building has historically featured architectural projections in the form of shade awnings which included multiple signs.

The awnings were removed during a recent façade remodel and the signage was replaced with low profile wall signs which reduce the general visual impact of the building. While the proposed flags meet the technical definition of rotating projecting signs, they do not directly advertise the business nor detract from the cohesiveness of the streetscape. The wall signs serve to identify the business and its offerings, and the projecting signs (team/country flags) serve to identify the type of establishment (sports bar) while also enhancing the visual appearance of the Planning Area, consistent with Objective O.6.3 of the Lighthouse Specific Plan. Similar flags are displayed above The Salty Dog Brewpub and Sports Bar located on Cannery Row, and above The Crown & Anchor located on West Franklin Street. A photograph of the Salty Dog Brewpub was shown at the hearing and established that it was flying more than six flags at one time. Allowing the six flags in this location would maintain equity among other businesses in the City without contributing to sign clutter. The four wall signs and six rotating projecting signs (typically sports team flags) are appropriate and achieve the objectives of the Sign Ordinance.

Monterey City Code section 31-7(A)(2) requires that “… The proposal is consistent with all applicable sign guidelines or has been determined by the Architectural Review Committee to better achieve the purpose and objectives of this chapter than the strict application of said sign guidelines.”
Overall, the signs are inconsistent with the strict application of the Citywide Sign Guidelines; however, the additional signage, as approved and conditioned, is appropriate in this location and better achieve the purposes and objectives of the City’s sign regulations. The wall signs adequately identify the business and its offerings while the projecting signs (flags) identify the type of establishment and enhance the visual appearance of the Planning Area, consistent with Objective O.6.3 of the Lighthouse Specific Plan. While the total amount of signage exceeds the limitations prescribed by Chapter 31 of the Monterey City Code, the six flags and four wall signs are not cluttered and appear balanced and harmonious – particularly in comparison to the prior signage that this location. The signs achieve the purpose and objectives of the Sign Ordinance.

Monterey City Code section 31-7(A)(3) requires that “… The proposal is consistent with any other adopted land use document including, but not limited to, the Monterey general plan, area or neighborhood plans, design guidelines, or specific plans.” As approved by the City Council, the proposed signs would be consistent with the Monterey General Plan and the Lighthouse Specific Plan in that they would not contribute to sign Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 10., Item Page 6, Packet Page 127 4 clutter and their display features would be similar to other commercial establishments in the City. The proposed signs are located on property that the Monterey General Plan designates as Commercial. Additionally, the approved signage meets the sign objectives of the Lighthouse Specific Plan in that the design and scale of the signage is integrated into the design fabric of the Planning Area and enhances the visual appearance of the streetscape.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it considered this matter de novo, and based on the foregoing findings grants the appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval of Sign Permit SI-23-0051, approves six rotating projecting signs (flags) and four wall signs at 611 Lighthouse Avenue and repeals Planning Commission Special Condition of Approval 1 and replaces it with the following:

1. The applicant shall submit building plans that show six (6) projecting signs (flags) with a maximum of size of fifteen (15) square feet each, and clearance from the bottom of the hanging flag to the sidewalk of no less than eight (8) feet.

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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 10., Item Page 7, Packet Page 128 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Tonya Hufford, Conference Center General Manager
Prepared by: Mark Ackermann, Management Analyst, City Manager’s Office SUBJECT: Authorizing the City Manager to Enter into an Agreement with Monterey Marriott Hotel for Food and Beverage Services for the Monterey Conference Center (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 authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Monterey Marriott Hotel for Food and Beverage Services for the Monterey Conference Center for one (1) three-year term with the option of one (1) three-year extension.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

It is within the City Council’s purview to authorize the City Manager to enter into agreements that will enhance revenue, support business retention and attraction, and benefit the long-term economic potential of the City of Monterey.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The proposed contract provides for a percentage of sales payable to the City by the vendor.

Based on currently booked business, the projected revenue generated by the vendor during the contract period 2023-2026 will be $1.27 million in commissions, assuming a conservative 5% year-over-year food and beverage sales increase.

Additionally, the Contractor agrees to the following:
1) A food and beverage commission of 15-17% of sales on food, non-alcoholic beverages, and alcoholic beverages.
2) A payment of 10% of the gross receipts from subcontracted vendor services. 3) Work with the City to develop menus for up to four (4) “at cost” events annually with discounted rates for Monterey Conference Center and City-sponsored events. Provide an extensive collection of production equipment and service wares for Monterey Conference Center and City-sponsored events at no cost.

Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 11.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 11., Item Page 1, Packet Page 129 4) Offer non-profit organizations discounted pricing on published rates where applicable. 5) Obtain and maintain a liquor license.
6) Provide one (1) Banquet Captain to oversee every food and beverage service by Contractor.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

City Council could choose not to authorize the City Manager to enter into this agreement; however, that is not recommended as Monterey Conference Center clients are booked several years in the future and require a schedule of food and beverage service fees to assist them in their planning and budgeting. Beyond October 31, 2023, there is no food and beverage service currently contracted. Therefore, staff is unable to provide vital information that will enable clients to confidently select the Monterey Conference Center as the venue for their next event. The time required to conduct another request for proposals, review, and selection would likely extend this uncertainty by another 3 to 6 months, potentially resulting in a loss of revenue.

DISCUSSION:

In June 2023, requests for proposals were posted on the City’s Request for Proposals (RFP) portal, OpenGov Procure, and sent to four (4) food and beverage organizations with a submission deadline of August 1, 2023. One (1) organization submitted a proposal – the Monterey Marriott Hotel. Their written proposal demonstrated a renewed focus on meeting changing client needs, a strong support staffing structure, consistent efforts to update their highend banquet food and service, and their knowledge and familiarity with the City of Monterey and Monterey Conference Center. The Monterey Marriott Hotel has years of experience as the Conference Center’s exclusive food and beverage provider and the organization has a stellar reputation amongst clients and the local community due to its work in catering many local, highprofile events and conferences.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 11., Item Page 2, Packet Page 130 Staff believes that this vendor will continue to not only meet but exceed Conference Center clients’ expectations. This is critically important in providing the necessary levels of service in the Monterey Conference Center.

The City Council’s authorization to enable the City Manager to enter into a food and beverage services agreement between the Monterey Conference Center and the Monterey Marriott Hotel for one (1) three-year term with the option of one (1) three-year contract extension will enable staff to continue to attract clients for the duration of the agreement period.

TH/ma
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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 11., Item Page 3, Packet Page 131 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

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

AUTHORIZING CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH MONTEREY

MARRIOTT HOTEL FOR FOOD AND BEVERAGE SERVICES FOR THE MONTEREY

CONFERENCE CENTER
WHEREAS, on June 16, 2023, the City of Monterey issued a request for proposals for food and beverage services, posted on the City’s online procurement portal and sent to four (4) organizations; one (1) proposer responded to the deadline; one (1) written proposal was reviewed based on the criteria and on menu tasting;
WHEREAS, based on the written proposal and menu tasting, the Monterey Marriott Hotel was selected as the top proposer to enter into vendor agreements for the Monterey Conference Center; the proposer has agreed to the provision of food and beverage services for the Monterey Conference Center for one (1) three-year (3-year) term with the option of one (1) three-year (3-year) contract extension.

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 City Manager or designee is hereby authorized to execute a contract between the City of Monterey and Monterey Marriott Hotel for the Food and Beverage Services at the Monterey Conference Center for one (1) three-year (3-year) period beginning November 1, 2023 and ending on October 31, 2026 with the option of one (1) three-year (3-year) contract extension ending on October 31, 2029.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 11., Item Page 4, Packet Page 132 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this 5th day of September, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST: ___________________________
Mayor of Said City
__________________________
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 11., Item Page 5, Packet Page 133 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Clementine Bonner Klein, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Receive Mayor’s Recommendation and Appoint Lorene Kimzey to the Museums and Cultural Arts Commission (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 19, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the Council receive a recommendation from Mayor Williamson and appoint Lorene Kimzey to the Museums and Cultural Arts Commission as outlined in the “Discussion” section of this report.

VALUE DRIVER:

Foster a local government that is transparent and collaborative; and solicits, welcomes and appreciates input from all.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This recommendation conforms to Monterey City Code and the California Maddy Act.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no fiscal implications with this action.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The Council could take no action or could make an alternate appointment.

Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 12.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 1, Packet Page 134 DISCUSSION:

Background
Vacant seats on Monterey’s boards, commissions, and committees were duly advertised by the City Clerk’s Office pursuant to the California Maddy Act and the Council’s appointments policy, seeking qualified applications for the following vacancies, with priority review for those applications received by noon on Friday, August 4, 2023:

Disabled Access Appeals Board – one vacant seat (vacated in December, 2021 by the resignation of Kathleen White)
Museums and Cultural Arts Commission – one vacant seat (vacated effective July 7, 2023 by the resignation of Kimberley Peake)
Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) Committee – vacant Alternate seats representing Aguajito Oaks, Alta Mesa, and Deer Flats neighborhoods (all three Alternate seats vacant for over six years)
Qualified applications for the above-listed vacant positions were received from the following residents and are attached to this packet (Attachment 1). The City Clerk’s Office confirmed residency requirements using the GIS assessment database.

Museums and Cultural Arts Commission
Sharon Cavanagh
Chris Cobb
Karla Cummings
Carolyn Garrison
Lorene Kimzey
Megan Whilden
Recommendation
Mayor Williamson reviewed the applications seen in this packet, conducted interviews with each applicant above in accordance with Council policy, and gave appropriate attention and time to the process that resulted in the following recommendation. Mayor Williamson is grateful that residents applied, and recommends that the Council make an appointment as follows:

Museums and Cultural Arts Commission
Lorene Kimzey – for a term expiring June 30, 2027
Next Steps
Seats remain available on the Disabled Access Appeals Board and Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) Committee. Applications will continue to be received on an ongoing basis for these roles until the vacancies are filled. Monterey residents are encouraged to learn more and apply for these volunteer positions. Monterey residents interested in receiving notice of board and commission vacancies are encouraged to subscribe to the City’s “Boards and Commissions Interest List.”
CBK
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 2, Packet Page 135 Attachment: 1. Applications Received
e: Applicants
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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 3, Packet Page 136 (CONTINUED)

CITY OF MONTEREY APPLICATION

TO SERVE ON A BOARD, COMMITTEE, OR COMMISSION
Name:

Last Name First Name Middle Initial (optional)
Primary Phone Number: Alternate Phone:

Residential Address: Monterey, CA 93940*
Email Address: _
Business Address: Business Phone:

Occupation:
* Monterey residence is required
Check the box next to all body(s) on which you are interested in serving. Note that appointments are not limited to body(s) checked.

APPEALS HEARING BOARD – meets as needed
The Appeals Hearing Board conducts hearings and appeals relating to administrative orders, denials, and suspensions; revocations of massage establishment permits; bidder responsibility determinations; fees, penalties, and other sums of money owed to the City; administrative abatement actions; and authorizes the imposition of liens, assessments, and other collection processes. Members: Three plus one alternate.

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE – meets 1st and 3
rd Wed. of ea. month at 4 p.m., plus field trips
The Architectural Review Committee (ARC) reviews projects to ensure orderly development and harmonious design; implements the General Plan and neighborhood plans; preserves and promotes the visual character of the City; and reviews and oversees architectural review submittal requirements. Members: Seven, at least one architect or person professionally competent in a field related to architecture.

BOARD OF LIBRARY TRUSTEES – meets 4th Thurs. of ea. month at 4 p.m.

The Board of Library Trustees manages the library’s collections; makes and enforces bylaws, rules and regulations for the library’s administration; appoints and removes the Library Director and other library personnel; performs additional duties as prescribed; and requests expenditures from the library trust fund. Members: Five.

BUILDING AND HOUSING APPEALS BOARD – meets as needed
The Building and Housing Appeals Board hears appeals of orders, decisions, or determinations relating to building, fire, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical codes, and authorizes imposition of liens, special assessments, and other collection processes. Members: Three plus one alternate, with experience and training relating to building construction, building trades, code enforcement, or building inspection.

DISABLED ACCESS APPEALS BOARD – meets as needed
The Disabled Access Appeals Board hears appeals of orders, decisions, or determinations relating to disabled access, and authorizes imposition of liens, assessments, and other collection processes. Members: Five, three with experience and training relating to building construction and/or disabled access regulations, and two of whom who are physically disabled.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION – meets 2nd Thurs. of ea. month at 4 p.m., plus field trips The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) acts and makes recommendations on matters relating to promotion, restoration, preservation, and protection of Monterey’s historic buildings, sites, artifacts, and features; and adopts minimum submittal requirements for historic preservation review. Members: Seven.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 99300016-099D-4943-9825-8600C9B81BC1 Sharon

N/A N/A
Photographer, Drone Pilot & Educator
N/A
Cavanagh
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 4, Packet Page 137 Name:
2 MEASURE P AND S OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE – meets quarterly The Measure P and S Oversight Committee reviews revenues generated by Street Infrastructure Rehabilitation Transactions and Use Tax, and expenditures of those revenues, and reports to the City Council. Members: Five.

MUSEUMS AND CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION – meets 1
st Thurs. of ea. month at 4 p.m.

The Museums and Cultural Arts Commission serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council on matters relating to the City’s museums, Monterey history, and cultural arts. Members: Seven, representing a variety of history and cultural arts-related disciplines and activities.

NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM COMMITTEE – meets seasonally The Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) Committee directs tourist-generated dollars directly back into the City's residential neighborhoods by considering all submitted projects and recommending to Council which projects should be funded. Members: One representative and one alternate representing the following designated neighborhoods (check one; you must reside in the jurisdiction):
 Aguajito Oaks  Alta Mesa  Casanova-Oak Knoll  Deer Flats  Del Monte Beach  Del Monte Grove – Laguna Grande  Downtown  Fisherman Flats  Glenwood  Monterey Vista  New Monterey  Oak Grove  Old Town  Skyline  Villa Del Monte
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION – meets 2nd Wed. of ea. month at 5:30 p.m.

The Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council on matters pertaining to the maintenance and development of the City's parks and recreation programs, and the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Members: Seven.

PLANNING COMMISSION – meets 2nd and 4
th Tues. of ea. month at 4 p.m. and 7 p.m., plus field trips The Planning Commission implements the General Plan and specific and area plans; reviews the Capital Improvement and Neighborhood and Community Improvement Programs; develops community development programs; administers zoning and subdivision ordinances and recommends revisions to City Council; hears appeals on matters of development, zoning, and architectural review; and reviews and acts on applications for development approval, including use of land and buildings, height and bulk of buildings, open space regulations, parking requirements, etc. Members: Seven.

Please list in the following space your relevant education, work experience, public service and/or volunteer experience, and/or other experiences that would enhance your service and effectiveness on the body(s) for which you are applying. Feel free to attach additional sheets, a cover letter, resume, and/or additional pages to fully describe your qualifications and interest in this position.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 99300016-099D-4943-9825-8600C9B81BC1 Sharon Cavanagh X
Hello,
Attached to my application you will find (almost) everything you need to get to know me. *Cover Letter
*Resume
*Recommendation Letter: Learning for Life Charter School - Executive Director *Recommendation Letter: Habitat for Humanity - Vice President, Advocacy & Community Engagement *Pictorial Cover Letter: Designing Guatemala - a photo spread of an experience traveling to Guatemala on behalf of Arts Center in Pasadena
I would be very excited (and honored) if you were to consider me for the Museum & Cultural Arts Commission vacancy.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Respectfully,
Sharon Cavanagh
Photographer & Educator
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 5, Packet Page 138 Name:
3 Are you employed by the City of Monterey? Yes No
Do you have any relatives who are employed by the City of Monterey? Yes No Initial to confirm that you understand and will comply with the following requirements:

All members of Boards and Commissions are subject to the conflict of interest laws of the State of California and are required to submit the Form 700, “Statement of Economic Interests,” within 30 days of assuming office, annually thereafter, and upon the completion of a member's term of office. More information is available at http://www.fppc.ca.gov/Form700.html Members who are compensated for their service* or reimbursed for expenses undertaken in the performance of official duties shall take two hours of training in ethics principles and laws every two years as required by Government Code. The training shall occur, and a signed certificate of completion shall be filed with the City Clerk, within 30 calendar days of assuming office, and every two years thereafter. * NCIP and Measure P & S members receive no compensation.

Sign and date your application:

Signature: Date:

Full Name:

Return the application electronically, or by mail or personal delivery to:

A submitted application is a public record. It will be published (with signatures and personal contact information redacted) in the agendas for relevant meetings of the City Council. initial
initial
City of Monterey
Attn: City Clerk’s Office
580 Pacific St, Room 6
Monterey, CA 93940
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99300016-099D-4943-9825-8600C9B81BC1 Sharon Cavanagh
X
7/31/2023 | 5:50 PM PDT
Sharon Cavanagh
X
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 6, Packet Page 139 Sharon Cavanagh
Monterey, CA 93940
Attention: Mayor Tyller Williamson
Ref: Museum & Cultural Arts Commission
City of Monterey
580 Pacific Street
Monterey, CA 93940
July 29, 2023
Dear Mayor Tyller Williamson,
I’m excited to be writing you to introduce myself as a candidate for the Museums & Cultural Arts Commission.

I have been a part of our local community since relocating from Los Angeles more than four years ago. While originally from Australia, I lived in London and then LA for more than twenty years working as a freelance photographer and educator.

In Los Angeles, I was a board member and volunteer for many education and arts-based nonprofits whose priorities were to support the local community. As a photojournalist, I’ve traveled throughout the world with international nonprofits creating images that aligned with their visual identity.

When I moved to Monterey, I sought out a board position based in education. I was on the board of directors of Learning for Life Charter School in Marina for almost two years before being taken into the fold of teaching the students as a faculty member. I developed the first photography and drone programs for the school.

This position alongside a new opportunity of Drone Instructor at the Chartwell School, cements my commitment and enthusiasm to Monterey as my home. Being a part of my local community means sharing my passion and skills as a working artist with others.

I believe I would be an asset to the Museum & Cultural Arts Commission, and I would be thrilled and honored if you would consider inviting me to join you.

Yours sincerely,
Sharon Cavanagh
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99300016-099D-4943-9825-8600C9B81BC1 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 7, Packet Page 140

S H A R O N C A V A N A G H

PHOTOGRAPHER & EDUCATOR

SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS
• Accomplished freelance photographer having worked with national and international nonprofit organizations such as the Special Olympics World Games Los Angeles and Habitat for Humanity
• Skilled photography educator with a wide variety of teaching experience at renowned campuses such as the Art Center College of Design, Digital Media Academy at UCLA, Berkeley, Stanford and, NYFA
• Experienced and engaged education professional who is involved with community-based nonprofits as a board member, education program developer, and volunteer
NON-PROFIT CLIENTS AND SELF-ASSIGNED PROJECTS – PHOTOGRAPHER 2005-2020 Awarded a year-long Chief Photographer position with the Jimmy Carter Work Project within Habitat for Humanity. Sharon photographed low-income families in their old homes before they were given a new low-interest home they helped to build.
2015 Official Photographer covering backstage events during the 2015 Special Olympics World Games in Los Angeles
2005– 2010 Official Photographer, Butterfly Foundation, a non-profit group of orthopedic medical professionals who perform free spinal surgery on children with severe spinal deformities. Traveled to Vietnam, Jamaica, Dominican Republic and Peru
2009 Photography Instructor, traveled to Guatemala with Caltech engineering students and Art Center design students to document the design and manufacture of wheelchairs built from reclaimed bicycle parts for rural communities
1995–2000 Documented the daily activities of Los Angeles Fire Department Station 57 in South Central LA. Stayed at the station for each 24-hour shift along with the fire fighters seeing many sides of life. Photographed private events for the fire fighters. Self-assigned project
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99300016-099D-4943-9825-8600C9B81BC1 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 8, Packet Page 141

NON-PROFIT ASSOCIATIONS
2019-Present Learning for Life Charter School – Board Member, Vice Chairwoman & Photography Instructor
2017 Canvasser/Location Coordinator for Amnesty International USA 2013–2020 Taproot Foundation Volunteer Photographer
2011–2015 Barbara Seniors Harkins Foundation – Board Member 2013–2014 Council for Watershed Health - Contributing Photographer 2013–2014 The Lamp Project – Senior Manager of Educational Programs & Artistic Advisor
2013 Venice Arts – Assistant Film Instructor for the summer program TEACHING & LECTURES – EDUCATOR
2023-Present Drone Instructor, Chartwell School. Developing the first drone program. 2016–2019 Photography Instructor, Downtown Women’s Center, developed the first photography classes for the women at the center and, volunteered once a week to lead a touch-typing class
2009-2019 Photography Instructor, Faculty, Art Center College of Design, Pasadena Introduction to Photojournalism for Graduate students. Created and developed the syllabus for the class
2009–2018 Photography and Media Department Instructor, Notre Dame High School Teaching students to explore their photographic talents during lectures and summer camp classes
2012–2015 Photography Instructor, Faculty, New York Film Academy, Burbank Instructed courses on Business and Marketing for Photographers.

Created and developed three classes - Photojournalism/Documentary, Personal Vision and Portfolio Development
2011–2014 Lead Instructor of Photography, Digital Media Academy at UCLA, Berkeley and Stanford
Instructed students through two-week-long intensive training courses that included learning to use their own camera, photo editing, retouching, composing, perspective and lighting for stills photography DocuSign Envelope ID: 99300016-099D-4943-9825-8600C9B81BC1 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 9, Packet Page 142 SKILLS
Working knowledge of Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom
Advanced knowledge of studio lighting, off-camera flash and continuous lighting

FILM CREDITS
2007 Photographed actor Rose Byrne in Melbourne Australia for the poster of the feature film ‘28 Weeks Later’
2005 Stills photographer and film poster artwork on the independent feature ‘Neo Ned’ featuring Academy Award nominated actor Jeremy Renner as Ned

FULL TIME POSITIONS
2019 National Sales Manager, Camera Lights with Light & Motion, Marina CA 2010 Producer for cinematographer Gale Tattersall for Canon workshops

EDUCATION
Pasadena City College
Associates Degree in Political Science, minor in Linguistics Photography Studies College, Melbourne, Australia
Diploma of Illustrative Photography
Black and white expert darkroom printer

DocuSign Envelope ID: 99300016-099D-4943-9825-8600C9B81BC1 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 10, Packet Page 143 Learning for Life
Charter School
3180 Imjin Rd, Suite 110, Marina, CA 93933
(831) 582-9820
July 31, 2023
To Whom it May Concern:

I recommend Sharon Cavanagh for a position on the Monterey Museums & Cultural Arts Commission.

Sharon served as a member of the Board of Directors of Learning for Life Charter School (LFLCS) from December 2019, through September 2021. She proved to be dedicated, curious and capable. She helped guide our school during the COVID 19 pandemic, when schools were experiencing the most tremendous changes in recent history. In September of 2021, Sharon stepped down from the Board, started working on her teaching credential, and became a photography, business, and drone education teacher at LFLCS.

Sharon has demonstrated her artistic abilities while teaching courses in Photography to the students and staff at our school. She shares her own work, and the work of many other inspirational photographers, with her class and has motivated many of them to develop their abilities as photographers. Several of the featured artists were professional colleagues of hers and came in person to the virtual classroom to share their work.

Sharon has been a key figure in LFLCS’s efforts to connect our students to the emerging artistic and commercial opportunities offered by drone technology. Her Aerial Photography course offers a wide range of experiences to our 7—12th grade students, from just plain having fun to earning an FAA Part 107 commercial remote operator’s license.

Sharon has personal, organizational and altruistic capabilities that would make her an ideal candidate for a commission. She wants to help and has places a high priority on assisting youth.

She consistently demonstrates loyalty to an organization’s mission and vision. Sharon is widely traveled and appreciates diverse cultures. Her work at our graduation ceremonies, where for the past 3 years she has photographed each graduate holding their newly minted diploma, has shown that she has a master’s eye for perfectly capturing a mood, or the uniqueness of a situation, object, or person.

Please let me know if I can further attest to Sharon’s many good qualities! Sincerely,
Kenneth Lawrence-Emanuel
Kenneth Lawrence-Emanuel
Executive Director
DocuSign Envelope ID: 99300016-099D-4943-9825-8600C9B81BC1 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 11, Packet Page 144 DocuSign Envelope ID: 99300016-099D-4943-9825-8600C9B81BC1 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 12, Packet Page 145 DocuSign Envelope ID: 99300016-099D-4943-9825-8600C9B81BC1 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 13, Packet Page 146 DocuSign Envelope ID: 99300016-099D-4943-9825-8600C9B81BC1 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 14, Packet Page 147 DocuSign Envelope ID: 99300016-099D-4943-9825-8600C9B81BC1 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 15, Packet Page 148 Museums and cultural commission
Chris Cobb
Wed 8/9/2023 11:21 AM
To:City Clerk's Office Team <[email protected]>
Cc:Chris Cobb
City Clerk,
Please put my name in the hat for the opening position on the Museums and Cultural Commission. I currently have an application and resume on file.

Thank you,
Chris Cobb
Monterey, CA 93940
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Monterey mail system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 16, Packet Page 149 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 17, Packet Page 150 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 18, Packet Page 151 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 19, Packet Page 152 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 20, Packet Page 153 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 21, Packet Page 154 (CONTINUED)

CITY OF MONTEREY APPLICATION

TO SERVE ON A BOARD, COMMITTEE, OR COMMISSION
Name:

Last Name First Name Middle Initial (optional)
Primary Phone Number: Alternate Phone:

Residential Address: Monterey, CA 93940*
Email Address: _
Business Address: Business Phone:

Occupation:
* Monterey residence is required
Check the box next to all body(s) on which you are interested in serving. Note that appointments are not limited to body(s) checked.

BOARD OF LIBRARY TRUSTEES – meets 4th Thurs. of ea. month at 4 p.m.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 9D44C264-EDEB-4457-AC04-3ABE0806084F Cummings
NA
Karla
Client Partner for a large IT Firm
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 22, Packet Page 155 Name:
2 MEASURE P AND S OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE – meets quarterly The Measure P and S Oversight Committee reviews revenues generated by Street Infrastructure Rehabilitation Transactions and Use Tax, and expenditures of those revenues, and reports to the City Council. Members: Five.

MUSEUMS AND CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION – meets 1
st Thurs. of ea. month at 4 p.m.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 9D44C264-EDEB-4457-AC04-3ABE0806084F Karla Cummings X
Museum and Cultural Arts Commission member interest.

Thank you for your consideration. Please find *below my credentials to serve our beautiful community in this capacity.

Karla
*
Education:

Florence Academy of Art Intensive Program. This Program focused on The Masters of Fine Art historically and taught methods of painting, drawing in multiple media arts.

Sotheby's Institute of Art. Studies: Curatorial, Valuations, Provenance Tsinghau University: Art history including Western & Chinese Art Ashland University Liberal Arts Major studies
Stanford Certificate of Entrepreneurship - networking with a larger institution may be useful as a volunteer for Monterey for possible enhanced learning, idea sharing, field trips, etc.

Experience:

Work experience includes 25 years in the high-technology industry serving across multiple industry segments.
in part- my current responsibility focuses on immersive experiences across industry segments including innovation in the Metaverse, Digital Twins, AI/GPT generative AI which is being applied to the Art industry today to enhance creative experiences for consumers Passion:

The Monterey people and our community, Protecting our communities and their Art - the art of the people - on a global scale some day. Creatives. Art history. Practicing artist.

ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 23, Packet Page 156 Name:
3 Are you employed by the City of Monterey? Yes No
Do you have any relatives who are employed by the City of Monterey? Yes No Initial to confirm that you understand and will comply with the following requirements:

Sign and date your application:

Signature: Date:

Full Name:

Return the application electronically, or by mail or personal delivery to:

CITY OF MONTEREY APPLICATION

TO SERVE ON A BOARD, COMMITTEE, OR COMMISSION
Name:

Last Name First Name Middle Initial (optional)
Primary Phone Number: Alternate Phone:

Residential Address: Monterey, CA 93940*
Email Address: _
Business Address: Business Phone:

Occupation:
* Monterey residence is required
Check the box next to all body(s) on which you are interested in serving. Note that appointments are not limited to body(s) checked.

BOARD OF LIBRARY TRUSTEES – meets 4th Thurs. of ea. month at 4 p.m.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 46C4F163-36E7-4041-9522-046C3B8345A7 NA
NA NA
Carolyn
Teacher/ Retired Attorney
Garrison
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 25, Packet Page 158 Name:
2 MEASURE P AND S OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE – meets quarterly The Measure P and S Oversight Committee reviews revenues generated by Street Infrastructure Rehabilitation Transactions and Use Tax, and expenditures of those revenues, and reports to the City Council. Members: Five.

MUSEUMS AND CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION – meets 1
st Thurs. of ea. month at 4 p.m.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 46C4F163-36E7-4041-9522-046C3B8345A7 Carolyn Garrison X
I am interested in the Museums and Cultural Arts Commission.

I am a retired attorney and a current high school teacher. I have taught history for over twenty years.

I have a doctorate of law (JD), and a teaching credential.

I am available to attend the scheduled meetings, inlcuding any field trips.

I am interested in preserving the culture and hisotry of our peninsula.

ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 26, Packet Page 159 Name:
3 Are you employed by the City of Monterey? Yes No
Do you have any relatives who are employed by the City of Monterey? Yes No Initial to confirm that you understand and will comply with the following requirements:

Sign and date your application:

Signature: Date:

Full Name:

Return the application electronically, or by mail or personal delivery to:

CITY OF MONTEREY APPLICATION

TO SERVE ON A BOARD, COMMITTEE, OR COMMISSION
Name:

Last Name First Name Middle Initial (optional)
Primary Phone Number: Alternate Phone:

Residential Address: Monterey, CA 93940*
Email Address: _
Business Address: Business Phone:

Occupation:
* Monterey residence is required
Check the box next to all body(s) on which you are interested in serving. Note that appointments are not limited to body(s) checked.

BOARD OF LIBRARY TRUSTEES – meets 4th Thurs. of ea. month at 4 p.m.

DocuSign Envelope ID: A6D9B026-2CAC-4D60-848B-76BDA597E845 n/a
Kimzey
)
Retired RN-Part Time Tour Guide for Road Scholar Program n/a
Lorene M
n/a
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 28, Packet Page 161 Name:
2 MEASURE P AND S OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE – meets quarterly The Measure P and S Oversight Committee reviews revenues generated by Street Infrastructure Rehabilitation Transactions and Use Tax, and expenditures of those revenues, and reports to the City Council. Members: Five.

MUSEUMS AND CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION – meets 1
st Thurs. of ea. month at 4 p.m.

DocuSign Envelope ID: A6D9B026-2CAC-4D60-848B-76BDA597E845 X
My formal education consists of a BS (Nursing), an MEd.(Health Education) and Certification in Reproductive Endocrinology. My work experience includes but is not limited to the following:

Legislative Aide to Congressman Pettis and Congressman Wold, Administrative Assistant, US Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Research Nurse at the National Institutes of Health (Nurse of the Year 1995), Project Manager, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, FDA. Although I was active in the American Association of University Women,League of Women Voters and various charities, upon retirement I expanded my volunteer activities to include Salvation Army, Peace of Mind Dog Rescue, the Del Monte Club ofthe Naval Postgraduate School and the Gentrain Society of Monterey Peninsula College, where I served as Special Events Co-coordinator. I also accepted a position with Hidden Valley Music Seminars as Group Leader for the Magical Monterey and Jazz Bash programs through Road Scholar, a national educational travel group. In this position I became very focused on the wonderful history and culture offered by Monterey--a City of Firsts. Bringing my groups to Colton Hall, the jail where Steinbeck's characters enjoyed residing, Doc Ricketts Lab, the Presidio Museum, the arts display in the Conference Center, the Monterey Mural, etc. has endeared these places to me and encouraged me find ways to bring this rich cultural heritage to the attention of the masses of tourists and locals here in Monterey. Sadly, I have found that even locals were unaware of the great diversity of contributors to the City--Buffalo Soldiers, Portuguese and Italian fisherman, Japanese divers and baseball players, Phillipine and Hispanic agricultural workers, the Chinese community featured in Steinbeck's writings which mysteriously burned down one night.It has been difficult recently to share many of these wonderful cultural experiences because the hours on the museums are very limited, the art installation at the Conference Center has bare walls and funding issues are dimming the chances of Pre-Covid availability and increased programs and cultural opportunities.

It is my fervent hope to be allowed to serve on the Museums and Cultural Arts Commission to help find ways to reverse this trend so our rich heritage can be seen and enjoyed by all. Establishing a Friends of Colton Hall and Monterey Culture as well as various fundraisers could support these very worthwhile treasures, I have the energy, willingness, interest and commitment to my City to solutions to keep Magical Monterey readily available for everyone's enjoyment and enrichment.

Lorene "Rene" Kimzey
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 29, Packet Page 162 Name:
3 Are you employed by the City of Monterey? Yes No
Do you have any relatives who are employed by the City of Monterey? Yes No Initial to confirm that you understand and will comply with the following requirements:

Sign and date your application:

Signature: Date:

Full Name:

Return the application electronically, or by mail or personal delivery to:

CITY OF MONTEREY APPLICATION

TO SERVE ON A BOARD, COMMITTEE, OR COMMISSION
Name:

Last Name First Name Middle Initial (optional)
Primary Phone Number: Alternate Phone:

Residential Address: Monterey, CA 93940*
Email Address: _
Business Address: Business Phone:

Occupation:
* Monterey residence is required
Check the box next to all body(s) on which you are interested in serving. Note that appointments are not limited to body(s) checked.

BOARD OF LIBRARY TRUSTEES – meets 4th Thurs. of ea. month at 4 p.m.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 95F2A985-1192-41E6-800E-433A92517240 same as above
Whilden Megan
same as above
nonprofit consultant
n/a
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 31, Packet Page 164 Name:
2 MEASURE P AND S OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE – meets quarterly The Measure P and S Oversight Committee reviews revenues generated by Street Infrastructure Rehabilitation Transactions and Use Tax, and expenditures of those revenues, and reports to the City Council. Members: Five.

MUSEUMS AND CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION – meets 1
st Thurs. of ea. month at 4 p.m.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 95F2A985-1192-41E6-800E-433A92517240 X
Megan Whilden
I am a fourth generation resident of the city of Monterey - my great grandfather PJ Dougherty was once mayor - and I have a deep love for this community and its history.

I also have much experience serving on volunteer boards and commissions over the past 20 years in Massachusetts. I was a founding member of our regional Creative Economy Council, and a gubernatorial appointee to the statewide Massachusetts Creative Economy Council. I served on the Board of the Pittsfield Economic Revitalization Council and have a strong understanding of the interplay between cultural and economic development and how they support each other. I served on both the local visitors and chamber boards, and was on the advisory committee for Multicultural BRIDGE, which presented me with the Community Advocate of the Year Award several years ago. I also served on the Executive Committee of the local chapter of the NAACP for a number of years, on the Pittsfield Arts Council, and on the Board of the Berkshire Art Association.

Currently I serve on the advisory committee for the Fund for Homeless Women at the Community Foundation of Monterey County, and have recently done volunteer grant writing for Palenke Arts and to bring free dance classes especially for people living with Parkinson's Disease to Monterey (the first class was held this week!)
I have attached my resume and a cover letter, and you can also visit my LinkedIn page at for more information. Thank you for the opportunity to
apply for a position on the Museums and Cultural Arts Commission, and I look forward to learning more.

ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 32, Packet Page 165 Name:
3 Are you employed by the City of Monterey? Yes No
Do you have any relatives who are employed by the City of Monterey? Yes No Initial to confirm that you understand and will comply with the following requirements:

Sign and date your application:

Signature: Date:

Full Name:

Return the application electronically, or by mail or personal delivery to:

MEGAN PATRICIA WHILDEN
phone: email:

LinkedIn profile:

An innovative and creative leader, fundraiser and community collaborator with extensive experience working with funders, businesses, governmental agencies, non-profit organizations, the media, non-profits, volunteers, elected officials, and the public sector. Expert in resource development, communications, relationship building, and community outreach and collaborations.

EMPLOYMENT HISTORY
Director of Development | The Carmel Foundation | 2022-2023 Oversaw development, community outreach and membership for regional non-profit serving older adults in the Monterey Bay region. Wrote successful grants, oversaw design and production of annual report, negotiation of a large property gift creating a charitable gift annuity, increased annual appeal returns to highest level ever, along with successful major gifts, special events, and more.

Executive Director | Osher Lifelong Learning Institute at Berkshire Community College | 2014-2022
Led a regional lifelong learning program for over 1,400 older adults, overseeing communications and fundraising and working closely with over 200 member volunteers and 20 volunteer committees, a board of directors, four higher education partners, and over 35 community partners to provide over 100 high quality educational programs for the region each year.
● Raised funds through an annual appeal, email campaigns, planned giving, grantwriting, corporate sponsorships, special events and more.
● Grew membership by 65% to its highest level ever.
● Increased course enrollment to highest levels ever.
● Increased outreach and scholarships for those with financial need and diversified board of directors.
● Invited speaker at four national OLLI conferences.
● With volunteers, launched “Creative Aging: 65 and Better in the Berkshires” exhibit at the Massachusetts State House and serialized in the Berkshire Eagle. ● Increased media coverage and diversified marketing channels; established first social media presence and email newsletter.
● Expanded arts programming to include active partnerships with Berkshire Music School and Williamstown Theatre Festival, launched the OLLI Performing Arts Initiative, and presented featured writing, artmaking, music appreciation, and other courses.

Director of Cultural Development | City of Pittsfield, MA | 2005-2014 Appointed by and serving directly under the Mayor, served as public face of the arts and primary liaison for new & existing cultural and creative businesses, arts and cultural activities and initiatives, and artists.

Development & Fundraising: successfully wrote and won competitive grants from the National Endowment for the Arts, the Kresge Foundation, the Massachusetts Cultural Council, Mass Humanities, and others. Solicited substantial business sponsorships for cultural initiatives. Substantially increased department budget and capacity.

Leadership & Community Development: experienced public speaker representing Pittsfield’s cultural sector and creative economy in countywide, statewide, and national settings. Worked closely with elected officials, city and state government, artists, arts organizations, businesses, community organizations and others to sustain and build a welcoming environment for the arts in Pittsfield.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 95F2A985-1192-41E6-800E-433A92517240 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 34, Packet Page 167 Public Relations & Marketing: promoted Pittsfield through a variety of earned media channels, social media and targeted outreach, creating positive perceptions of the city through a focus on its cultural assets.

Program & Special Events Development: initiated, coordinated, and promoted major cultural events and programs designed to serve the local community, attract cultural tourism, and position Pittsfield as a cultural center. Ensured events were inclusive and welcoming to all.

Diversity & Inclusion: Expanded outreach and inclusiveness locally and regionally through initiatives such as the Islam Contemporary arts initiative, the annual Out in the Berkshires LGBT arts weekend, the Lift Ev'ry Voice African-American history and culture festival, founding supporter of a community Kwanzaa celebration, and other programming celebrating all members of our community.

Director of Marketing, IS183 Art School | Stockbridge, MA | 2001-2004 Developed marketing plan, including annual budget. Oversaw design, editing, and printing of all print publications and ads. Significantly increased media coverage of school activities and events in local and regional media. Developed and oversaw new visual identity for catalog, advertising and other materials.

Assisted with fundraising events and campaigns.

SELECTED PUBLIC SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
● Innovative Marketing Approaches panelist, National Osher Institute Conference, April 2017, Dallas, Texas
● Broadening Your Arts Partnership Horizon moderator, National Osher Institute Conference, October 2015, Charlotte, North Carolina
● Urban Park Advocates Summit, October 2011, Connecting People, Place & Community through Arts & Culture panelist
● Harvard Graduate School of Design, February 2011, panelist ● National Arts Marketing Conference November 2009, panelist on Package It and They Will Come:

Collaborative Cultural Tourism
● Massachusetts Governor’s Conference on Travel & Tourism, Worcester, March 2007, panelist, The Economic Impact of Travel & Tourism
● Massachusetts Economic Development Council, panelist, How the Arts Are Driving Local Economic Development, North Adams, September 2005

SELECTED AWARDS RECEIVED
● 2018 “Berkshire 25” Award | Berkshire Magazine
● 2013 Community Advocate Award | Multicultural BRIDGE
● 2011 Berkshire Trendsetter Award for Inspiring a Community | Berkshire Visitors Bureau ● 2009 Creative Community Commonwealth Award | Massachusetts Cultural Council ● October 2007 National Arts Marketer of the Month | Americans for the Arts ● 2007 Outstanding Member Award for Innovative Collaboration | Berkshire Visitors Bureau

SELECTED COMMITTEE & BOARD MEMBERSHIPS, PAST & PRESENT
 Community Foundation of Monterey County Fund for Homeless Women volunteer grant reviewer  Monterey Peninsula Chamber of Commerce Marketing Committee member  Berkshire Taconic Community Foundation Center for Nonprofit Excellence Advisory Council  Upper Housatonic Valley African-American Heritage Trail Advisory Committee  Massachusetts Nonprofit Network board member
 Multicultural BRIDGE Advisory Council
 Massachusetts Healthy Aging Collaborative

EDUCATION
Bachelor's of Science in International Relations, San Francisco State University DocuSign Envelope ID: 95F2A985-1192-41E6-800E-433A92517240 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 35, Packet Page 168

MEGAN PATRICIA WHILDEN
, Monterey, CA 93940
mobile: | | LinkedIn profile
July 20, 2023 Via online form
Dear Mayor Williamson,
First, let me thank you for both running for office and for co-founding Monterey Peninsula Pride, which I attended last weekend. I know so well that both require so much hard work and dedication! Thank you for all you do.

I am writing to apply for the open position on Monterey’s Museums and Cultural Arts Commission. I am a fourth generation resident of the city of Monterey - my great grandfather PJ Dougherty was once mayor - and I have a deep love for this community and its history.

I also have extensive professional experience in community arts, culture, and learning. For ten years I served as the award-winning first Director of Cultural Development for the small city of Pittsfield in western Massachusetts, where I lived for two decades before coming back home to Monterey last year. In that position I launched multicultural festivals, including Latino and African-American ones, an LGBTQ initiative, and community public art projects that celebrated local history. I also managed a city arts center and gallery featuring a variety of events and contemporary art exhibitions. I worked closely with our local museum, historical society, theatre, music and community groups. All of my experience above would, I believe, serve Monterey's Museum and Cultural Arts Commission well.

Currently I serve on the advisory committee for the Fund for Homeless Women at the Community Foundation of Monterey County, and have recently done volunteer grant writing for Palenke Arts and to bring free dance classes especially for people living with Parkinson's Disease to Monterey (the first class was held this week!) I believe arts, culture and history should be inclusive, equitable and open to all, and that arts and culture bring communities together and revive our spirits. I hope to have the chance to discuss this position further and how I might best serve our community.

Warmly,
Megan Whilden
DocuSign Envelope ID: 95F2A985-1192-41E6-800E-433A92517240 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 12., Item Page 36, Packet Page 169 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Christine Davi, City Attorney
Kim Cole, Community Development Director
Prepared By: Clementine Bonner Klein, City Clerk
SUBJECT: 1st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance Amending Monterey City Code Section 38-112.6 “Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units” and Amending Section 38-11 “Definitions” Retroactive to July 6, 2023 (Statutorily Exempt from CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.17)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council introduce by title only, waive full reading, and pass to a second reading, the attached ordinance amending Monterey City Code Section 38-112.6 “Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units” and amending Section 38-11 “Definitions.” The City Council previously considered this ordinance on May 2, 2023, and approved this version of the ordinance on June 6, 2023. However, its adoption was procedurally deficient due to its late publication. Therefore, this draft of the ordinance is the same as the one previously considered and approved by the Council, but it specifies that it will be effective retroactive to July 6, 2023.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Monterey Charter section 4.4 provides: “No ordinance shall be passed by the Council on the day of its introduction, or within five (5) days thereafter, or at any time other than a regular, adjourned, or special meeting or until its publication at least three (3) days before its adoption.” Section 65852.2 of the Government Code does not limit the authority of local agencies to adopt less restrictive requirements for the creation of an ADU.

The Council embraces efforts that provide equitable access to affordable housing, including balanced approaches to increase housing supply, rental resources and assistance, and housing rehabilitation grants to homeless, low-income, senior and disabled individuals.

One of the City’s strategic priorities is to “support affordable housing through modern zoning policies/ordinances, ADU policies, housing grants, review of density requirements, and consideration of City-owned sites for affordable housing.” This ordinance may be effective retroactively so long as that intention is made clear by the City Council.

Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 13.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 1, Packet Page 170 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Construction of ADUs may affect property taxes by increasing the net value of certain properties.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey has determined that the adoption of the resolution and later potential adoption of these provisions of the Zoning Code are statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as provided by Public Resources Code Section 21080.17 and by CEQA Guidelines Article 18, Section 15282.h, because it is the adoption of an ordinance by a city to implement the provisions of Section 65852.2 of the Government Code.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

No alternatives are recommended. This action is required to ensure that the ordinance is validly adopted and made retroactive so that the applications that have been processed on or after July 6, 2023 will be legal and conforming.

DISCUSSION:

Background
On May 2, 2023, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the subject of amending the City Code provisions regarding Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) (the agenda report is attached as Attachment 1). In advance of the second reading, the full text of the ordinance was duly published in the newspaper at least three days before the reading as required by Charter sec. 4.4, and on May 16, 2023, the second reading was held at which the Council passed the ordinance to another second reading as amended to reflect the requirement that “any window parallel to an adjoining property line and closer than 10 feet shall be opaque.” In advance of the subsequent second reading on June 6, 2023, City Clerk’s Office staff sent the full text of the ordinance to the newspaper and designated a publication date of June 3, 2023 to comply with Charter sec. 4.4. On June 6, 2023, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 3664 C.S. Regrettably, after the affidavit of publication was received, City staff realized that the newspaper had published the notice on June 6, 2023 instead of the required date of June 3, 2023.

Recommendation
ADU projects are in progress in the city at this time, and without the provisions of the proposed ordinance existing regulations would be invalid. Therefore, in order to remedy the delayed publication in June and keep the regulations in effect, staff recommends that the Council pass the ordinance to print, with its provisions retroactive to July 6, 2023, which is the date that Ordinance No. 3664 C.S. would have been effective had the publication been timely. The ordinance will then be duly noticed in the newspaper no later than September 16, 2023 in advance of its recommended adoption at a second reading on September 19, 2023.

Attachments: 1. May 2, 2023 Agenda Report Introducing the Ordinance

2. Ordinance
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 2, Packet Page 171 e: ADU Interested Parties
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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 3, Packet Page 172 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Fernanda Roveri, AICP, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: Resolution Adopting Findings and Overruling the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission’s Consistency Determination for the Draft Ordinance Amending Monterey City Code Section 38-112.6 “Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units” and Amending Section 38-11 “Definitions” and 1st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance Amending Monterey City Code Section 38-112.6 “Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units” and Amending Section 38-11 “Definitions” (Statutorily Exempt from CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.17)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council:

1. Adopt a resolution adopting findings and overruling the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission’s (ALUC’s) consistency determination for the draft ordinance amending Monterey City Code Section 38-112.6 “Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units” and amending Section 38-11 “Definitions”, and

2. Conduct 1st reading by title only of an ordinance amending Monterey City Code Section 38-112.6 “Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units” and amending Section 38-11 “Definitions”
VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Section 65852.2 of the Government Code does not limit the authority of local agencies to adopt less restrictive requirements for the creation of an ADU.

Construction of ADUs may affect property taxes by increasing the net value of certain properties.

Date: 5/2/2023
Item No.: 6.

Council Regular Meeting, 5/2/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 1, Packet Page 39 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 4, Packet Page 173 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The attached draft ordinance proposes amendments to existing regulations for ADUs and JADUs, consistent with State law. Not adopting the attached draft ordinance would render existing regulations invalid. Not overruling the Monterey County ALUC’s consistency determination would limit the size and number of ADUs that can be built in certain airport safety and noise contour zones.

DISCUSSION:

California is experiencing a housing crisis, with housing demand outstripping supply. Since 2016, the California State Legislature has brought forward several bills (Government Code sections 65852.2 and 65852.22) relating to the planning and permitting of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) to address the housing supply crisis. Over the years, State ADU and JADU law has been revised to improve its effectiveness at creating more housing units.

On September 27, 2016, the Governor signed into law SB 1069 and AB 2299, the first bills requiring local jurisdictions to amend their zoning ordinances to allow ADUs consistent with this new State law, which took effect on January 1, 2017.

On January 17, 2017, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3560 to amend its Zoning Ordinance to designate areas where ADUs may be located and place other restrictions, consistent with State law.

On October 9, 2019, the Governor signed into law AB 68, AB 881, and SB 13 to further streamline ADUs and relax development standards, which took effect on January 1, 2020.

On October 20, 2020, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 3626 to prevent ADUs over 16 feet in height until the Planning Commission had an opportunity to provide policy recommendations. Ordinance No. 3626 also repealed the City’s ADU regulations, which were almost entirely inconsistent with the State law that took effect on January 1, 2020. On December 1, 2020, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3633, which extended Ordinance No. 3626 until October 19, 2021.

On November 2, 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3641 to amend the City Code to include ADU zoning regulations to further reduce barriers, better streamline approval processes, and expand the capacity to accommodate the development of ADUs and JADUs, consistent with State law.

On May 3, 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3650 to amend the City Code to be more flexible than State law by waiving lot coverage, floor area ratio, open space, and size regulations to allow a second story ADU above a garage or carport up to 25 feet in height and to Council Regular Meeting, 5/2/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 2, Packet Page 40 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 5, Packet Page 174 allow such ADU to have roof pitch and form that is different than the associated single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling, subject to architectural review.

Government Code sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 require cities to adopt ADU zoning regulations consistent with the new State law. In the absence of a valid local ordinance, the new State law provides a set of default standards governing local agencies’ regulation and approval of ADUs and JADUs.

On September 6, 2022, pursuant to the provisions of Section 21670 et seq. of the California Public Utilities Code ("Section 21670"), City staff referred Monterey City Code Section 38-112.6 “Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units” for a determination of consistency with the 2019 Monterey Regional Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP).

Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) staff entered this referral as ALUC File No. REF220059 and began reviewing it.

On September 28, 2022, the Governor signed into law AB 2221 and SB 897 to increase the allowed height of attached and detached ADUs and waive front yard setback limits if they prevent construction of certain ADUs, which took effect on January 1, 2023.

On November 1, 2022, City staff submitted to ALUC staff draft amendments of Sections 38- 112.6 and 38-11 that incorporate the new State law requirements. The goal of the amendments is to make the City’s ADU and JADU Ordinance consistent with AB 2221 and SB 897. AB 2221 adds front setbacks to the list of local development standards that local governments cannot impose if they would preclude construction of an ADU, further streamlines the approval process, and clarifies the definition of ADUs and JADUs. Amongst other changes pertaining to parking standards and application processing, SB 897 increases the maximum height limitation that may be imposed by a local agency to up to 20 feet (currently 16 feet) if the ADU is detached, within ½ mile walking distance of a major transit stop or a high-quality transit corridor, and has a roof pitch that is aligned with the roof pitch of the single-family or multifamily dwelling. Additionally, SB 897 allows an ADU to be constructed to a height of 25 feet if the ADU is attached to a primary residence.

ALUC staff reviewed City staff’s amendments and scheduled them for ALUC review on November 14, 2022. That day, the ALUC adopted Resolution No. 22-005 finding the proposed amendments consistent with the ALUCP if Section 38-112.6(1)(g), “An accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling shall not be permitted within the airport safety zone pursuant to the Airport Land Use Plan”, as proposed by the City is changed to:
“Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units are prohibited in Airport Safety Zones 1 and 6, which do not allow residential use. An Accessory Dwelling Unit or Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit is allowable where residential use is consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Monterey Regional Airport (ALUCP), as may be periodically amended, and the Accessory Dwelling Unit or Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit meets the following criteria, as applicable:
(i) The Accessory Dwelling Unit does not exceed 850 square feet in Airport Safety Zones 2, 3, 4, and 5, as delineated by the ALUCP; and
(ii) The Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit does not exceed 500 square feet in Airport Safety Zones 2, 3, 4, and 5, as delineated by the ALUCP; and Council Regular Meeting, 5/2/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 3, Packet Page 41 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 6, Packet Page 175 (iii) Any Accessory Dwelling Unit or Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit is required to be constructed to meet Allowable Interior Noise Levels as established by the California Building Standards Code; and
(iv) Neither the Accessory Dwelling Unit or Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit is located in noise contour zones where airport noise may equal or exceed 65 CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) as delineated by the ALUCP.”
On March 7, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 23-027 (Attachment 3), which adopted the following proposed draft findings to overrule the ALUC’s consistency determination:

1. Restricting ADU size to 850 square feet or less in Airport Safety Zones 2, 3, 4, and 5 would not protect public health, safety, and welfare more than if the ADU size was restricted to 1,000 square feet or less, as proposed by the draft ordinance. An ADU of 850 square feet could be designed and permitted to be occupied by just as many people as an ADU of 1,000 square feet. In addition, pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2(c)(2), a local agency shall not establish by ordinance a maximum square footage requirement for either an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit that is less than 1,000 square feet for an accessory dwelling unit that provides more than one bedroom.

2. The draft ordinance limits JADU size to 500 square feet or less. Adding that “JADUs shall not exceed 500 square feet in Airport Safety Zones 2, 3, 4, and 5” would be repetitive and would not protect public health, safety, and welfare further.

3. Adding that “Any ADU or JADU is required to be constructed to meet allowable interior noise levels as established by the California Building Standards Code” is redundant and would not protect public health, safety, and welfare further because the City has adopted and only issues building permits that comply with the California Building Standards Code.

4. The California Building Standards Code requires minimum noise insulation performance standards that buffer exterior noise. ADUs/JADUs in the 65-69 CNEL noise contour zone would be constructed to achieve the required noise performance standards. This would minimize human exposure to excessive noise.

With the adoption of Resolution No. 23-027, the City Council also expressed its intention to adopt the findings and overrule the ALUC’s determination on the proposed ordinance, and, pursuant to Public Utilities Code (PUC) 21676(a), directed City staff to provide the ALUC and the Caltrans Division of Aeronautics notice at least 45 days prior to the City’s decision to overrule the ALUC.

On March 13, 2023, City staff mailed and emailed a notice, which included a copy of Resolution No. 23-027, to the ALUC and Division of Aeronautics. This action provided 50 days’ notice. Both the ALUC and Division of Aeronautics provided formal comment letters within 17 days of notice (Attachment 2 – Draft Resolution Exhibit A).

The ALUC Attorney notes that, where, as here, the airport is publicly owned but not operated by the City, under PUC 21675.1(f) a legal effect of overruling the ALUC on the ordinance inconsistency would be to protect the operator of the airport from liability for “damages to property or personal injury resulting from the city’s . . . decision to proceed with the action [the portion of the ordinance it overruled].”
Council Regular Meeting, 5/2/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 4, Packet Page 42 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 7, Packet Page 176 Staff now recommends that the City Council overrule on a two-thirds vote the ALUC’s determination and make the specific findings in the resolution that the draft ordinance is consistent with the purposes set forth in PUC 21670 et. seq., and specifically 21676(a), which states, the local agency may propose to overrule the ALUC if it makes specific findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of PUC 21670 – 21679.5 as stated in Section 21670.

PUC section 21670 states, “It is the purpose of this article to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.” In summary, staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution adopting findings and overruling the ALUC’s consistency determination for the draft ordinance amending Monterey City Code Section 38-112.6 “Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units” and amending Section 38-11 “Definitions”. The City has satisfied procedural requirements and now recommends that the City Council conduct 1st reading by title only of the attached ordinance amending Monterey City Code Section 38-112.6 “Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units” and amending Section 38-11 “Definitions”.

KC/fr
Attachments: 1. Draft Ordinance

2. Draft Resolution with Comment Letters as Exhibit A

3. Resolution No. 23-027
e: All Neighborhood and Business Associations
Architectural Review Committee
Fionna Jensen, ALUC Staff, [email protected]
Jonathan Huff, Caltrans Division of Aeronautics, [email protected] Chris Morello, Monterey Peninsula Airport District, [email protected] ADU Interested Parties
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, 5/2/2023, Item No. 6., Item Page 5, Packet Page 43 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 8, Packet Page 177 ORDINANCE NO. ____ C.S.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
AMENDING MONTEREY CITY CODE SECTION 38-112.6 “ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND JUNIOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS” AND AMENDING SECTION 38-11 “DEFINITIONS” RETROACTIVE TO JULY 6, 2023
WHEREAS, California is experiencing a housing crisis, with housing demand outstripping supply. Since 2016, the California State Legislature has brought forward several bills (Government Code sections 65852.2 and 65852.22) relating to the planning and permitting of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) to address the housing supply crisis. Over the years, State ADU and JADU law has been revised to improve its effectiveness at creating more housing units;
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2016, the Governor signed into law SB 1069 and AB 2299, the first bills requiring local jurisdictions to amend their zoning ordinances to allow ADUs consistent with this new State law, which took effect on January 1, 2017; WHEREAS, on January 17, 2017, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3560 to amend its Zoning Ordinance to designate areas where ADUs may be located and place other restrictions, consistent with State law;
WHEREAS, on October 9, 2019, the Governor signed into law AB 68, AB 881, and SB 13 to further streamline ADUs and relax development standards, which took effect on January 1, 2020.

WHEREAS, on October 20, 2020, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 3626 to prevent ADUs over 16 feet in height until the Planning Commission had an opportunity to provide policy recommendations. Ordinance No. 3626 also repealed the City’s ADU regulations, which were almost entirely inconsistent with the State law that took effect on January 1, 2020. On December 1, 2020, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3633, which extended Ordinance No. 3626 until October 19, 2021;
WHEREAS, on November 2, 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3641 to amend the City Code to include ADU zoning regulations to further reduce barriers, better streamline approval processes, and expand the capacity to accommodate the development of ADUs and JADUs, consistent with State law;
WHEREAS, on May 3, 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3650 to amend the City Code to be more flexible than State law by waiving lot coverage, floor area ratio, open space, and size regulations to allow a second story ADU above a garage or carport up to 25 feet in height and to allow such ADU to have roof pitch and form that is different than the associated singlefamily dwelling or multifamily dwelling, subject to architectural review; WHEREAS, on September 28, 2022, the Governor signed into law AB 2221 and SB 897 to increase the allowed height of attached and detached ADUs and waive front yard setback limits if they prevent construction of certain ADUs, which took effect on January 1, 2023; Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 9, Packet Page 178 2 WHEREAS, Government Code sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 require cities to adopt ADU zoning regulations consistent with the new State law. In the absence of a valid local ordinance, the new State law provides a set of default standards governing local agencies’ regulation and approval of ADUs and JADUs;
WHEREAS, 2015-2023 Housing Element Goal b is to broaden the choice of rental housing types available to residents of Monterey in all price ranges and for all family sizes while maintaining neighborhood compatibility and, where possible, using second units to encourage owner opportunities;
WHEREAS, the amendments are consistent with the purposes of the General Plan, the purposes of the Municipal Code, and other applicable City ordinances; WHEREAS, on December 13, 2022, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, took public testimony, and recommended that the City Council adopt the ordinance amendments;
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on May 2, 2023, took public testimony, and considered the ordinance amendments;
WHEREAS, on June 6, 2023, the City Council approved this ordinance at its second reading. (Ordinance No. 3664.) It was later discovered that the publication of the ordinance occurred on June 6, 2023 and not on or before June 3, 2023 as required by City Charter section

4.4. Therefore, Ordinance No. 3664 is null and void;
WHEREAS, publication of this ordinance has now taken place at least three days before September 18, 2023;
WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City Council to make the effective date of this ordinance retroactive to July 6, 2023, which is the date that Ordinance No. 3664 would have been effective had the publication been timely; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey has determined that the adoption of an ordinance approving Zoning Ordinance amendments related to accessory dwelling units implements the provisions of Government Code sections 65852.1 and 65852.2 and is therefore statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.17.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Monterey City Council does ordain as follows:

SECTION 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.

SECTION 2. Monterey City Code Section 38-11 “Definitions” “Accessory Dwelling Unit” is hereby amended to read as follows:

Accessory Dwelling Unit: An attached or a detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation, which is located on the same parcel as a proposed or existing single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling. An attached accessory dwelling unit is physically attached to the single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling, including attached garages. A detached accessory dwelling unit is physically separated from the singleCouncil Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 10, Packet Page 179 3 family dwelling or multifamily dwelling. An accessory dwelling unit may consist of an efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code; or a manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.

SECTION 3. Monterey City Code Section 38-112.6 is hereby replaced in its entirety as follows:

1. General Requirements. All accessory dwelling units shall conform with the following:
a. The parcel must be zoned to allow single-family or multifamily use. b. The parcel may contain the following number of accessory dwelling units:
i. Single-Family Dwelling. A parcel with an existing or proposed single-family dwelling may contain one of the following:
(1) A new construction accessory dwelling unit may be developed as attached to or detached from the single-family dwelling.
(2) An accessory dwelling unit within the walls of a proposed or existing single-family dwelling or within an existing accessory structure, including detached garages, may be developed if the unit has exterior access separate from the proposed or existing single-family dwelling; the side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire and safety; and an expansion of the accessory structure for ingress and egress is not more than 150 square feet.
(3) Both one accessory dwelling unit and one junior accessory dwelling unit may be developed on the same parcel with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling if the accessory dwelling unit is developed as either of the following:
a. A new construction, detached accessory dwelling unit up to 800 square feet in size, up to the allowed height in subsection (2)(d) of this section, and with minimum four-foot side and rear setbacks; or
b. The accessory dwelling unit meets the standards of subsection (1)(b)(i)(2) of this section.
ii. Multifamily Dwelling. A parcel with a multifamily dwelling may contain one of the following:
(1) A parcel with a proposed or existing multifamily dwelling may construct one of the following:
a. One attached accessory dwelling unit meeting the standards of subsection (2); or
b. Up to two detached accessory dwelling units if the accessory dwelling unit does not exceed the allowed height in subsection (2)(d) of this section, and has at least four-foot side and rear setbacks.
(2) A parcel with an existing multifamily dwelling may contain accessory dwelling units converted from portions of the building that are not used as livable space. The Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 11, Packet Page 180 4 number of accessory dwelling units permitted is equivalent to up to 25 percent of the number of existing, legally permitted multifamily dwelling units, or one, whichever is greater.
c. Prior to issuance of a building permit for an accessory dwelling unit, the property owner shall record a covenant in a form prescribed by the city attorney, which shall run with the land and provide for the following:
i. The accessory dwelling unit(s) may not be sold separately from the existing or proposed single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling; and
ii. Neither the accessory dwelling unit(s) nor the junior accessory dwelling unit may be used for short-term residential rentals of less than 30 consecutive days.

A copy of the recorded covenant shall be filed with the Building Division prior to issuance of a building permit.
d. Prior to issuance of a building permit for an accessory dwelling unit on those certain parcels identified as Monterey County Assessors Parcels: 013-231-027-000, 013-231-017- 000, 013-231-018-000 and 013-231-028-000, the property owner shall provide the City with an avigation easement granted to the Monterey Regional Airport District or evidence that the parcel is no longer within the Monterey Regional Airport Land use Compatibility Plan 65-, 70-, and 75 Community Noise Equivalent Level boundaries.
e. Exemptions.
i. Notwithstanding the development and design standards of this section, accessory dwelling units that meet the standards in subsection (1)(b)(i)(2), (1)(b)(i)(3)(a), (1)(b)(ii)(1)(b), or (1)(b)(ii)(2) of this section are permitted. ii. Notwithstanding subsection (1)(c), a single-family dwelling and accessory dwelling unit that were developed by a qualified nonprofit, as that term is defined in and pursuant to Government Code section 65852.26, may be conveyed pursuant to a tenancy in common agreement that allocates an undivided, unequal interest in the property based on the size of the dwelling that each buyer occupies if the development and the transaction meet the requirements of Government Code Section 65852.26.
f. Fire sprinklers shall not be required in the accessory dwelling unit unless fire sprinklers are required for the single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling. Fire sprinklers shall not be required for an existing single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling as a condition of the construction of an accessory dwelling unit.
g. An accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit conforming to the requirements of this section shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density for the parcel upon which the unit is located and shall be deemed to be a residential use consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designations for the parcel. h. Accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units are prohibited in Airport Safety Zones 1 and 6, pursuant to the 2019 Monterey Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. i. An accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit conforming to the provisions of this subsection shall be approved ministerially as provided in Section 38-153(B).

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 12, Packet Page 181 5 2. Accessory Dwelling Unit Development Standards. Except as otherwise provided in this Section 38-112.6, all accessory dwelling units shall comply with the following development standards:
a. The accessory dwelling unit shall conform to all requirements of the underlying residential zoning district, any applicable overlay district, and all other applicable provisions of this chapter. Notwithstanding this requirement:
i. the accessory dwelling unit is contained in a structure that is unpermitted and/or nonconforming with zoning and/or State and local building code requirements and all of the following apply:
(1) the creation of an accessory dwelling unit does not expand or affect the nonconformity or the building code violations, and
(2) the nonconformity does not pose a threat to public health and safety. ii. the unpermitted accessory dwelling unit was constructed prior to January 1, 2018, even if the accessory dwelling unit is nonconforming with local zoning, California Government Code section 65852.2, and/or State and local building code requirements. However, the city can deny the application for an unpermitted accessory dwelling unit as described in this subsection (a)(ii) if the building is deemed substandard under Section 17920.3 of the Health & Safety Code or if the Building Official makes a finding that correcting the violation is necessary to protect the health and safety of the public or occupants of the structure.
iii. the applicable provisions of this Chapter 38 are inconsistent with the provisions of this Section 38-112.6, in which case the standards of this section shall apply. b. Floor Area.
i. No accessory dwelling unit shall be smaller than the size required to allow an efficiency unit pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 17958.1. ii. The floor area of an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed 850 square feet for a studio or one bedroom and 1,000 square feet for a unit that contains more than one bedroom.
c. Setbacks. Except as specified below, an accessory dwelling unit shall be required to comply with the setback requirements of the zone in which the unit is to be located. i. No setback is required for an existing living area or an existing accessory structure converted to an accessory dwelling unit, or for a new accessory dwelling unit constructed in the same location and built to the same dimensions as an existing structure, except that:
(1) An expansion of not more than 150 square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure is allowed solely for the purpose of accommodating ingress and egress.
(2) Setbacks shall be sufficient for fire safety.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 13, Packet Page 182 6 ii. For all other accessory dwelling units, a setback of four feet is required from the rear and side property lines.
d. Height.
i. Attached Accessory Dwelling Unit. The height of an attached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed 25 feet or the height limitation that applies to the single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling, whichever is lower. However, the accessory dwelling unit may not exceed two stories.
ii. Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit. The height of a detached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed the following:
(1) 16 feet on a lot with an existing or proposed single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling;
(2) 18 feet on a lot with an existing or proposed single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling if the lot is within one-half of one mile walking distance of a major transit stop or a high-quality transit corridor, as those terms are defined in Public Resources Code Section 21155. The accessory dwelling unit may be up to 20 feet in height to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch of the single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling (3) 18 feet on a lot with an existing or proposed multifamily, multistory dwelling. iii. Second Story Accessory Dwelling Unit Above Garage or Carport. If an accessory dwelling unit is attached to a detached garage or carport, then the accessory dwelling unit is a detached accessory dwelling unit. If a detached accessory dwelling unit exceeds the maximum permitted height set forth in subsection (2)(d)(ii) of this section, the applicant may apply for an exception through the discretionary architectural review process pursuant to Article 25 of this Chapter if:
(1) The total building height is 25 feet or less;
(2) The parcel is within the R-3 zone;
(3) The garage or carport is detached from the single-family dwelling and is at the ground level of the accessory dwelling unit;
(4) No windows or openings are permitted for that portion of the accessory dwelling unit that is closer than four feet to a property line; and (5) Any window parallel to an adjoining property line and closer than 10 feet shall be opaque.
e. Limits on lot coverage, floor area ratio, open space, front setbacks, and size cannot prevent the construction of a detached or attached accessory dwelling unit, with a maximum floor area of 800 square feet and minimum four-foot side and rear yard setbacks, if the proposed accessory dwelling unit is in compliance with all other development standards. f. Access. An accessory dwelling unit shall have a separate entrance from other dwelling units.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 14, Packet Page 183 7 g. Parking.
i. One additional parking space shall be provided per unit or per bedroom, whichever is less, which may be provided as tandem parking on an existing driveway, or in setback areas unless the Community Development Director makes specific findings that tandem parking and parking in setback areas is not feasible because of specific topographical conditions.
ii. No parking may extend into a public sidewalk or public right-of-way. iii. Notwithstanding this provision, no additional parking may be required for an accessory dwelling unit, including an accessory dwelling unit that is being proposed along with a proposed single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling, that is:
(1) Located within one-half mile walking distance of a public transit stop; (2) Located within one block of a car share vehicle pickup location; (3) Located entirely within the proposed or existing single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling or within an existing accessory structure; (4) Located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district; or (5) Located on a parcel where on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the accessory dwelling unit.
iv. If an existing garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction of or replaced by an accessory dwelling unit, the parking spaces do not need to be replaced.
h. Properties with Historic Overlay Zoning or Historic Zoning. Attached or detached accessory dwelling units on a parcel with an H-1 or H-2 designation shall:
i. Be located behind the historic structure, unless these requirements prevent creation of the accessory dwelling unit. If attached, the accessory dwelling unit shall be located at the rear of the main historic structure. If detached, new construction, the accessory dwelling unit shall be located 10 feet behind the rear of the main historic structure; ii. Notwithstanding the design standards below, not match the exterior finish of the historic building; and
iii. Be designed so that any new exterior door for the accessory dwelling unit is not facing the front yard, unless this requirement prevents creation of the accessory dwelling unit. i. Water and Sewer. Accessory dwelling units shall not be permitted on a parcel where water or sewer services are inadequate. Water restrictions imposed by the State Water Resources Control Board’s Cease and Desist Order demonstrate existing water sources are insufficient to meet any expansion of water demand and do not satisfy criteria for the adequacy of water and sewer services. Water credits or water entitlements may be available to offset additional demand for an accessory dwelling unit. The adequacy of water is determined by the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD). Verification of water credits from MPWMD is to be submitted at the time of building permit application.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 15, Packet Page 184 8 3. Accessory Dwelling Unit Design Standards. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, all accessory dwelling units shall comply with the following design standards:
a. Colors and Materials. The accessory dwelling unit shall be constructed with I materials identical in color, and identical in texture and appearance to the single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling, including but not limited to roofing, siding, and windows and doors; and b. Roof Pitch and Form. The accessory dwelling unit shall match the roof pitch and roof form of the single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling in order to blend with the architecture of the single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling. The applicant may apply for an exception through the discretionary architectural review process pursuant to Article 25 of this Chapter.

The Architectural Review Committee may grant such an exception if it finds that an alternative roof pitch and form design are compatible with the single-family or multifamily structure and neighborhood.
c. State and Local Building Code Requirements. The accessory dwelling unit shall conform to all applicable State and local building code requirements. The new construction of an accessory dwelling unit shall not constitute a Group R occupancy change under the building code, as described in Section 310 of the California Building Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations), unless the building official or enforcement agency makes a written finding based on substantial evidence in the record that the construction of the accessory dwelling unit could have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety or the accessory dwelling unit is converted from unhabitable or nonresidential space.

4. Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit Development Standards. Junior accessory dwelling units shall conform with the following:
a. A junior accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed 500 square feet in size and shall contain at least an efficiency kitchen, which includes cooking appliances, a food preparation counter, and storage cabinets that are of reasonable size in relation to the junior accessory dwelling unit.
b. A junior accessory dwelling unit shall have a separate entrance from the entrance of the single-family dwelling.
c. The junior accessory dwelling unit may, but is not required to, include separate sanitation facilities. If separate sanitation facilities are not provided, the junior accessory dwelling unit shall share sanitation facilities with the single-family dwelling. If provided as part of the singlefamily dwelling, the junior accessory dwelling unit shall have direct access to the single-family dwelling so as to not need to go outside to access the bathroom. d. Unless the property is owned by a governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization, one of the dwellings on the parcel must be the bona fide principal residence of at least one legal owner of the parcel, as evidenced at the time of approval of the junior accessory dwelling unit by appropriate documents of title and residency. e. Prior to issuance of a building permit for a junior accessory dwelling unit, the owner shall record a covenant in a form prescribed by the city attorney, which shall run with the land and provide for the following:
i. A prohibition on the sale of the junior accessory dwelling unit separate from the sale of the single-family dwelling;
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 16, Packet Page 185 9 ii. A restriction on the size and attributes of the junior accessory dwelling unit consistent with this section;
iii. A prohibition against renting the property for fewer than 30 consecutive calendar days; and
iv. A requirement that either the single-family dwelling or the junior accessory dwelling unit be the owner’s bona fide principal residence, unless the owner is a governmental agency, land trust, or housing organization.

A copy of the recorded covenant shall be filed with the Building Division prior to issuance of a building permit.
f. Parking is not required for junior accessory dwelling units. However, if an existing attached garage is replaced by a junior accessory dwelling unit, each removed parking space must be replaced with an off-street parking space that does not extend into the public right-of-way. If the proposed replacement parking is uncovered parking located in the driveway, the dimensions of the off-street parking space should at least be nine feet by 18 feet and the space may occupy any part of the driveway so long as it does not extend into the public rightof-way and is not located in the front yard setback. g. Junior accessory dwelling units shall not be permitted on a parcel where water or sewer services are inadequate. Water restrictions imposed by the State Water Resources Control Board’s Cease and Desist Order demonstrate existing water sources are insufficient to meet any expansion of water demand and do not satisfy criteria for the adequacy of water and sewer services. Water credits or water entitlements may be available to offset additional demand for a junior accessory dwelling unit. The adequacy of water is determined by the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD). Verification of water credits from MPWMD is to be submitted at the time of building permit application.

5. Utilities and Impact Fees.
a. Except as provided in subsection (5)(b) of this section, an accessory dwelling unit shall provide a new or separate utility connection, including a separate sewer lateral, between the accessory dwelling unit and the utility, unless the applicant has obtained a sewer lateral inspection performed by a licensed plumber demonstrating that the sewer lateral meets the City’s standards and specifications. Proof that the sewer lateral meets the City’s requirements shall be submitted on a sewer lateral inspection form provided by the City and completed by the professional who completed the inspection. A connection fee or capacity charge may be charged that is proportionate to the size in square feet of the accessory dwelling unit or its drainage fixture unit (DFU) values. Separate electric and water submeters shall be required for the accessory dwelling unit, except that separate water meters shall be required for accessory dwelling units if and when California American Water is allowed to connect new water meters.
b. Junior accessory dwelling units and accessory dwelling units converted from the existing space of a single-family dwelling or accessory structure are exempt from any requirement to install a new or separate utility connection and to pay any associated connection or capacity fees or charges, unless the accessory dwelling unit is constructed within a new single-family dwelling.
c. All utility extensions shall be placed underground.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 17, Packet Page 186 10 d. No impact fees may be imposed on an accessory dwelling unit that is less than 750 square feet in size. For purposes of this section, "impa”t fees" include the fees specified in Sections 66000 and 66477 of the Government Code, but do not include utility connection fees or capacity charges. For accessory dwelling units that have a floor area of 750 square feet or more, impact fees shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling.

6. Process and Timing.
a. Permit Review. The City requires a building permit and, as applicable, any additional services permits, to create and serve an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit.
i. The City must approve or deny an application for a permit to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit within 60 days from the date that the City receives the completed application without discretionary review or a hearing, unless either:
(1) The applicant requests a delay, in which case the 60-day time period is tolled for the period of the requested delay; or
(2) When an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit is submitted along with a permit application to create a new single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling on the parcel, the City may delay approving or denying the permit application until the City approves or denies the permit application to create the single-family dwelling or multifamily dwelling; or
(3) The applicant requests discretionary architectural review for a second story accessory dwelling unit above a detached garage or carport that exceeds the height limit pursuant to subsection (2)(d)(ii) of this section and/or for alternative roof pitch/form, as provided in subsection (2)(d)(iii) or (3)(b) of this section. ii. If the City denies the permit application, the City will provide to the applicant within the 60 day review period a complete list of the application's deficiencies and describe how the applicant can remedy the application.
iii. If the applicant applies for a demolition permit to demolish a detached garage or carport and a building permit to construct a detached accessory dwelling unit, the demolition permit and building permit for the detached accessory dwelling unit will be issued at the same time. b. Mills Act. An accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit proposed on a property subject to a Mills Act contract pursuant to Government Code section 50280 et seq. must comply with the provisions of the contract, including conformance to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior’s Standard for Rehabilitation, and the California Historical Building Code.

SECTION 4. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. Ordinance No. 3664 is null and void.

SECTION 5. Severability. If any section, sub-section, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 18, Packet Page 187 11 court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each section, sub-section, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, sub-sections, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions to be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 6. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from and after its final passage and adoption and its application shall be effective retroactive to July 6, 2023.

SECTION 7. Publication. Pursuant to Charter section 4.4, this ordinance shall be published in the Monterey County Herald, a newspaper printed and published in the County of Monterey, at least three days before its adoption.

SECTION 8. The City Clerk shall send a copy of this Ordinance to the Department of Housing and Community Development within 60 days after adoption, as required by State law.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this __ day of __________, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor
City Clerk
5349212.1
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 13., Item Page 19, Packet Page 188 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: David J. Hober, Chief of Police
Prepared By: Lieutenant Ethan Andrews (CAT/MDOT Commander) SUBJECT: Presentation on the Monterey Police Department Outreach and Navigation Center (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council receive a report on the Monterey Police Department’s (“MPD”) Outreach and Navigation Center (Substation) at 401 Camino El Estero.

VALUE DRIVERS:

In collaboration with our community partners, recognize that public safety is a priority to ensure that our City is safe and welcoming to all, contributing to our economic vitality as a destination City.

Support efforts and policies that provide equitable access to affordable housing in Monterey and the region and address homelessness through programs and partnerships such as the MPD Multi-Disciplinary Outreach Team (MDOT).

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action is consistent with Council’s commitment to address homelessness through programs and partnerships such as the MPD MDOT.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The Public Works Department budgeted $50,000 for facility improvements for interior paint, exterior paint, shutter repairs and other improvements in FY24. Furniture, equipment, and office supply expenses of approximately $21,000 have been paid from the MPD FY23 and FY24 budgets. Information Services costs for Internet and telephone connectivity, and technology costs have also been paid out of the City’s current FY24 budget.

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: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 14.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 14., Item Page 1, Packet Page 189 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Council could direct staff to discontinue the utilization of the Substation. This is not a recommended course of action.

DISCUSSION:

The City has opened the Substation at the First French Consulate Building (401 Camino El Estero) adjacent to Lake El Estero. This location will allow access for MPD personnel and equipment to the beach waterfront at Window on the Bay and to the downtown areas of Monterey. It also offers an opportunity for various governmental and non-governmental organizations that comprise the MPD MDOT to work from a location in close proximity to those in need. The MPD receives consistent requests to address quality of life issues and provide services for those who are unhoused along the beach waterfront, the downtown area, El Estero Park, the cemetery, El Estero Lake Dog Park and adjoining areas. The MPD Substation will provide a collaborative workspace for MPD, MDOT and other service providers.

The MPD Substation will be a “touch-down” office that will allow MPD personnel and MDOT members a location to work “in the field.” In this vein, the location will not have set hours or permanently assigned personnel or provide other administrative services – this will all continue to be conducted from the Monterey Police Department at 351 Madison Street. The intention is to provide a location where MPD personnel and partner MDOT personnel can work and respond from in closer proximity to people looking for services. This office will also offer additional police presence in the area providing a more secure feeling for those who live, work and visit Monterey.

In addition to opening the MPD Outreach and Navigation Center (substation) the MPD is currently in the process of hiring a Homeless Outreach Navigator, a position that the City Council added with the approved budget in FY 2023-2024 to assist with providing services for those who are unhoused. This will provide a dedicated staff member to directly provide outreach and engagement with those experiencing homelessness by assisting with navigating the various resource systems, providing case management assessment, and followup with additional supportive services. The Homeless Navigator will connect, interview and assess clients’ immediate social service needs and make referrals to appropriate resources.

Referral services include food, clothing, shelter, housing, employment, veterans’ assistance, legal services, vocational training, mental health and substance abuse treatment assistance, and other services.

The MPD Substation and Homeless Navigator position will broaden and enhance the Monterey Police Department-led MDOT process to collaborate and develop stronger connections. MDOT provides the City of Monterey with a long-term relationship with our community partners and other government agencies to implement creative solutions.

DJH/ea
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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 14., Item Page 2, Packet Page 190 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Hans Uslar, City Manager
SUBJECT: 2
nd Reading of an Ordinance to Increase Compensation for the Mayor and City Councilmembers (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt an ordinance to increase compensation for the Mayor and City Councilmembers.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

According to California State Senator Bill Dodd, D-Napa, the author of SB 329:

City Councilmembers have one of the hardest jobs in California government.

They deal with a wide range of issues, from street maintenance to emergency response duties. And all too often, they do this job with very little financial compensation. No one runs for City Council in order to make money. But the low levels of pay make it much harder for them to balance their careers and personal obligations with the calling to serve their community. The Legislature has not raised the base pay amounts for City Councilmembers since 1984. It's time those amounts caught up to the present economic reality, especially with the rapid increase in inflation we've seen recently. Raising the pay will also make it easier for members of marginalized communities to serve. City Councils should be reflective of the communities they represent and I believe raising their compensation is an important step to achieving that equitable outcome.

This bill was supported by the League of California Cities because:

Lengthy time commitments and limited pay discourage many, especially lowincome residents, single parents, people of color, and young people, from running for public office. For many, being a council member is a full-time commitment with part-time pay. Cal Cities is proud to sponsor this important legislation that lessens barriers for those interested in governing at the local level. This overdue reform is another tool communities can choose to use that can help ensure our city councils are reflective of the residents who live, work, and play in their communities.

Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 15.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 15., Item Page 1, Packet Page 191 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The cost to increase compensation for the Mayor and City Councilmembers would be $34,650 per year. For the 2023-24 fiscal year, the amount would be $17,325, as the increase would go into effect on January 1, 2024.

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 has 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:

Ultimately, the City Council could choose not to increase City Council compensation, or it could increase compensation by a lesser amount than the amount proposed in the draft ordinance.

DISCUSSION:

On June 29, 2023, the Governor signed SB 329 into law, allowing for city councilmember pay to increase in general law cities. The Legislature last adjusted these amounts in 1984.

Effective January 1, 2024, the Government Code authorizes up to $950 per month based on Monterey's population. This new law applies to the City of Monterey because City Charter section 4.1 authorizes the City Council to be compensated in an amount permitted by state law for general law cities of the same population, with extra compensation for the Mayor.

City Councilmembers are currently paid $429 (effective 1999) and the Mayor $675 (effective 2002). Under the new law, Councilmember salary may be increased beyond $950 per month if the increase does not exceed: (1) an amount equal to 5% for each calendar year from the last adjustment (not compounded pursuant to an Attorney General opinion); or (2) an amount equal to inflation since January 1, 2024 based on Consumer Price Index (CPI).

Here, the first formula results in a maximum monthly amount of $965.25 ($429 x 5% x 25; $429 + $536.25 = $965.25) for City Councilmembers. For the Mayor, this formula would result in a maximum salary of $1,417.50 ($675 x 5% x 22; $675 + $742.50 = $1,417.50).

Amounts paid for retirement, health, and other benefits are not included for purposes of determining salary, provided that the same benefits are available and paid by the City for its employees.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 15., Item Page 2, Packet Page 192 This matter has been previously heard by the Monterey City Council at agendized public appearances with public comments received, on August 1, 2023 when the matter was first presented, and on August 15, 2023 when the ordinance was passed to print.

If approved, the increase in compensation would be effective January 1, 2024, which is the earliest opportunity under State law.

Attachments: 1. Ordinance
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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 15., Item Page 3, Packet Page 193 ORDINANCE NO. ____ C.S.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№07/19
ADDING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 1, SECTION 2-1.06 TO THE MONTEREY CITY CODE TO

INCREASE COMPENSATION FOR THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY DOES ORDAIN, as follows:

SECTION 1:

WHEREAS, because City Charter section 4.1 authorizes the City Council to be compensated in an amount permitted by state law for general law cities of the same population, with extra compensation for the Mayor;
WHEREAS, City Councilmembers are currently paid $429 (effective 1999) and the Mayor $675 (effective 2002);
WHEREAS, on June 29, 2023, the Governor signed SB 329 into law, allowing for city councilmember pay to increase in general law cities. The Legislature last adjusted these amounts in 1984. Effective January 1, 2024, the Government Code authorizes up to $950 per month based on Monterey's population.

WHEREAS, under the new law, Councilmember salary may be increased beyond $950 per month if the increase does not exceed: (1) an amount equal to 5% for each calendar year from the last adjustment (not compounded pursuant to an Attorney General opinion); or (2) an amount equal to inflation since January 1, 2024 based on CPI.

WHEREAS, the City Council agrees with the author of SB 329, Senator Bill Dodd-DNapa, that:

City Councilmembers have one of the hardest jobs in California government.

WHEREAS, the City Council agrees with the League of California Cities, which supported SB 329 for the following reasons:

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 15., Item Page 4, Packet Page 194 2 Lengthy time commitments and limited pay discourage many, especially lowincome residents, single parents, people of color, and young people, from running for public office. For many, being a council member is a full-time commitment with part-time pay. Cal Cities is proud to sponsor this important legislation that lessens barriers for those interested in governing at the local level. This overdue reform is another tool communities can choose to use that can help ensure our city councils are reflective of the residents who live, work, and play in their communities.

WHEREAS, by the time this ordinance will be effective, City Councilmember compensation will not have been increased for 25 years, and the Mayor’s compensation for 22 years. The cost of living in the City of Monterey is extremely high. The City Council has received public comment urging an increase in compensation to encourage others to run for public office.

In August 2022, an editorial in the Monterey County Weekly urged increasing compensation for city elected officials;
WHEREAS, this ordinance was presented to the City Council with findings demonstrating the need for the increased compensation on August 1, 2023 consistent with the requirement set forth in Government Code section 36516(g)(2); WHEREAS, a first reading of the ordinance was held on August 15, 2023; 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 has 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.

NOW THEREFORE, the Monterey City Council declares as follows:

SECTION 2: 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.

SECTION 3: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 1, Section 2-1.06 is hereby added to read as follows:
2-1.06 Compensation for the Mayor and City Councilmembers Effective January 1, 2024, Compensation for the Mayor and City Councilmembers shall be as follows:
(a) Compensation for the Mayor is hereby established in the sum of $1,417.50 per month.
(b) Compensation for City Councilmembers is hereby established in the sum of Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 15., Item Page 5, Packet Page 195 $965.25 per month.
(c) The compensation set forth in subsections (a) and (b) is exclusive of any amounts paid by the city for retirement and health benefits, provided that the same benefits are available and paid by the city for its employees. (d) This ordinance does not and shall not provide for automatic future increases in compensation.

SECTION 4: All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed effective January 1, 2024.

SECTION 5: 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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 15., Item Page 6, Packet Page 196 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Kimberly Cole, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: 1
st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance to Establish a Rental Inventory and Requiring Registration of All Residential Rental Properties within the City of Monterey Beginning January 1, 2024 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council introduce by title only, waive full reading, and pass a first reading of an ordinance to establish a rental inventory and require registration of all residential rental properties within the City of Monterey beginning January 1, 2024.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Maintaining and increasing access to affordable housing supports the City’s ongoing housing efforts, including those intended to serve extremely low, very low, and low-income residents.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

As reported in April 2023 at the City Council meeting, staff estimates that a rental registry program will require around $400,000 annually in ongoing costs. The management, administration, and maintenance of a rental registry program will require two additional full-time staff members at a total estimated annual operating cost of $275,000, plus $25,000 for management/supervisory staff time.

Staff also estimates approximately $100,000 in additional initial staff time to develop the program and physically confirm data before launching.

The cost for a specialized rental registry software will be around $25,000 in start-up costs in year one plus an estimated $30,000 annual subscription fee, for a total year-one cost of $55,000. The $30,000 subscription fee would continue annually thereafter. Since this is a new program, the City needs to create fees to recover the costs for the program.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The proposed Rental Inventory will not result in any construction or change in the physical environment. The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as Date: 9/5/2023
Item No.: 16.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 1, Packet Page 197 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.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City could decline to adopt a rental registry ordinance at this time.

DISCUSSION
Background
Over the years, the City of Monterey City Council has received updates about rent stabilization measures and discussed whether to create a new program.

December 1, 2020: Councilmember Williamson and Vice Mayor Haffa’s Request to Agendize a Discussion about Rent Stabilization Measures Action: Directed staff to bring an extension of the eviction moratorium before the Council within two months, prior to State's eviction moratorium ending, and directed staff to dedicate a study session in 2021 to the issue of renter protections.

March 25, 2020: City Council passed Urgency Ordinance No. 3614 to temporarily prohibit residential and commercial evictions for non-payment of rent related to COVID-19 through May 31, 2020.

August 19, 2020: City passed Urgency Ordinance No. 3623 to temporarily prohibit residential evictions and residential rent increases.

This ordinance expired on September 30, 2020.

September 30, 2020: Council received an update on recent development in the law regarding COVID-19 tenant protections.

September 29, 2021: Council received Presentation about Rent Control in California and Potential Rent Stabilization Measures that could be implemented in the City of Monterey and an Overview of the City’s Current Housing Program
Action: Received presentation, discussed.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 2, Packet Page 198 February 23, 2022: Council received a Report on Rent Registry Programs
Action: Received report, discussed.

In early 2023, Mayor Williamson requested that this discussion be placed on an agenda for further discussion. On April 18, 2023, the City Council received a presentation on rent stabilization options and the legal framework. The Council gave direction to the Housing Office to begin the process of drafting the legal framework for a rental inventory database. Information was also posted on the City’s Have Your Say Monterey portal at
www.haveyoursaymonterey.org/rentalinventory. Due to this direction, staff has prepared the attached ordinance, creating the legal framework for a rental inventory database.

On May 30, 2023, the City hosted a town hall meeting on the potential Rental Inventory. The meeting was well attended in person and on ZoomGov with more than 150 participants. The live poll showed there was a fairly good mix of renters, property owners, property managers, and real estate agents:

A video playback of the town hall meeting may be viewed via this link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUcLL71UHOY
Round-table discussion topics included the following questions:
 What are your initial thoughts about the rental inventory?  What information is most useful to include in the rental inventory?  What information would you like to see omitted from the rental inventory?  What questions or concerns still need to be addressed? Feedback from the discussion is included as Attachment 2.

On June 20, 2023, the City Council received a report and public feedback on the town hall meeting.

A draft ordinance has been prepared based on the City Council’s April 18th direction.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 3, Packet Page 199 Proposed Ordinance
The draft ordinance (Attachment 1) specifies:

The purpose of this Article is to adopt regulations for Landlords to register their rental units and provide other information to the City on an annual basis. The registration process will allow the City to collect, monitor and analyze the characteristics of the rental units and actual rents in Monterey. This data will be available to the City Council to inform future policy decisions about the regulation of the rental market in Monterey. The registration fees collected pursuant to this Article will be used to fund the creation and maintenance of the rental inventory as well as to provide services, including referrals to mediation and legal services, education opportunities, and landlord/tenant resources, to Landlords and Tenants in the City. This Article supports the City’s housing goals and protects public health, safety, and welfare for Monterey residents. This Article and its implementation are intended to protect the privacy of individual Tenants and the proprietary information of Landlords, the public release of which could result in a competitive disadvantage.

The information collected will include:

1. The name, address, and phone number of the landlord, including any on-site or off-site property manager or property management company;

2. The street address and/or Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) of each rental unit for rent or lease;

3. The year the property was built and the number of rental units on the property;

4. The number of bedrooms and bathrooms in each rental unit, including square footage, for rent or lease;

5. The occupancy status of each rental unit (e.g., vacant or occupied) and reason for vacancy, if applicable;

6. For each occupied rental unit, the current amount and date of the monthly rent received for each rental unit, identifying whether the monthly rent includes utility charges and housing service charges;

7. For a rental unit in a condominium or other common interest development, the amount of the homeowners’ association fees, regular and/or special assessments, or other similar charges paid to an association;

8. Whether or not the tenant receives a housing voucher or other rental subsidy;

9. Any other information deemed necessary by the Community Development Director to implement the ordinance.

One of the key issues raised during the public meeting was the privacy of renters’ information.

The draft ordinance requires that only certain information be available to the public, including:

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 4, Packet Page 200

1. The street address and/or Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) of each rental unit for rent or lease;

2. The year the property was built and the number of rental units on the property;

3. The number of bedrooms and bathrooms in each rental unit, including square footage, for rent or lease;

4. The occupancy status of each rental unit (e.g., vacant or occupied); and

5. For each occupied rental unit, the total current amount of monthly rent received for the rental unit.

The registration will expire annually and must be renewed. The ordinance includes an enforcement provision mimicking the City Code that establishes fee penalties, administrative citation procedures, or civil action and penalties.

A summary of the proposed ordinance compared with the City of Salinas’ ordinance is attached (Attachment 11).

In conclusion, staff recommends that the City Council introduce by title only, waive full reading, and pass a first reading of an ordinance to establish a rental inventory and require registration of all residential rental properties within the City of Monterey beginning January 1, 2024.

2. Summary of Town Hall Comments

3. December 1, 2020 City Council Minutes

4. March 25, 2020 City Council Minutes

5. August 19, 2020 City Council Minutes

6. September 30, 2020 City Council Minutes

7. September 29, 2021 City Council Minutes

8. February 23, 2022 City Council Minutes

9. April 18, 2023 City Council Minutes

10. June 20, 2023 City Council Minutes

11. Comparison of Salinas City Code and Monterey’s Proposed Ordinance Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 5, Packet Page 201 ORDINANCE NO. _______ C.S.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY

ESTABLISHING A RENTAL INVENTORY AND REQUIRING REGISTRATION OF ALL

RESIDENTIAL RENTAL PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF MONTEREY BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2024
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY DOES ORDAIN, as follows:

SECTION 1:

WHEREAS, pursuant to Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution, the City of Monterey ("City") has broad authority to maintain the public peace, health and safety of its community and preserve the quality of life for its residents and may make and enforce all regulations and ordinances using its police powers to do so; WHEREAS, the City, with direction from the City Council, has developed goals, objectives, policies, and action programs that directly address the City’s housing needs; WHEREAS, according to the Monterey County Analysis of Impediments of Fair Housing Choice, published in 2019, 65.9 percent of housing units in the City are occupied by renters, who are an essential part of the City’s community and workforce; WHEREAS, the City does not currently track residential rents, and there is no current source for obtaining that information specific to the City, making it difficult to ascertain the effect of rents and housing conditions on the potential displacement of residents; WHEREAS, the City Council convened study sessions on September 29, 2021 and April 18, 2023 to discuss tools to address gaps in information necessary to address housing conditions and housing affordability in the City;
WHEREAS, the City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance for City Council consideration that would require owners of residential rental properties to provide the City with information annually regarding the character and other information regarding Rental Units, including optional information that could include the rent level of the Rental Units; WHEREAS, City staff held a community meeting about the rental housing inventory on May 30, 2023, and will continue to collaborate with a variety of stakeholders, including but not limited to property owners, property managers, realtors, tenants and tenant advocates, to identify opportunities to collect data;
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines the Rental Inventory Ordinance, codified in Chapter 8 of the City Code, is adopted pursuant to the City’s police power to protect to the public health, safety and welfare; and
WHEREAS, approval of this ordinance is exempt from environmental review under the general rule in California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).

The activity is covered by the general rule which exempts activities that can be seen with certainty to have no possibility for causing a significant effect on the environment.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 6, Packet Page 202 NOW THEREFORE, the Monterey City Council declares as follows:

SECTION 2: The above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as fully set forth herein.

SECTION 3: The title to Monterey City Code, Chapter 8, is hereby renamed “Housing”.

SECTION 4: Monterey City Code, Chapter 8, Article 1, Sections 8-1 through 8-7 are hereby renumbered sequentially as Sections 8-1.00 through 8-1.06.

SECTION 5: Monterey City Code, Chapter 8, Article 2 is hereby added to read as follows:

ARTICLE 2. – RENTAL INVENTORY
§ 8-2.00 – FINDINGS AND PURPOSE
A. Findings. The City Council finds and declares as follows:

1. The City has a substantial government interest in regulating the relationship between Landlords and Tenants to increase certainty, stability and fairness within the rental market.

2. The Ordinance codified in this Chapter is being adopted pursuant to the City’s police power authority to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.

B. Purpose.

B. “Department” means the Community Development Department of the City of Monterey.

C. “Effective Date” of this Article shall be January 1, 2024.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 7, Packet Page 203 D. “Community Development Director” means the director of the Community Development Department of the City of Monterey or their designee. A designated representative may include City staff and/or a party or organization contracted by the City to provide the necessary services to implement the procedures contained in this Article.

E. “Housing Service Charges” means any charges for laundry facilities and privileges, janitor services, refuse removal services, furniture, furnishings, parking, pets, and any other amenity, benefit, privilege, or facility connected with the use or occupancy of any Rental Unit.

F. “Landlord” means an owner, lessor, or sublessor of residential real property who receives or is entitled to receive Rent for the use and occupancy of a Rental Unit or a portion thereof, and includes any legal entity or other individuals, employees, agents, contractors, and subcontractors that comprise or represent the Landlord.

G. “Rent” means a fixed period compensation paid by a Tenant at fixed intervals to a Landlord for the possession, use, and occupancy of a Rental Unit as defined by the Rental Agreement between the Landlord and the Tenant. Rent excludes pass-through costs and ancillary costs paid separately to the Landlord for parking, storage, utilities, water, garbage, or any other fee or charge associated with the Rental Unit.

H. “Rental Housing Agreement” means an agreement, oral, written, or implied, between a Landlord and Tenant for use or occupancy of a Rental Unit and any attendant housing services.

I. “Rental Inventory Fees” means the fee required to be paid by a Landlord pursuant to Section 8-2.03 of this Article.

J. “Rental Inventory Information” means the information required to be submitted to the City by the Landlord of a Rental Unit pursuant to this Article.

K. “Rental Unit” means a habitable structure offered for Rent and used as a place of permanent or customary and usual abode of a Tenant. Rental Unit includes a room in dwelling unit that is shared with the Landlord, a single-family residence, an accessory dwelling unit, a junior accessory dwelling unit, a condominium or other unit in a common interest development, a mobilehome or manufactured home, a building, a group of buildings or portion of a building used and/or designed as dwellings. A Rental Unit shall not include:

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 8, Packet Page 204

1. Housing accommodations in a visitor accommodation facility, group housing, supportive housing, transitional housing, general residential care and bed and breakfasts as those terms are defined or used in the City’s Zoning Ordinance..

L. “Security Deposit” means any payment, fee, deposit, or charge, including but not limited to, an advance payment of rent, used or to be used for any purpose, including but not limited to the compensation of an owner for a tenant's default in payment of rent, the repair of damages to the premises caused by the tenant, or the cleaning of the premises upon termination of the tenancy exclusive of normal wear and tear.

M. “Tenant” means any renter, tenant, subtenant, lessee or sublessee of a Rental Unit, or any group of renters, tenants, subtenants, lessees or sublessees of a Rental Unit, or any other person entitled to the possession, use and/or occupancy of such Rental Unit, or any successor of any of the foregoing.

N. “Utility Charges” means any charges for gas, electricity, water, garbage, sewer, telephone, cable, internet, or other service relating to the use and occupancy of a Rental Unit.
§ 8-2.02 – REGISTRATION OF RENTAL UNITS
A. Initial Registration. A Landlord must register every Rental Unit that is subject to the provisions of this Article within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date of this Article.

Landlords shall complete the Registration on forms provided by the City. The forms provided by the City may include a secure internet website with an interface for submitting the information required by this Article. Registration is complete only when all required information has been provided to the City and all outstanding fees and penalties, if applicable, have been paid. Upon completion of the initial registration of a Rental Unit, the City shall issue a registration statement, which shall include the renewal date for the registration of the applicable units. The City may issue an administrative citation and impose a late penalty should a Landlord fail to register their Rental Unit(s) within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date of this Article.

B. Registration Renewal. Unless a registration statement provides otherwise, registration of the Rental Units shall expire on June 30th of the year following the issuance of a registration statement. Registration of Rental Units shall be renewed annually. Payment is due to the City of Monterey on July 1st each year. The City may issue an administrative citation and impose a 20% late penalty on August 15th , and an additional penalty of 10% on the 15th of each month thereafter until the fee and penalty are paid; provided that the amount of such penalty to be added shall in no event exceed 50% of the amount due should a Landlord fail to register their Rental Unit(s) by 12:00 midnight on August 15th of each year.

C. Rental Inventory Information. At minimum, the following information below shall be provided as part of initial and renewal registration of a Rental Unit. Failure to provide information required or providing false information shall be a violation of the Monterey City Code and enforceable as set forth in Section 8-02.05.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 9, Packet Page 205

1. The name, address, and phone number of the Landlord, including any on-site or off-site property manager or property management company;

2. The street address and/or Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) of each Rental Unit for rent or lease;

3. The year the property was built and the number of Rental Units on the property;

4. The number of bedrooms and bathrooms in each Rental Unit, including square footage, for rent or lease;

5. The occupancy status of each Rental Unit (e.g., vacant or occupied) and reason for vacancy, if applicable;

6. For each occupied Rental Unit, the current amount and date of the monthly rent received for each Rental Unit, identifying whether the monthly rent includes Utility Charges and Housing Service Charges;

7. For a Rental Unit in a condominium or other common interest development, the amount of the homeowners’ association fees, regular and/or special assessments, or other similar charges paid to an association;

8. Whether or not the Tenant receives a housing voucher or other rental subsidy;

9. Any other information deemed necessary by the Community Development Director to implement the provisions of this Article.

D. Termination of Exemption. When a Rental Unit that was exempt from this Article becomes governed by this Article for the first time, the Landlord must register the Rental Unit with the City within thirty (30) days after the City provides notice that the exemption has ended.

E. Registration Amendment. A Landlord shall notify the City if there is a change to the registration information for any Rental Unit within thirty (30) days of the change.

Changes that are subject to the registration amendment requirement include:

1. A change in a Rental Unit's ownership or management, or a change in the owner's or manager's contact information;

2. A rent increase for any Rental Unit, including the amount of the rent increase and the effective date of the rent increase; and

3. A change in the occupancy status of a Rental Unit, including the reason for which the prior tenancy was terminated.

F. Administrative Regulations. The Community Development Director may promulgate administrative regulations to implement the provisions of this Chapter.

G. Rental Inventory Database. The City anticipates that Rent Inventory Information will be kept in a Rental Inventory Database. The database containing Rent Registry Information shall be created and maintained such that it can generate reports for the City’s internal use.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 10, Packet Page 206

1. Public Database. The Community Development Director, or their designee, shall add a publicly accessible portion of the Rental Inventory Database for the purposes of providing the public with information about Rental Units in the City.

The public database shall show the following information:
a. The street address and/or Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) of each Rental Unit for rent or lease;
b. The year the property was built and the number of Rental Units on the property;
c. The number of bedrooms and bathrooms in each Rental Unit, including square footage, for rent or lease;
d. The occupancy status of each Rental Unit (e.g., vacant or occupied); and
e. For each occupied Rental Unit, the total current amount of monthly rent received for the Rental Unit.

2. Confidential Rental Inventory Information. The City Council recognizes that some of the Rental Inventory Information constitutes Personal Identifying Information (PII) or proprietary information of a Landlord that could create a competitive disadvantage for every Landlord required to comply with this Chapter. The City Council also recognizes that the Public Records Act (Government Code §§ 6250, et seq.) generally requires that the City make available to the public information in its possession that relates to the conduct of the public's business. The Public Records Act contains several exceptions intended to protect the privacy of individuals and the proprietary information of businesses that is in the City's possession only because of a legal requirement to provide it to the City in connection with a regulatory program. Except for the Rental Inventory Information enumerated in Section 8-2.02(G)(1) the City Council declares that all other Rental Inventory Information shall be received in confidence, and that the public interest in nondisclosure of such Rental Inventory Information clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure.

3. Other Reports. The Community Development Director may generate additional reports from the Rental Inventory Information database for the purposes of this Chapter. Such reports shall be released to the public only if kept in the normal course of City business and only after redacting any Rental Inventory Information that would improperly intrude into personal privacy of Tenants or reveal Landlord proprietary information that could result in a competitive disadvantage.

4. Legal Disclosure Required. The Community Development Director, in consultation with the City Attorney, may authorize the release of other Rental Inventory Information that would be otherwise confidential if they determine that the release is legally required or the public interest in disclosure clearly outweighs the public interest in nondisclosure.

H. Annual Review and Report. The Community Development Director shall annually prepare a report to the City Council assessing the effectiveness of the program Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 11, Packet Page 207 established and this Chapter and may recommend changes based on the findings made in the report.
§ 8-2.03 – RENTAL INVENTORY FEES
A. Rental Inventory Fees. A Rental Inventory Fee shall be imposed annually for each Rental Unit owned by the Landlord. Each Landlord shall pay the required Rental Inventory Fees upon registration of their Rental Unit(s). The City Council shall set the Rental Inventory Fee on a per Rental Unit basis and the fee shall be adopted and integrated into the City’s Master Fee Schedule by resolution of the City Council, as required by Section 19-103 of Article 4 (Fee and Service Charge Revenue/Cost Comparison System) of Chapter 19 (Licenses, Fees and Charges) of the Monterey City Code. The Rental Inventory Fee required by this section is in addition to and not in lieu of any general business license tax that might be required by Chapter 19 of the Monterey City Code. The fees shall be used to defray the reasonable costs associated with the implementation and administration of this Chapter, including costs of maintenance of a rent inventory database, enforcement of the registration required by Chapter, outreach, education, and other services as deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director pursuant to Section 8-2.0 of this Chapter.

B. Late Fees; Penalties. A Landlord's failure to pay the annual Rental Inventory Fees required by this section shall result in the City taking the following actions:

1. Issue a delinquency notice to the owner that provides up to thirty (30) days to pay the amount due.

2. If not paid within thirty (30) days following the issuance of the delinquency notice, the City shall assess a penalty of ten (10) percent of the Rental Inventory Fee, due and payable with the Rental Inventory Fee on the first day of the month following the due date provided in the delinquency notice.

3. For every thirty (30) days thereafter that the Rental Inventory Fees remain unpaid, the City shall assess a penalty of ten (10) percent of the Rental Inventory Fee. If the Rental Inventory Fees remain unpaid within one-hundred eighty (180) days following the issuance of the delinquency notice, the Landlord shall be subject to a citation described in in Division 1 (Administrative Citations) of Article 2 of Chapter 1 – General Provisions of the Monterey City Code.

The City may collect any past due Rental Inventory Fees and/or late payment penalties by use of all available legal means, including, but not limited to, means available for the collection of judgments, liens, and actions for recovery of money. The City also may recover its collection costs.

C. Rental Inventory Fees Pass-Through. A Landlord may recover up to one hundred percent (100%) of the Rental Inventory Fee, excluding any associated late penalties, from their Tenant(s).

D. Exemptions. This section shall not apply to the following Rental Units:

1. Subsidized Rental Units. Rental Units in the housing developments are restricted by deed, regulatory restriction contained in an agreement with a government Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 12, Packet Page 208 agency, or other recorded document as affordable to persons and families or very low, low, or moderate income, as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code, or subject to an agreement that provides housing subsidies for affordable housing for persons and families of very low, low, or moderate income as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code or comparable federal statutes.

2. Mobile Home Spaces. A lot or space of land in a Mobile Home Park where a Mobile Home is or may be located. Mobile Home and Mobile Home Park shall have the same meaning as the definitions of "mobilehome" defined in Section 798.3 of the Civil Code and "mobile home park" defined in Section 798.4 of the Civil Code, respectively, as those sections may be amended from time to time, or their successor code sections.
§ 8-02.04 – PROVISION OF SERVICES
A. In addition to being used for the administration and enforcement of the rental registration requirement, the Rental Inventory Fees provided for in Section 8-2.03 of this Article shall be used by the Community Development Director for the provision of services to Landlords and Tenants in the City. These services may include, without limitation, the following:

1. A website dedicated to landlord/tenant services and resources;

2. Hotline and email dedicated to addressing landlord/tenant issues;

3. Referrals to mediation and/or legal services;

4. Education and outreach to landlords and tenants, such as handouts, mailings, workshops and webinars, about rights and obligations; and

5. Any other services for Landlords and Tenants as deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director.
§ 8-02.05X – ENFORCEMENT
A. Any person violating any provision or failing to comply with any of the requirements of this Chapter shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor or an infraction and may be subject to the penalties prescribed in Section 1-7 of the Monterey City Code.

B. In addition to any other remedies or penalties available to the City, in law or equity, the City may enforce the terms of this Article through the administrative citation procedures provided in Division 1 (Administrative Citations) of Article 2 of Chapter 1 – General Provisions of the Monterey City Code.

C. The City Attorney may bring a civil action to seek redress for any violation(s) under this Chapter on behalf of the City. In any such relief, the City shall recover all civil penalties prescribed in Division 1 (Administrative Citations) of Article 2 of Chapter 1 – General Provisions of the Monterey City Code, and any other relief the court deems proper.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 13, Packet Page 209 D. A Landlord’s failure to comply with any of the requirements of this Chapter, including but not limited to, the failure to register their Rental Unit(s) as required by Section 8-

02.02 or to pay the Rental Inventory Fees as required by Section 8-02.03, or any administrative regulations promulgated hereunder shall constitute a complete affirmative defense to an unlawful detainer or other action instituted by the Landlord to recover possession of the Rental Unit from a Tenant.

E. A Tenant may enforce the provisions of this Chapter, or any administrative regulations promulgated hereunder, by means of a civil action. The burden of proof in such cases shall be a preponderance of the evidence. A Landlord who violates any of the provisions of this Chapter shall be liable for civil damages for each provision of this Chapter that the Landlord violates, and for each instance in which the Landlord violates a provision of this Chapter. The court may also award a prevailing Tenant reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs to the extent allowed by law, punitive damages, and any such other relief the court deems proper.

SECTION 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this chapter is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this chapter.

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.

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, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 14, Packet Page 210 Attachment 2
№08/22
Townhall Meeting Summary Comments – May 30, 2023

1. What are your initial thoughts about the rental inventory?  Not sure how it would help
 What information (if any) will be made public?
 Concerns about added costs – breakdown the $400,000 cost  Invasion of privacy of renter & owner – names, lease info, etc., property / rental status
 Burden of cost (landlord and tenant)
 Rent increase on everyone every year – added fees to cover program falling to renters, leaves no choice for landlords but to charge extra  Creating a senseless bureaucracy (& costly)
 Landlords sensitive to increased costs – pass to renters  Invasion of privacy
 The only information we’re comfortable sharing is what is on Zillow  Monetary compensation for hacked information from inventory.  The only information we’re comfortable sharing is what is on Zillow / Redfin. As such, what is the benefit of incurring the $400,000 charge / debt to create a rental inventory?
 Is $400,000 every year or just the first year?
 Building inventory will incur cost and do nothing to increase available housing  This would raise rent
 Whose idea was this locally?
 What are other cities doing and how is it going?
 What would the enforcement mechanism be for the inventory?  What is the purpose of the inventory?
 Whether the city has studied small vs. large landlords  How does this help inventory?
 Moving too fast
 Haven’t exhausted other options
 Unclear what the benefits are?
 What questions will the inventory answer?
 Why are rents high because City raises fees?
 How will the registry provide affordable housing?
 Time suck and distraction to staff
 Does not consider the money landlords put into their buildings.  Don’t understand how this affects renters and if there will be fees to renters  Concern about privacy information – address and rental price  Cost of program is better spent by increasing city worker salaries so they can afford to rent here
 Could cause collusion among property owners to increase rents  Why are we doing this if it doesn’t solve the problem  Expense on landlords not being heard, there’s another side of the equation  Will landlords recoup loss?
 Turnover rate is important for renters to see.
 Definition of short – term rentals?
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 15, Packet Page 211  Data gives us information to make responsible decisions about the community.  What are the potential benefits to renters.
 How can I opt out of being known by the tenant? Property manager is the go between.
 Makes me feel uncomfortable.
 Why do they need a copy of the lease – private contract.  What happens if correct information isn’t provided? Prosecution?  Suspicious about what information is used for.
 What are the consequences if we don’t provide information?  Creates division between owners and tenants.
 Creating inventory doesn’t solve the issue of not enough inventory.  How many employees will run the program?
 Not necessary – landlord / renter wouldn’t use it.
 Fair market more powerful.
 The ability to have market rent helps local renters.
 Feels socialist.
 Concerned about stability.
 Strengthen renter / landlord relationship.
 Could help health / transparency.
 How can the City mitigate risk to property owners?
 Don’t pass on costs to owners, trickle down to renter.  Right to charge rents, privacy
 Scarcity problem, solve water?
 Don’t record rent / increases.
 No more government involvement.
 Proper noticing – MC Weekly
 Is there a way to access realtor.com?
 Pay to have access to MLS, why should others have access to this information if they have access to the MLS
 Is rental inventory assisting with credit / background checks to find good renters, already pay realtor for this service
 What problems are we trying to solve? If the problem we all agree on is affordable housing, this is not the solution.
 Private information that is not protected puts military members and others at risk  The owner should have a choice
 Burden of cost
 Rent increase on everyone every year – added fees to cover program falling to renters, leaves no choice for landlords but to charge extra  Creating senseless bureaucracy and it’s costly
 Hurts renters
 Property management costs will increase
 Negatively impact sales of homes / lowers values
 Destroys privacy for landlords & renters
 Ignores law of supply & demand
 Prevents renters from negotiating rents with landlords because prices will be public  Does not consider money that the landlords put into their buildings Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 16, Packet Page 212  Don’t understand how this affects renters and if there will be fees for renters  Concern about privacy information -address and rental price

2. What information is most useful to include in the rental inventory?  SF, year built, renovations
 Renters Rental history / references
 Helpful to whom?
 Emergency contact for property
 Section 8 housing data comparison
 Insurance information / property tax
 Number of water meters
 Live onsite
 Market value of property
 Income of tenant / minimum wage
 Only what is already publicly available
 Turnover rate available to public
 How has rent increased or changed year over year?
 If all information is publicly available, why pay the government for a database?  Nothing
 Aggregated data only
 Only number of bedrooms / baths and SF
 Rent amount
 Owner names, not corporation name – name of owners who own corporation that owns the property

3. What information would you like to see omitted from the rental inventory?  Everything but emergency contact
 Mortgage status
 No names / ethnicity / personally identifiable information  Turnover rate
 The lease
 Mandatory participation
 Names and contact information
 Everything
 Social Security Number
 Rental price
 Everything
 Renter’s history
 Omit anything other than basic inventory information like number of bedrooms / baths
 Copies of leases and rental agreements
 Terms of lease
 How do we include those that would like to rent but can’t afford it – how do we get to know who they are?
 Not sure we want a rental registry
 Study / survey that is anonymous rather than a rental registry.

Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 17, Packet Page 213  The general cost per SF of renting in different parts of the city  Anything that would require regular reporting

4.What questions or concerns still need to be addressed?  Concerned about displacement due to owners selling property (condo, owneroccupied unit)  Should know what program is first before comments
 Lack of transparency
 Lack of ability to public input
 Will this really benefit anyone?
 How does the military affect the market?
 If registry is used for rent control, ordinance is terminated  Focus on new housing
 Seattle is a good study – 2020
 State Farm no longer insuring
 Rent control protects current renter, not future
 What stage in this are we in?
 What information will be public via PRA request?
 Will landlords sell property instead of dealing with inventory, will property come off the market?
 Has there been an analysis to show how this is beneficial & to who?  Penalty for noncompliance?
 How to tell who’s not complying?
 How do we solve the real problem?
 Incentive for compliance
 Vacancy taxation
 Why spend money on short term rental consultant / enforcer if the rental inventory staff can do both jobs?
 Sunset provision / when will it end
 Cap / limit for programmatic costs
 Citywide vote on any ordinance regarding rental inventory / control.  How does it consider differing costs?
 Is there a landlord protection element?
 What would the enforcement mechanism be for the inventory?  What is the purpose of the inventory?
 What are the effects on the larger market – net loss of housing units?  Is compliance mandatory – is there a reward for compliance?  How does this help the landlords?
 When will rent control be initiated?
 The city should address the fact that two people spoke at a City Council meeting and said that rent registries did not work in their cities and properties sold.  Can keep track of evictions
 Who pays the landlord when renters don’t pay rent?
 If I sell my property because of government overreach (rent control & rent registry) rents, will go way up due to new mortgage & property taxes? Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 18, Packet Page 214  How does this help tenants?
 Impacts to individual small landlords that may rent just one property.  What is the annual cost of the rental registry?
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 19, Packet Page 215

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Tuesday, December 1, 2020
4:00 PM 7:00 PM

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, Police Chief, Finance Director, Parks and Recreation Director, City Clerk, Fire Chief, Interim Recreation and Community Services Manager, Traffic Engineer, Deputy Human Resources Manager, Parking Superintendent, Senior Administrative Analyst, Associate Planner
Pursuant to Section 3 of Executive Order N-29-20, issued by Governor Newsom on March 17, 2020, this meeting was conducted with telephonic/video participation only by all parties. ***Afternoon Session Agenda ***

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Roberson called the meeting to order at 4:02 p.m. Administrative Assistant Salameh explained to the public how to participate in the meeting and provide public comment.

ROLL CALL - 2018-2020 CITY COUNCIL
City Clerk Klein called the roll with all Councilmembers present.

ELECTION CERTIFICATION AND COUNCIL INSTALLATION

1. Adopt a Resolution Declaring Canvass of Returns and Results of the Consolidated General Municipal Election on November 3, 2020 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 20-179 C.S.

Public comment was not received on the matter.

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 adopted Resolution No. 20-179 C.S. Declaring the Canvass of Returns and Results of the Consolidated General Municipal Election on November 3, 2020:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 20, Packet Page 216 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
2 2. Installation of 2020-2022 Monterey City Council (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Mayor Clyde Roberson, Councilmember Dan Albert, and Councilmember Alan Haffa were installed
Councilmembers Albert and Haffa and Mayor Roberson took the Oath of Office. Each made brief remarks. Gratitude was expressed to the voters, committees, family members, friends, members of the community, and City staff.

3. Appoint the Vice-Mayor for 2021 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Appointed Councilmember Tyller Williamson as Vice-Mayor for 2021 Public comment was not received on the matter.

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 appointed Councilmember Tyller Williamson as Vice-Mayor for 2021:

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 COMMENTS
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from Marta Kraftzeck and Tony Tollner.

CONSENT ITEMS
Public comment on the Consent Items was not received.

On a motion by Councilmember Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Haffa, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council adopted the CONSENT ITEMS except Items 7, 8, and 10:

4. November 17, 2020 (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Approved
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 21, Packet Page 217 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
3 Award of Construction Contracts

5. Award Electrical Contractor Job Order Contract 2021 in an Amount Not to Exceed $1,000,000 to Jensco Inc. dba JM Electric ***CIP/NCIP*** (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 20-180 C.S.

6. Award Electrical Contractor Job Order Contract 2021 Presidio Municipal Services Agency (PMSA) in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000 to Jensco Inc. dba JM Electric ***PMSA*** (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061; Excluded from NEPA per Title 32 CFR 651 Appendix B Categorical Exclusion (e) (1)) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 20-181 C.S.

Resolutions

7. Amend Resolution 19-115 to Change the Position Control List, Amend Resolution 20-150 to Change the Full-Time Salary Schedule, and Amend Resolution 16-249 to Change the PartTime Salary Schedule for Parking Division Reorganization Savings (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Pulled from consent; Adopted Resolution No. 20-182 C.S.

Public Works Director Wittry gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was not received on the matter.

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 adopted Resolution No. 20-182 C.S. to Amend Resolution 19-115 to Change the Position Control List, Amend Resolution 20-150 to Change the Full-Time Salary Schedule, and Amend Resolution 16-249 to Change the Part-Time Salary Schedule for Parking Division Reorganization Savings:

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

8. Award a Professional Services Agreement for Design Services to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for the Del Monte and Casa Verde Recreation Trail Crossing Intersection Improvement Project in the amount of $173,612.45 ***CIP/NCIP*** (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1)
Pulled from consent; Adopted Resolution No. 20-183 C.S.

Traffic Engineer Renny shared information from the agenda report and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was not received on the matter.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 22, Packet Page 218 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
4 On a motion by Councilmember Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Albert, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 20-183 C.S. to Award a Professional Services Agreement for Design Services to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. for the Del Monte and Casa Verde Recreation Trail Crossing Intersection Improvement Project in the amount of $173,612.45:

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

9. Adopt a Resolution Amending Resolution 19-007 to Extend the Pre-Commitment of .086 Acre Feet of Water to 704 Foam Street to January 17, 2022 (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 20-184 C.S.

Other

10. Approve the Parks and Recreation Commission's Recommendation to Update the Ballpark Advertising Program Regulations and Specifications, and Authorize the City Manager to Enter into Ballpark Advertising Program Agreements with (1) Monterey Pony Baseball/Softball, Inc. and (2) Save Our Sports (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378, and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Pulled from consent; Approved as amended to reflect a one year period for signs Interim Recreation Services Manager Leon and City Manager Uslar answered Councilmembers' questions.

It was suggested by Council to leave signs up for a full year, and that if weatherization of temporary signs were a concern, then perhaps the signs could be more permanent.

Public comment was received from Michael Groves, who spoke in support of using sturdy modern banners for a year-long period.

A motion was introduced by Councilmember Albert, and seconded by Councilmember Smith, to Approve the Parks and Recreation Commission's Recommendation to Update the Ballpark Advertising Program Regulations and Specifications, and Authorize the City Manager to Enter into Ballpark Advertising Program Agreements with (1) Monterey Pony Baseball/Softball, Inc. and (2) Save our Sports, as outlined in the agenda report, but with the time period extended to one year (instead of six months).

An amendment was proposed by Councilmember Williamson to monitor the condition of signs and ensure that they did not deteriorate and affect the environment. In response, it was stated that existing language in the program documentation already covers the scenario in question.

The amendment was not incorporated into the motion.

The motion carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call:

PUBLIC HEARING

11. Adopt an Urgency Ordinance Extending Ordinance No. 3626 to Comply with State Law and to Create a Maximum Height Limit of Sixteen Feet for Accessory Dwelling Units (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, California Public Resources Code section 21080.17 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Ordinance No. 3633 C.S.

Public comment was not received on the matter.

On a motion by Councilmember Albert, seconded by Councilmember Williamson, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 3633 C.S. Extending Ordinance No. 3626 to Comply with State Law and to Create a Maximum Height Limit of Sixteen Feet for Accessory Dwelling Units:

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 was not received for the closed session.

RECESS
Recessed at 5:24 p.m. to closed session

RECONVENE
The Council reconvened at 7:02 p.m.
*** Evening Session Agenda ***

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Roberson led the Pledge.

ROLL CALL - 2020-2022 CITY COUNCIL
City Clerk Klein called the roll with all Councilmembers present. Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira reminded the public how to participate in the meeting and provide public comment.

CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from Lorna Moffat and Jean Rasch.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 24, Packet Page 220 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
6 ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CLOSED SESSION
City Clerk Klein announced the following:
cs1. MAHONEY, DANIEL vs. CITY OF MONTEREY, et al. WCAB No.: ADJ4160592: Fwd:

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) Name of Case: MAHONEY, DANIEL vs. CITY OF MONTEREY (Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board)
Action: On a unanimous roll call vote, the Council gave confidential direction to their legal counsel

PUBLIC HEARING (EVE)

12. 1st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance Amending the City Code to Create a Definition of Cannabis and Cannabis Products (38-11), Create an Industrial Use Classification of Agricultural Testing Laboratory (Including Cannabis Testing) (38-16), Conditionally Permit Agricultural Testing Laboratory Use in I-R Zoning District (38-40(B)), Create Supplementary Regulations for Cannabis-related Agricultural Testing Laboratories (38-41), and Exempt Licensed Cannabis Testing Laboratories (22-39(a))
Action: Passed ordinance to print as amended
Senior Associate Planner Schmidt gave the staff presentation. City Manager Uslar answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was received from Esther Malkin, who spoke in favor of allowing cannabis testing laboratories in Monterey.

It was suggested by Council to change the language from hours of operations and activities from "shall be" to "should be limited," and that a required period of retention for records should be specified. It was noted by City Attorney Davi that the California Business and Professions Code requires records be kept for a specific amount of time. The Council stated that the details should be in the ordinance, and City Attorney Davi confirmed that the language could be added to the wording about business surveillance. On question, Police Chief Hober said he would be comfortable with one year of retention.

It was noted by the Council that it is confusing and difficult to reconcile the fact that on cannabis related matters, "Federal law is enforceable despite State law.” On a motion by Councilmember Haffa, seconded by Councilmember Williamson, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council passed to print the 1st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance Amending the City Code to Create a Definition of Cannabis and Cannabis Products (38-11), Create an Industrial Use Classification of Agricultural Testing Laboratory (Including Cannabis Testing) (38-16), Conditionally Permit Agricultural Testing Laboratory Use in I-R Zoning District (38-40(B)), Create Supplementary Regulations for Cannabis-related Agricultural Testing Laboratories (38-41), and Exempt Licensed Cannabis Testing Laboratories (22-39(a)), as presented with an amendment to require one year retention of records:

AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Albert, Haffa, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 25, Packet Page 221 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
7 13. Deny an Appeal (AP-20-0248) and Approve the Personal Wireless Facility Use Permit Amendment UP-20-0171, to Allow Modifications to an Existing Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T) Facility on the Rooftop of the Portola Hotel and Spa Building located at 2 Portola Plaza; Applicant: James Phillips, MasTec Network Solutions for New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T); Owner: Custom House Hotel, LP; VAF – Visitor Accommodation Facilities Zoning District; Commercial General Plan Land Use Designation; Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15303, Class 3
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 20-185 C.S.

Mayor Roberson asked the Council to disclose any ex parte communications, and nothing was disclosed.

Community Development Director Cole gave a brief introduction. Jerry Hittleman, contract planner with Rincon Consultants, gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions. City Attorney Davi reported that during a brief period, Mayor Roberson lost the ability to turn on his camera and microphone, but could hear everything being said in the meeting. After this period Mayor Roberson was able to turn his camera and microphone on.

Lee Afflerbach, radiofrequency (RF) engineer with CTC Technology & Energy answered technical questions asked by the Council.

It was noted by Council that public safety is a high priority of wireless infrastructure and will benefit from the 4G connectibility thanks to FirstNet.

On question, City Attorney Davi said that judicial remedies could apply if the Council makes a decision that doesn't have substantial evidence to support their findings, with associated cost of time and money.

On question, Community Development Director Cole said that the wireless provider would need to get permission from the City to change the technology used by the antennas, for example from 4G to 5G. City Attorney Davi said that it is important that the Council analyze the application that is before them, which is for 4G connectivity.

The applicant was given 15 minutes to speak. Applicant James Phillips, MasTec Network Solutions, said that the City contracts directly with FirstNet for any monthly services subscribed to by Fire, Police, EMS, and such services. He said that AT&T is a host for equipment at the existing site on behalf of FirstNet. He stated that the application is a 4G application and AT&T has no intention at this time to use the site for 5G technology. He said that multiple small cells would have to be deployed to enable 5G, which he said would be more focused on an intersection. He commented that placing a 5G network on top of the hotel would allow for great connections on the roof of the hotel and not much more.

As part of the applicant presentation, Bettye Saxon, AT&T, clarified that FirstNet is a governmental agency, and said that FirstNet has their own capability to look into a system and see how the network is working. She said that in the case of emergency, FirstNet customers have priority in the network and that their calls will go through first. She listed some of FirstNet’s contracts: Cal Fire, Cal OES, CHP, and locally, City of Monterey Police and Fire, Pacific Grove, Del Rey Oaks, and the Monterey Airport, which she said were just a few examples. She said that the network contractually needs to work at its optimum level. She said that this year, the network was tested more than ever before with many people working and schooling from home. She said that AT&T was able to ramp up through wireless technology so that families without wired connections were able to connect successfully to necessary DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 26, Packet Page 222 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
8 schooling. She said that the City of Monterey needs to continue to upgrade its network for purposes of FirstNet connectivity as well as education.

On question from Council, Mr. Phillips said that AT&T has feedback from its cellular sites to determine the performance of each site. He said that if the coverage area at a site falls, AT&T is notified and engineers go out to make sure that the site is working properly, and that it is in their best interest to continually monitor to ensure that the directions of the antennas do not change. He said that lots of time is spent in the early stages of construction to verify where the antennas need to be pointed. Bill Hammett, engineer with Hammett & Edison, said that the application conforms with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) limits.

The appellant was given 15 minutes to speak. Appellant Nina Beety said that she may need additional time for her presentation and stated that she is already disadvantaged because the project directly affects her disability. She said that she did not see included in the Council packet the plans, radio frequency (RF) reports, and other information that the Planning Commission used for their decisions. She said this information is critical for the Council to make their decisions instead of just receiving minutes and the staff report. She said that in the recent Montage Health antennas matter, the Council received all of these reports. On question, Community Development Director Cole directed Ms. Beety to the section of the Council packet that included the RF reports in question, which she noted were attached as exhibits “A” through “G” to the Planning Commission resolution.

Ms. Beety continued. She referenced Monterey City Code section 38-211, Authority of Appellate Body, and said that the City Council should consider the record and additional evidence provided, and find whether an error was made. She stated that a substantial error was made in the Planning Commission decision and by staff and the consultant, as well as many irregularities. She said that she has provided ample documentation and evidence, including her most recent letter, in which she said she went through various findings that she said were required to be made by the Wireless Ordinance but were not made, and additional findings that she said were made in error. She said that the Planning Commission members claimed that their hands were tied but provided no evidence about why they believed it. She said that if it was based on input from a formal legal consultant that no longer works for the City, she stated that the firm has come under fire for conflicts of interests. She said that the Planning Commissioners were unfamiliar with ordinance requirements and federal rules. She said that one commissioner said he didn't see how the Planning Commission could deny the project, and that he said the applicant had done everything asked of them and all the boxes were checked, but she stated that all the boxes were not checked. She said that staff had omitted findings required by the Wireless Ordinance from the Planning Commission’s resolution.

Ms. Beety continued. She said that the project’s roof areas would exceed FCC exposure limits in violation of the Wireless Ordinance. She said that first responders, as she said was noted during the Planning Commission hearing, could be harmed by these rooftop exposures with safety measures that she stated had not been clearly or realistically discussed. She asserted that some rooms and balconies could exceed FCC limits and that the applicant would not discuss changing the angle of the antenna to reduce exposure to the rooms, and she said that the Planning Commission didn't pursue it. She said that CTC said in their August 17 letter that their calculations of exposure levels from 180-degree sector antenna indicate that demonstrating full FCC emission compliance from the site configuration was, at best, borderline. She said that earthquake settling, vibration, corrosion, or other events, could result in the antennae being out of compliance now or in the future. She said that CTC warned about possible exposure violations on a public walkway, and she said that this was not addressed by the Planning Commission and that the walkway was not identified. She said that the public corridor from Del Monte to Custom House Plaza and an interior atrium and exterior courtyard DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 27, Packet Page 223 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
9 below the 180-degree antenna could be exposed to high levels of radiation from the antennas overhead but she stated that this wasn't explored or discussed. She said that no signs will warn people about this.

Ms. Beety continued, stating that hotel guests on balconies could be exposed to the 100% level of radiation. She said that people with pacemakers, insulin pumps, or other devices that could suffer from interference could be affected and that the FCC doesn’t take into consideration these populations. She stated that staff members would be exposed daily to high levels of RF as they are cleaning hotel rooms and balconies and using utility rooms, and she referred to a photo that she said showed an open doorway from a utility room with linens looking out to an antenna. She stated that exposure of hotel staff to RF was not discussed. She said that the applicant did not provide estimated exposure numbers other than at the ground level. She said that some RF percentages were provided and that they were averaged instead of using peak exposure numbers possible for each frequency. She said that the penetrative qualities of frequencies were never addressed. She stated that lower frequencies go inside a building much more easily and that this was never addressed. She said that no information was provided about RF emissions from the rear of the antennas toward the hotel. She said that assurances were made that levels would comply, but she said that two national studies found high numbers outside of compliance with FCC limits and stated that the FCC does not police this. She said that this was for the general emissions coming from the face of the towers. She said that once the project is up and running and post-construction assessment is done, exposure levels will be anything the company wants. She said that the RF engineer omitted cumulative exposure, and she said it was misstated that there are no nearby wireless facilities.

She said that the same statement was made about the Hyatt Regency despite the location of the Naval Postgraduate School across the street as well as other companies’ facilities that she said were on the Hyatt Regency. She said that the Marriott has many antennas and that other wireless emissions exist in and around the Portola Plaza Hotel.

Ms. Beety continued. She said that CTC provided faulty analysis of cumulative emissions and corrected the RF engineer’s statement poorly. She said that CTC only talked about cumulative levels at the site at the Portola Plaza Hotel and completely omitted areas adjacent to the Marriott and Pacific Street that she said would be subject to high cumulative exposure from both facilities. She said that she drew a map and drew out different azimuths from these beams, and said that it was frightening to see that these areas were never addressed. She stated that the building directly across from the Marriott would be in the intersection of beams from the Portola and the Marriott. She said that the surrounding few buildings would receive high levels of radiation as well as the buildings above Pacific Street and that these were never addressed.

She said that in the photo it only addressed what happens at the site of the Portola Plaza, which she said will not be affected by the Marriott antennas. She said that CTC repeatedly urged, as she said they did tonight, that the City get RF evaluations because of possible high exposure levels before the project becomes fully operational, to ensure that the facility, as installed and maintained, complies with FCC guidelines. She said that the ongoing maintenance portion was dropped in the Planning Commission hearing and cannot be required according to the FCC.

She said that it's an issue that they urged should be assessed frequently, and that if compliance cannot be compelled by the City, the City will never know what is coming out of the towers.

Ms. Beety continued. She asked if people would be in the hotel when testing is being done.

She stated that tourism impacts were ignored. She stated that there would be impacts to disabled people who come to the City, and to tourists who are EMF sensitive or have medical implants and devices. She said that liability to the City was not adequately addressed. She stated that false names were provided on the application which were only now being somewhat corrected. She stated that the City had been sold a system that is supposed to deal with people who are in danger or sick, and she stated that the system makes per personally sick. She said DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 28, Packet Page 224 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
10 that the existing facility already installed two miles from her house sends frequencies through the walls and windows and that she became sicker on the day it was installed. She said that the Portola Plaza facility is closer and double the power of the existing facility, and would affect her ability to use and enjoy her home and would block her access to downtown Monterey, Pacific Grove, and New Monterey. She said that the antennas appear to have no backup power beyond short term battery backup and would not function in many emergencies. She said that once batteries run out there would be no FirstNet, and she said therefore it is not an emergency system but an expensive, foolish system that she said would not protect the public but would unnecessarily exposes the public to RF radiation. She said that it's redundant, and that the City had a system before this was adopted. She stated that Los Angeles County firefighters opposed the FirstNet system and identified that it would be a public hazard. She referred to firefighters in a pilot study who she said experienced severe neurological impacts from living near a facility that put out a fraction of the emissions that she said the proposed facility would emit. She said that the firefighters received exemptions from two state bills on the basis of health, which she said she had previously provided to the City in an affidavit.

Ms. Beety continued. She said that the City has a symbiotic relationship with FirstNet that she said may add to the City’s liability. She said that there had been no public notice, no public hearing, and no due process before the FirstNet contract was adopted. She said that City officials knew there would be residents harmed by increased exposure but failed to adhere to ADA or Fair Housing considerations. She said that there had been no competitive bid for the FirstNet contract even though Verizon also has a system and the City had services previously through an unknown provider. She said this would be an expensive change that would likely necessitate new equipment and pose risk to first responders. She said that it would be a substantial change to the human environment and should have been reviewed under CEQA.

She said that it doesn’t appear to be regulated under the TCA and that it is not a personal wireless service and therefore the City may have even more latitude to regulate. She said that a letter from the Department of the Interior on FirstNet identified serious harm to birds relating to this new system.

Ms. Beety continued. She said that three Planning Commissioners voted to deny the project due to serious reservations, which she said was admitted in the staff report. She said that Commissioner Brassfield questioned how emergency responders would be protected from high radiation levels on the roof. She said that Commissioner Latasa said that the location of the 180-degree beam wasn’t acceptable from a health perspective due to levels in adjoining rooms.

She said that the vote ended in a tie and that Commissioner Reed went into a tirade against the three commissioners, telling them to take their jobs seriously, which she said they tried to do by evaluating the evidence. She said that City staff offered the Planning Commission little guidance about next steps on the tie vote. She said that Commissioner Latasa finally announced he was changing his vote under duress, and that Commissioner Dawson silently followed when the roll call was taken, resulting in a 5 to 1 vote approving the project. She said that the Commission was not forced to approve the project if the findings could not be made.

Ms. Beety continued. She said that the public has a right to information, but that the applicant stated that if exposures were lower than 100% of FCC limits, then the carrier has satisfied threshold conditions for preemption, and stated that as a result the applicant did not provide emission levels on different parts of the hotel. She said that compliance is dependent on factors including deflection, resonance, metal surfaces, and asserted that factors that create hot spot conditions for individuals and factors can cause exposures to exceed computer estimations. She said that exposures can cause Interference with medical devices. She stated that the public has the right to know estimates of peak exposure and not get blown off by applicants hiding exposure estimates. She said that the figures came from the applicant, not from an independent third party. She said that CTC is reportedly also a network planner as well DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 29, Packet Page 225 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
11 as a provider of assessment, and she said that it was the firm recommended and/or used by the City’s former legal consultant. She said that the City's planning consultant made numerous errors in his analysis that she said was reviewed by staff and the City Attorney. She said that he has made errors in past hearings and stated he has lied about Ms. Beety and the text of laws.

Ms. Beety continued. She alleged that City staff and its consultant continue to deny her her legal rights, and to state that she is not entitled to ADA or Fair Housing protections and that she is not disabled. She said that they refuse to comply with state and federal obligations toward her as a disabled person. She said that this was the latest in serial discrimination by City against her since 2008, which she said had taken place through a series of policies and actions that she stated is effectively taking her home and permitting assault and battery. She said that they had displayed contempt and indifference for her suffering and made a mockery of Monterey’s statement about caring for all residents. She said that staff did not include her demand letter from October 27 which she stated she would include in the record for this meeting. She said that this is a continuation of a pattern and practice of disappearing her disability and herself from consideration. She said that the Planning Commission and City Attorney also ignored access requirements under the ADA for the Portola Plaza Hotel as a place of public accommodation under Chapter 126 Section 12182. She said that she has been patient and reasonable to the City for years to no avail, and alleged that City staff have refused to comply with their obligations toward her and have mischaracterized and reworded her words and requests and retaliated against her.

Ms. Beety continued, stating that she would place in the record a portion of the 1996 Telecommunications Act conference report, which she read aloud: “The conference agreement creates a new section 704 which prevents Commission preemption of local and State land use decisions and preserves the authority of State and local governments over zoning and land use matters except in the limited circumstances set forth in the conference agreement. … Actions taken by State or local governments shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the placement, construction or modification of personal wireless services. It is the intent of this section that bans or policies that have the effect of banning personal wireless services or facilities not be allowed and that decisions be made on a case-by-case basis.” She stated that she was asking the City Council for a decision and that this hearing was on one case. She said that no hands were tied in the Council’s ability to make a decision.

Ms. Beety continued, stating that she would share details about issues that she had with the staff report. She said that her house is one and a half miles away from the site, not two miles.

She said that her house is two miles from the Hyatt Regency FirstNet antennas and that those antennas are only half the radiated power of the proposed Portola Plaza Hotel antennas. She said that when the Hyatt Regency antennas were activated, she got sicker and that she continues to worsen. She said that the ones that are half a mile closer and approximately double the power will sicken her further. She stated that her access to the City is blocked, stating that downtown will be blanketed and that her access to City streets, City services including City Hall, her bank, the post office, and any downtown events is impossible. She said that traveling on Pacific Street to go to Pacific Grove, or to go to the beach, or drive on Del Monte, will be impossible and her coastal access is being denied.

Ms. Beety continued, stating that the service program and activity being provided by the City is the review and permitting of this proposal for which she stated that the City has been given authority by Congress. She stated that the consultant’s arguments are not on point and not grounded in any plain reading of applicable statutes or the concepts explained by the Department of Justice in their Appendix C to Part 35 Title II rules or State Civil Code 54(a) and

54.1(a)(1). She said that ADA regulations are for all disabled people, that disability is defined broadly, and that neither Mr. Hittleman nor City staff defines disability. She said that ADA DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 30, Packet Page 226 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
12 provides examples only. She said that Mr. Hittleman and staff made repeated nonsensical statements about EMF and ADA and challenge the ADA, and she said that they do so to avoid their obligation to comply with ADA and equivalent State rules. She said that the City ignores the Telecommunications Act itself, which she said doesn’t supplant other federal and State and local laws, and she referred to and appeared to quote from Section 601 regarding applicability of consent decrees and other law, Section 414 regarding remedies in the Act not being exclusive, the ruling of G. v. Fay School, and Section 255 from the 1934 Communications Act regarding access by persons with disabilities.

A concern was voiced by the Council that the appellant had gone over her time limit by a few minutes. It was stated that Ms. Beety had spoken for about 17 minutes. In the interest of fairness for the pre-established parameters that had been set for the public hearing, Mayor Roberson requested that Ms. Beety bring her comments to a close within no more than two additional minutes, and Ms. Beety agreed.

Ms. Beety said that Mr. Hittleman lied about what she said and about fair housing, and said that he and staff have failed to read ADA and the Amendments Act. She said that people are recognized as disabled, not conditions. She said that staff can’t read or is indifferent to what Congress laid out and the Department of Justice codified. She said that she qualifies as disabled because she meets the definition in ADA act. She stated that ADA and ADAA define disability and do not have a list of recognized disabilities. She referred again to Part 35 Appendix C. She requested that the Council direct staff to stop challenging ADA. She stated that she is disabled by electromagnetic sensitivity as it is defined, and said that therefore under Fair Housing and the Fair Housing Amendments Act the City cannot discriminate against her in housing. She stated that neither Mr. Hittleman nor staff responded to appeal issue number three or number four, and said that their sole aim seems to be deny her civil rights.

Mayor Roberson asked Ms. Beety to conclude her comments. Ms. Beety said that the situation affects her disability and her ability to live in the City and to live in and use her home. She said that the City is sickening her by its policies and practices. Mayor Roberson gave Ms. Beety one additional minute with which to conclude her verbal presentation.

Ms. Beety said that under CEQA the issue is inappropriate because the facility has a footprint of several miles due to a coherent signal, and she said that it is a very large land use project, not a small structure. She said that this very large facility will cause a substantial change to the human environment and will have an effect on migratory birds and she said that CEQA review would be appropriate. She said that the wireless ordinance requires that facilities comply with FCC guidelines and that the only way this can be ascertained is with a post-construction RF assessment that she said should be conducted. She concluded by saying that the compliance issue is serious, and that the ADA issue and her right to housing are serious, and she asked the City Council that they address all of the identified issues, find that the approval by the Planning Commission was in error, and deny the facility.

Mayor Roberson stated that the City Council had also received the written comments provided by Ms. Beety.

The Council recessed at 8:52 p.m. and reconvened at 9:04 p.m.

Mayor Roberson stated that the emails received from the public on the subject have been read and are in the public record. He opened public comments and set a three-minute time limit.

Lorna Moffat, Danielle Gregorio, and Jean Rasch spoke in support of approving the appeal and denying the use permit amendment. With no further requests from the public to speak, Mayor Roberson closed public comments.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 31, Packet Page 227 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
13 The applicant was given the opportunity to provide a rebuttal. Bettye Saxon thanked the City Council for the opportunity to bring the application back to review. She said that AT&T believes they have supplied everything that was required on the application checklist, and that the application is complete and in compliance, and she asked Council to deny the appeal so that AT&T may move forward to provide better wireless coverage for the area, for first responders, citizens, and students. She said that she sat on the task force for the Monterey County Office of Education and that the number one request to carriers was what could be done to improve access to students during the COVID-19 pandemic, and that the carriers were able to accomplish improved access through the use of wireless technology. Bill Hammett, Hammett & Edison, said that studies that his firm did and that CTC conducted were cumulative and considered all potential sources nearby, and stated that the calculations were not done at the ground only but were done at specific locations in the hotel and other buildings nearby. He said that it is not an issue for medical devices, which he said have standards that they meet that provide robust operation at levels equal to the standard, and he said that all levels that such devices would be exposed to at the site would be lower than the standard. Regarding reflecting surfaces, he said that in 35 years his firm had never found a single site where levels exceeded what they had calculated. He said that a 2.56 reflection factor was recommended by the FCC as just one of several conservative factors that he said were included. He said there were no issues with metal roofs or reflections. He said that the issue of FCC compliance was well established, and would be happy to take questions.

The rebuttal continued. Applicant James Phillips, MasTec Network Solutions, said that if Bill Hammett had come to him early in the process and told him that the levels would be exceeded, then it would have been his job to inform AT&T that a redesign would be necessary. He stated that Lee Afflerbach and Bill Hammett are licensed engineers and that it is a small group of RF engineers in the world. He said that if Mr. Hammett says a facility is safe to build, he can build it, and likewise if Mr. Hammett says it's not safe to build, it's not safe. He said that if anyone questions Mr. Hammett’s report, he would like to see their resume to compare qualifications.

Regarding the Hyatt location, he said that the theoretical study came in at 7%, and a field study with the RF measuring tool came in at less than 0.1%. He said that the numbers in the RF studies were at 100% of the maximum capability of the cell site, and that even if AT&T wanted to they would never be able to turn it up past this level. He stated that AT&T and MasTec have a quality system in place to ensure that technical standards and structural categories are met at installation, and that at every cell installation there is a video audit recorded for the entire installation, with tools on top of the antenna giving a digital read on every direction that the antennas are pointing, and that these are checks and balances to ensure performance and accuracy. He said that building officials and inspectors must sign off on the scope of work and confirm that it was done per plan. He said that demand for cell phone technology has increased exponentially in the last 10 years, and that demand from the public is what requires these upgrades, which he said were a necessity in order to meet obligations so that important services such as 9-1-1 and Google maps would work.

The Council took up discussion of the matter.

On question from Council, Mr. Afflerbach said that there is no place that people can be where the exposure level would be above 100%, and that the only way such exposure could happen would be on the roof or on a ladder in front of the antennas. He said that a fire truck ladder could get that high but it's not a conceivable, practical situation and that anything beyond 95 feet would not be able to exceed FCC levels. He said that CTC does not work for the industry, but strictly for municipal and nonprofit organizations, and that multiple staff members including himself calculated the levels independently. He stated that Bill Hammett did the same on his end, and that the calculations were done with a lot of detail. He said he was very confident that DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 32, Packet Page 228 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
14 in no way would the exposure exceed FCC numbers and he stated that actual measurements made with equipment in the field were well below the calculated values. He recommended, and said that it would behoove all, to complete a proof of performance/proof of construction to confirm that standards are met. He addressed questions about preventing overexposure when people need to go near the site, and said that there are locks people can't get through, areas with warning signs, and disabling methodology in place. He said that when repairs are done, the equipment is either turned off or down. On the same subject, Bill Hammett said that there are signs present including identification of the carrier and a site designator, with a 24-hour number to call to arrange for site shutdown. He said that part of the lease arrangement should codify that procedure. Bettye Saxon said that AT&T has protocols such that any time there is maintenance or an issue with the sites, they are turned down, and the workers who are authorized to work at the sites know exactly when to enter into the area. Regarding intruders, she stated that there is a warning system. She said those systems are tied to the network and that AT&T would receive a warning and investigate and know to shut it off. She said that a regular person would not be up on the roof.

The Council posed questions about the appeal, including whether the City can ignore the FCC and what the consequences would be of doing so, and what findings, if any, would support denying the project. City Attorney Davi stated that the legal job before the City Council was to look at the City Code and ensure that the applicant has met all of the standards required by the City Code, and that if it doesn't meet those standards, there would be a basis for the denial and the Council would need to pinpoint the deficiencies it sees and why. She said that the Council does not have the authority to deny an application based on health effects as long as it complies with FCC emission standards.

It was commented by Council that State and federal mandates are a cause of frustration and that the City can only do what it can do legally. It was stated that the court costs would be high if the Council were to be taken to court for their decision. It was stated that the Council did not want to expose anyone to something that is detrimental to their health. It was stated by Council that they did not find justified findings to deny the project.

A motion was introduced by Councilmember Williamson, and seconded by Councilmember Haffa, to adopt Resolution No. 20-185 C.S. to Deny an Appeal (AP-20-0248) and Approve the Personal Wireless Facility Use Permit Amendment UP-20-0171, to Allow Modifications to an Existing Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T) Facility on the Rooftop of the Portola Hotel and Spa Building located at 2 Portola Plaza; Applicant: James Phillips, MasTec Network Solutions for New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T); Owner: Custom House Hotel, LP; VAF – Visitor Accommodation Facilities Zoning District; Commercial General Plan Land Use Designation.

The Council continued to discuss the matter. In support of the motion it was stated that there were no aesthetic impacts and no historical impacts associated with the application and no grounds on which to deny the project. Appreciation was expressed for significant public participation received. It was stated that the Council is not in favor of corporate overreach, and that the community members’ work reading carefully through the reports was appreciated. It was stated that the appellant’s position relates to health and other arguments. It was stated that the application complies with City Code, California Public Utilities Commission regulations, Federal Communications Commission, siting and radiofrequency regulations, development standards, noise, security, compatibility, RF compliance, and was consistent with the City's General Plan and was compliant with all specific conditions. It was stated that, given reports showing that the facility will at most affect someone in a public space at a level of 72%, the Council was not seeing the health impacts.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 33, Packet Page 229 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
15 It was stated that the Council has heard many of these appeals and each time starts with a clean slate with regard to the decision, but their understanding of the terminology improves over time. It was stated that particular attention was paid to three locations on the site and how they are pointed, and that the validation of alignment and the technical nature of the work was intriguing. It was stated that there is a standard that the FCC requires and that the evidence demonstrated that the RF would be well below the ceiling for exposure levels. It was stated that the Council went through all of the appellant's points and could not find evidence that the community would be placed at risk. It was stated that there was no evidence, cause, or reason to lawfully find the authority to support denial of the use permit amendment. It was stated that the applicants and staff report did an adequate job of addressing the 20 points of the appeal.

The Council stated that local control keeps being taken away and will have to be won back through Congress or the FCC. It was stated that it will remain to be seen whether the new administration will be more permissive.

The motion carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call:

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 (EVE)

14. Receive Update and Provide Feedback on the City’s Commercial Cannabis Roadmap (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Received presentation, discussed, and provided feedback City Manager Uslar gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was received from Tom Rowley and Sal Palma, who spoke in favor of the planned approach. Concern was expressed by Tom Rowley and Esther Malkin that it will be difficult to gather community input from residents who are not online.

The Council discussed the matter.

On the subject of outreach, it was noted that stakeholders contacted will need to include military and education communities. On question, City Manager Uslar shared details of his vision for town hall meetings. It was requested by Council that the City send postal mail notices letting people know the meetings will take place. It was stated that the public should be engaged in other ways than only neighborhood associations. Concern was stated about how to get full public input due to COVID-19 limitations, and it was requested that staff inform Council if they have a difficult time achieving engagement.

On the subject of timing, it was stated that the proposed timeline is good, and the hope was expressed that the Council would have a clear idea of the community’s stance by July or August of 2021. It was questioned how City departments will work together simultaneously on the subject. It was stated that the matter should be decided one way or another sooner than later, because it has serious implications for the budget.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 34, Packet Page 230 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
16 It was stated that discussing cannabis zoning will be an important discussion. Concern was stated that rent prices may be driven up by cannabis businesses and local businesses can suffer as a result. It was stated that Monterey is in a unique situation with a lot of visitors, and it would be good to find the right locations.

On the subject of public opinion, it was stated that the public has moved further and further in the direction of cannabis legalization. Statistics were cited regarding majority votes from both Monterey County and City of Monterey voters on Proposition 64 in the 2016 election. On the other hand, it was stated that people may have voted to legalize cannabis but may not want it in their community, so it will be important to receive community input.

It was stated that the Council has not yet made a decision to get in this business, but has made a decision to ask the community what they think. It was suggested not to start talking about modeling for revenue, or prioritizing how to spend the money, but to listen to the community. A current advisory from the community is more valuable than the Prop. 64 vote from 2016.

It was stated that if there were questions regarding support for cannabis, it would be best to direct staff to hire an independent agency to conduct a survey as the City did for past ballot measures. It was stated that the maximum public input would be achieved through an advisory vote of the people.

It was stated that the Council wants to hear from residents, not the cannabis industry or advocates. It was stated that there are concerns about administration and law enforcement impacts. It was stated that lives have been destroyed by cannabis use.

REQUESTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS TO AGENDIZE NEW MATTERS

15. Councilmember Williamson and Vice Mayor Haffa’s Request to Agendize a Discussion about Rent Stabilization Measures (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378, and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Directed staff to bring an extension of the eviction moratorium before the Council within two months, prior to State's eviction moratorium ending, and directed staff to dedicate a study session in 2021 to the issue of renter protections Councilmembers Williamson introduced his personal intern, Jenna Tobin, who presented the staff report. Councilmember Haffa cited evidence that people are suffering due to the economy that has been impacted by COVID-19 and said he is concerned there will be a massive eviction wave as soon as the State moratorium ends, which would have a deterimental effect on the community. Councilmember Williamson clarified that an urgency ordinance for rent increases was requested for the next Council meeting, and a study session was requested for 2021 for further discussion and research on topics and policies that could protect Monterey's renters.

The Council discussed the matter. It was suggested that the State would be likely to extend their moratorium on COVID evictions, and that the City's rental assistance program might help address that issue, which was described as immediate.

On the issue of broader renter protections, it was stated that Proposition 21 lost in California. It was stated that the immediate priority was to restore the economy and the City and that the Council would be hesitant to have staff spend a great deal of time and money on another initiative. Concern was expressed about the cost of monitoring and creating lease registries. It was stated that the City must get back on its fiscal footing. It was stated that property owners are being careful with tenants and there is not currently urgency to evict tenants.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 35, Packet Page 231 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
17 The City staff’s workload was acknowledged. It was noted that the Council had prioritized housing as its number two priority.

Public comment was received from Esther Malkin, who spoke in favor of protection for renters, and from Scott Dick, Monterey County Association of Realtors, who spoke against rent control.

The Council spoke favorably about agendizing an urgency ordinance for COVID-19 related evictions if the State does not extend theirs.

Comments were made by Council against agendizing a study session on broader renter protections, with reasons cited including the need for COVID-19 relief, restrictions on local actions, premature timing, lack of support for rent control, the demand on staff, and consideration of other items already in the works. It was stated that before the Council would be willing to agendize the proposed study session, data would be needed on how many property owners are raising rents at this time. It was stated that evidence was needed and that the Council must be judicious.

In favor of agendizing the study session, it was stated that the renter community will not be satisfied by the Council not being willing to have a conversation. It was stated that people of color, people in poverty, women, and households with children are being disproportionally negatively affected by current conditions. It was stated that there is no independent, verified information on whether rents are being raised, and that would be one of the benefits of a rental registry paid for by landlords at a certain level. It was suggested to have staff come back to Council with information about what would be involved in a rental registry.

On a motion by Councilmember Haffa, seconded by Councilmember Williamson, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council directed staff to agendize:
 prior to State's eviction moratorium ending, in the next two months, extension of an eviction moratorium, and
 a study session dedicated to the issue of renter protections in 2021:

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 COMMENTS
Councilmember Albert thanked City Clerk Klein for her work on the election.

Councilmember Smith referred to the City’s 250th anniversary, reminding all of the history that the City has been through and stating that the best years are yet to come. He thanked the community and congratulated the newly reelected Mayor and City Council.

CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Uslar reported that $415,000 has been spent on rental assistance that has benefited 150 participants.

ADJOURNMENT
The Council adjourned at 11:23 p.m.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 36, Packet Page 232 City Council Minutes December 1, 2020
18 Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Clyde Roberson
City Clerk Mayor
DocuSign Envelope ID: 8ADB8275-D6D1-42E9-8AF0-090E8AD73022 Attachment 3
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 37, Packet Page 233

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Wednesday, March 25, 2020
4:00 PM

TELECONFERENCE - PER GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers

Present: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson

Absent: None
City Staff

Present:

City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Community Development Director, Acting City Clerk, Human Resources Director, Dir. of Information Resources/City Clerk, Administrative Analyst (Housing), Deputy City Attorney, Fire Chief
Pursuant to Section 3 of Executive Order N-29-20, issued by Governor Newsom on March 17, 2020, this meeting was conducted with telephonic/video participation only by all parties.

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Roberson called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira called the roll and explained the Executive Order by Governor Newsom that resulted in the meeting being held by teleconference only. Everyone listed in the roll call participated virtually using a web meeting. The full meeting was broadcast live on Channel 25 and streamed online.

PUBLIC APPEARANCE

1. Adopt Urgency Ordinance to Temporarily Prohibit Residential and Commercial Evictions Related to COVID-19 (Exempt from CEQA, Guidelines 15061(b)(3)) Action: Adopted Ordinance 3614 C.S. as amended
Housing Analyst Leonard gave the staff presentation.

Mayor Roberson opened public comments. Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira and Acting City Clerk Klein alternated reading comments from the following individuals into the record:

Steven F. Romberg; Marjorie Bullock; Duane Peters, Villa Del Monte Neighborhood; Barbara Meister, Monterey Bay Aquarium; Esther Malkin, Monterey Peninsula Renters United; Valerie Cantley; Jack Murphy, Veterans Transition Center; Stephen Morton; Teresa Wagner; Carl Outzen; René Boskoff, Monterey Marriott; Larry Scholink; William Walker and Nelson Vega, Vega Investments; Roshi Pejhan, New Monterey resident; Melvin F. Fortes; Mike Kanalakis; Kathryn Avila, Avila Construction; and Craig Coming, Mangold Property Management.

Comments were made both supportive of and critical of the ordinance, suggestions were made for language changes and/or further protections such as a moratorium on raising rents and extending the moratorium for a longer time period. Critical comments included concerns about language in the ordinance, citations of financial and administrative burdens that the ordinance would place on property owners, concerns about public access to the meeting, a request to make sure renters of City-owned property are protected, and a request to revisit the City's Voluntary Rental Guidelines to incorporate COVID-19 protections, and concerns about Cal-Am tiered rates and continued property tax collection during the crisis.

On question, City Manager Uslar reported that the City is looking at tenant relief for its own renters as well, and information will be brought to Council at the next Council meeting. He clarified that partial rent is encouraged if a tenant can pay it. He said that the Harbor office will ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 38, Packet Page 234 City Council Minutes March 25, 2020
2 reach out to tenants at the Marina who live on their boats. He said that staff would need to explore the situation at the commercial marina. He said that Monterey Boatworks is a leaseholder, and the City can contact them and work with them to pass on possible rent relief for the boaters.

Housing Analyst Leonard answered Councilmembers' questions. He said that this ordinance pertains only to economic challenges directly related to COVID-19 only, and tenants must provide documentation to prove the connection. He confirmed that federally-backed mortgages will not be subject to foreclosure if the inability to pay is related to COVID-19.

It was noted by the Council that many landlords work with their tenants, and that the ordinance points out bad actors. It was noted that language is the same in Section 4(a) and 4(b) of the draft ordinance. It was stated that in Section C, "it is" should instead read "they have" reasonable expectation. It was stated that there should be a requirement that the tenant should provide verifiable documents to the landlord.

On question, City Attorney Davi said that Section 4(a) requires documentation, but additional criteria could be added. Regarding 4(b), she said that the tenant is required to use reasonable efforts to notify the landlord in writing. Regarding Section C, she said the ordinance doesn't waive the obligation to pay rent, it's just deferring the amount due between now and May 31, 2020 and giving the tenant a 120 day period to pay it back.

The concern was raised by Council that someone laid off may not have written documentation.

The impact of local layoffs was stressed, including an example of one hotel property laying off 107 employees. It was stated that reasonable people need to take care of each other. Support for the ordinance as written was expressed.

Council discussed potential documentation that could be required. Sacramento's ordinance was cited as an example, in which required documentation could include a copy of a payroll check or a supervisor's statement, or evidence that the tenant is out of a job or laid off. It was stated that producing documentation would alleviate the potential for a dispute. It was commented in response that the requirement to produce a written document could present a lot of stress to someone who has lost their job or a business that has had to go through layoffs. It was stated that documentation of employment is a requirement to get an apartment and should therefore be a requirement for this scenario.

City Manager Uslar said that it was the City's intent that the documentation to be provided should be as wide and allowable as possible. He stated that section 4(a) gives the most flexibility, and if the documentation is not delivered, other rules regarding evictions can apply.

On question, City Attorney Davi said that the City's only powers are those that have been limited by the Governor, and therefore the May 31 deadline must apply, but it could have the potential to be extended. She said that renters would be able to use the City's ordinance, if adopted, in court as a defense if they were wrongfully evicted.

It was asked whether the ordinance could include protections against rent increases during this time. City Attorney Davi said that staff could look at this type of protection separately. It was suggested to add privacy language similar to that used in City of Carmel-by-the-Sea's ordinance. It was stressed that an eviction process would take people out of their homes at a time when people are being asked to stay at home to protect the public health. On question, Housing Analyst Leonard said that non-COVID-19 related evictions would not be affected by the ordinance. It was stated that the ordinance is not being proposed based on fear. It was stated that Council supports working with Cal-Am Water and the State. On question, City Manager ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 39, Packet Page 235 City Council Minutes March 25, 2020
3 Uslar spoke about discussions with the County and noted that the County is putting out high quality, regular COVID-19 updates. It was noted that it would be a complex situation for the County to postpone property tax payments being due, which would impact schools and City and County operations.

A motion was made by Councilmember Williamson, and seconded by Councilmember Haffa, for the City Council to adopt an Urgency Ordinance to Temporarily Prohibit Residential and Commercial Evictions Related to COVID-19:

It was commented that 64% of Monterey's residents are renters, and the impacts of COVID-19 will create hardship for many people. It was stated that the City is trying to stabilize and reassure people and give them a pathway to know they can negotiate with their landlords and pay as much as they can, and have a mechanism for protection if they can't. Tenants were urged to reach out to their landlords and find solutions, which could include "work in lieu." It was highlighted that this action is not only a humanitarian action but also a public health action.

City Attorney Davi suggested an amendment to the motion to include City of Carmel-by-theSea's language regarding privacy in Monterey's ordinance, and the mover and seconder approved the amendment.

The motion, as amended, 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)

ADJOURNMENT
The Council adjourned at 5:25 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clemenitne Bonner Klein Clyde Roberson
Acting City Clerk Mayor
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 40, Packet Page 236

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Wednesday, August 19, 2020
4:15 PM

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, City Clerk, Property Manager, Police Lieutenant, Administrative Analyst (Housing)
Pursuant to Section 3 of Executive Order N-29-20, issued by Governor Newsom on March 17, 2020, this meeting was conducted with telephonic/video participation only by all parties.

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Roberson called the meeting to order at 4:16 p.m. Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira provided details on how to phone into the meeting to participate and provide public comment.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Roberson led the Pledge.

PUBLIC APPEARANCE

1. Receive Informational Report on Physical Distancing and Crowd Management on Municipal Wharf No. 1 (Fisherman's Wharf) and Provide Direction to Staff on a Potential Emergency Order by the Director of Emergency Services (City Manager) (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061) Action: Received report
City Manager Uslar gave a brief update about the local wildfires, and shared the staff presentation on possible measures to manage physical distancing and crowd management at Wharf 1.

Mayor Roberson opened public comments. Mary Alice Fettis praised the City for its efforts so far and said they are successful. Nancy Black, Monterey Bay Whale Watch, questioned the need for a big change, and gave suggestions for how to reduce crowding if changes must be made. Kelly Ray gave a few suggestions and spoke in favor of closing the beaches. Dorit Gersh spoke about Item 2, sharing concerns about housing issues, and spoke in favor of a freeze on rent increases.
ssociation, citing wildfires, said that it would be unlikely for crowds to come to the Wharf in the next few weekends. Jason Little suggested that a kiosk charge a small fee for entrance to the Wharf. Esther Malkin urged the Council to take strong measures to improve safety at the Wharf. Janine Chicourrat, Portola Hotel and Spa, said that the hospitality industry is trying hard to support the community in response to the fires and evacuations. Jean Rasch ated that it should
be possible to calculate the capacity of the Wharf and limit attendance accordingly.

Attachment 5
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 41, Packet Page 237 City Council Minutes August 19, 2020
2 Kala Fossum said the beach should be shut down and the Wharf should be regulated beyond just limiting parking. Lorna Moffat suggested either a full shutdown like the original Shelter in Place Order, or to post a security guard so only small groups at a time can enter the Wharf at a time. Luis Osorio said that the business owners need to regulate themselves. With no further requests to speak, Mayor Roberson closed public comments.

On question from Council, City Manager Uslar addressed questions about the capacity of the Wharf, and said that all area beaches will be completely shut down for Labor Day weekend.

The Council discussed the matter. It was noted that not many tourist-heavy weekends are left in the season and most crowds come to the Wharf on the weekends. It was stated that there is serious concern from residents and that a stronger policy will help make sure businesses can remain functioning. It was proposed to somehow limit the number of people who can access the Wharf at a time. It was stressed that the Council has always listed public safety as its top priority. It was suggested to calculate the maximum capacity of all the businesses, and use that as the maximum capacity of the Wharf. It was suggested not to limit parking, but to spend the additional money on a staff person who would monitor crowding at the Wharf. It was urged to adopt a policy to cover the remaining time in the tourist season. It was stressed that Wharf businesses are being cautious and that the Council supports them. It was stated that people are already used to limited capacity in stores, and that it makes sense for the Wharf also. It was stated that closing the beach during certain parts of day could help with the beach concern.

It was stated that the consumer, the City, and the business operators all have responsibility regarding public safety.

It was stressed by Council that the City staff should calculate a safe capacity for Wharf 1, and that visitors to the Wharf need to be limited to meet the safe limit by way of a monitor. It was requested to increase garbage cleanup on the beaches.

City Manager Uslar said that limiting parking was a positive measure that helped limit crowds, and asked to keep it in his tool kit as he addresses the crowding problem. He proposed that he would come forward with an emergency order, which he would request Council to ratify at their next regular meeting on September 1, 2020. It was requested by Council to collaborate with small businesses as well as the Fisherman's Wharf Association on the City's solution.

The Council recessed at 6:00 p.m. and reconvened at 6:11 p.m.

2. Adopt an Urgency Ordinance to Temporarily Prohibit Residential Evictions and Residential Rent Increases Related to COVID-19 (Exempt from CEQA, Guidelines 15061(b)(3)) Action: Adopted Ordinance No. 3623 C.S. as amended (4-1, Councilmember Smith voting no)
Housing Analyst Leonard gave the staff presentation and, together with City Attorney Davi, answered Councilmembers' questions.

Mayor Roberson opened public comments. Kelly Davidian, Legal Services for Seniors, appealed to Council to enact the proposed urgency ordinance, citing vulnerability in the senior population to COVID-19 and lack of affordable housing in the area. Mark Poehner questioned the ability to fairly negotiate considering the power balance between landlords and renters, shared statistics regarding renters and rent, and spoke in support of rent control. Esther Malkin said that renters in the Monterey area pay 50% of their income for housing. Luis Osorio shared thoughts about challenges faced by area renters and urged Council to be proactive. Ashley Schaffer echoed concerns about rent in Monterey and said that now is the time to make changes to help renters.

Attachment 5
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 42, Packet Page 238 City Council Minutes August 19, 2020
3 Robert Brown asked Council to do anything possible to limit rent increases for all types of rentals. Scott Dick, Monterey County Association of Realtors, said that there should be some third-party mechanism to confirm a reduction in income, and suggested notification seven days before, instead of seven days after, rent is due. Jeff Davi expressed concern about the ordinance and said that landlords will raise rents to avoid being shut out by legislation like this.

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

A motion was introduced by Councilmember Williamson, and seconded by Councilmember Haffa, to adopt Ordinance No. 3623 C.S. to Temporarily Prohibit Residential Evictions and Residential Rent Increases Related to COVID-19.

The Council discussed the matter. It was stated that everyone, renters and landlords alike, are affected by the pandemic. It was stated that property owners are dependent on the income and that this should be temporary, through September, 2020 only. It was suggested that Council consider writing letters to the State legislature to weigh in on pending bills. It was stated that the Council needs to do what it can to protect the most vulnerable people in the community. It was urged that the City not become overly prescriptive.

It was proposed by the mover to amend the motion to change the 20% threshold to 10%. On question, City Attorney Davi said that the Governor's order refers to a "substantial" decrease in household income, and Council should decide what they find to be a "substantial" difference.

Statements were made against reducing the threshold to 10%.

A friendly amendment was proposed by Councilmember Albert to change reduce the lost income threshold to 15%. The friendly amendment to 15% was approved by the mover and the seconder.

It was stated that a finding supporting a threshold representing a 15% reduction in income is that most renters pay more than a third of their income to rent, and that the percentage paid toward rent is closer to 55 to 60% of their income. It was stated by a member of Council that the change in direction would not be supported.

The amended motion carried by the following roll call vote:

AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Albert, Haffa, Williamson, Roberson NOES: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)

ADJOURNMENT
The Council adjourned at 7:16 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Clyde Roberson
City Clerk Mayor
Attachment 5
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 43, Packet Page 239

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Wednesday, September 30, 2020
4:00 PM

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, Police Chief, Finance Director, Parks and Recreation Director, City Clerk, Human Resources Director, Library Director, Administrative Analyst (Housing), Deputy Human Resources Manager, Associate Planner, Fire Chief
Pursuant to Section 3 of Executive Order N-29-20, issued by Governor Newsom on March 17, 2020, this meeting was conducted with telephonic/video participation only by all parties.

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Roberson called the meeting to order at 4:01 p.m. Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira provided details on how to phone into the meeting to participate and provide public comment.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Roberson led the Pledge.

STUDY SESSION

1. Commercial Cannabis Business Use Policy Framework Discussion (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Received report, Discussed
City Manager Uslar, City Attorney Davi, Finance Director Lai, Police Chief Hober, and Community Development Director Cole gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions. It was requested to find out from neighboring cities whether crime rates had increased along with introduction of dispensaries. It was requested to know whether there would be a market for a dispensary for medicinal-only marijuana.

Public comments were received from: Peter Kaiser and Eloise Shim, who spoke against cannabis legalization; Rita Painter-Wos, Monterey Holistic Health, and Peter Brazil, JRG Attorneys at Law, who shared observations about the local cannabis industry; Sal Palma and David Villareal, who spoke in favor of adult recreational use of cannabis; Jennifer Hewlett, and Kelly Violini, Monterey Fairgrounds, who spoke about the potential revenue cannabis could provide; Tom Rowley, who recommended receiving feedback from military partners; and Inge Lorentzen Daumer, who said the matter should go to a vote of the people. Mayor Roberson encouraged the public to further share their thoughts in writing to the City Council.

The Council discussed the matter.

The Council stated that it would be important to receive a lot of public input. They identified categories of stakeholders from whom they would like to hear input:

Attachment 6
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 44, Packet Page 240 City Council Minutes September 30, 2020
2 neighboring jurisdictions that have allowed cannabis business, from whom it was stated the Council would like to know what expenses were involved in order to achieve the revenue, how it has impacted crime levels, how far dispensaries must be from schools, and whether the jurisdictions have hired extra staff; community educators, including the school district, superintendent, and Monterey Peninsula College; the military; those who may be interested in opening a business who would then be affected by regulations; neighborhood associations; the rental community; and business districts. To receive the maximum public input, it was suggested that the Council consider a ballot measure to ask the voters how they feel.

Further information was requested by Council about public health considerations of allowing cannabis business in the City, including statistics on the impact of driving under the influence, and accidents. It was stated that traffic deaths and DUI arrests do not increase and may in fact decrease, and it was stated that legalization results in decreased teen use of marijuana. Data from comparable California cities was requested in order to be able to assess whether this would make a true economic impact for Monterey. It was requested to receive and analyze data from neighboring jurisdictions. It was requested to receive a status update regarding the cannabis testing lab approved by the City. It was urged to consider both medical and recreational retail and distribution as the City moves forward with its research. It was requested to know when a potential tax could be put to the ballot. It was requested that the Council be informed about how cannabis products would be tested and regulated.

It was stated that it would need to be determined where a potential dispensary would be located, including how far it should be from schools and restricted areas. It was urged to identify appropriate locations after talking to business districts. It was stated that there would need to be a limit on concentration, and as long as there were not too many in one area and they were not too close together, then they should be approved on a first come, first served basis instead of using a permitting process.

Expressions of concern regarding allowing cannabis businesses in Monterey included asserting that marijuana is a gateway drug, and stating that just because a majority of residents voted to legalize recreational marijuana did not mean they want a dispensary in their City.

Expressions of enthusiasm for the concept included stating that diversifying revenue streams and increasing taxes could help provide economic recovery from the devastating impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. It was stated that cannabis is less harmful than alcohol, is supported by a clear majority of residents, and is used by many professionals. It was stated that locals and tourists not having to leave Monterey to buy cannabis would reduce vehicle miles. It was stated that Congress has approved legislation that would allow military members to use CBD oil and that the City should not introduce restrictions on matters that external politics are changing in a way to allow.

On the subject of public safety, it was stated that the industry holds itself to a very high standard, and that legal alternatives support the minimization of illegal sales, black markets, cartels, and street gangs. It was stated that a public safety program should include the demands of the tourism industry and also address any potential cannabis program which would be affected by tourism. The need was stated to look at larger buffer zones from schools than 600 feet. It was stated that requiring alarms and cameras would make sense.

Additional suggestions by Council included requesting to look into temporary licensing for events, and allow longer events than four days. It was stated that if the City made it too difficult for the cannabis testing lab in Ryan Ranch, it was a lost opportunity. It was noted that Cities, through zoning and regulations, may be obstructing business opportunities. Concern was cited Attachment 6
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 45, Packet Page 241 City Council Minutes September 30, 2020
3 that the City was making it difficult for people who have medical issues and can't drive to get their medicine since the City doesn't allow delivery of medical marijuana.

Potential uses of a percentage of cannabis-related revenue were identified by Council as: rental assistance, housing, homelessness, social work, addiction programs, and programs that would help address inequities traditionally faced by racial minorities.

2. Update on Recent Developments in the Law Regarding COVID-19 Tenant Protections (Exempt from CEQA Guidelines Article 20, Section 15378)
Action: Received update
City Attorney Davi gave the staff presentation. Community Development Director Cole answered Counclimembers' questions.

Public comment was received from Esther Malkin, who had questions about room rentals impacted by COVID-19.

The Council discussed the update. It was stated that people are experiencing hardship due to the lack of ability to collect rent. It was noted that it is important for everyone to do their part during these difficult times and not take advantage of others. It was suggested that the City demand support from the federal legislature, and could draft letters to mortgage banks and/or landlords asking for relief. It was stated that the City should consider and discuss extending the existing moratorium because small businesses in the community are suffering.

ADJOURNMENT
The Council adjourned at 6:02 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Clyde Roberson
City Clerk Mayor
Attachment 6
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 46, Packet Page 242

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Wednesday, September 29, 2021
7:00 PM

COUNCIL CHAMBER AND TELECONFERENCE

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers

Present: Albert*, Haffa*, Smith*, Williamson*, Roberson*

Absent: None
* Participated remotely via Zoom videoconference
City Staff

Present:

City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Community Development Director, Public Works Director, Finance Director, Human Resources Director, City Clerk, Property Manager, Senior Administrative Analyst, Administrative Analyst (Housing), General Services Superintendent

CALL TO ORDER
Pursuant to Section 3 of Executive Order N-29-20, issued by Governor Newsom on March 17, 2020 and Section 42 of Executive Order N-08-21 issued by Governor Newsom on June 11, 2021, the meeting was conducted with a hybrid combination of telephonic/video participation (via Zoom) and in-person attendance in the Council Chamber.

Mayor Roberson called the meeting to order 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 and the full Council was present, with all members attending remotely by Zoom videoconference.
*** Evening Session Agenda ***

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Roberson led the Pledge.

CONSENT ITEMS
City Clerk Klein stated that a member of the public had requested to pull Item 1 from the Consent items.

Resolutions

1. Authorize the City Manager or His Designee to Execute an Intergovernmental Support Agreement Amendment with the U.S. Army Garrison Presidio of Monterey on Behalf of the Presidio Municipal Services Agency to Extend the Contract Term and Establish 5th Option Period (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) ***PMSA***
Action: Pulled from Consent; Adopted Resolution No. 21-102 C.S.

A brief verbal presentation was made by Mayor Roberson and City Manager Uslar.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 49072719-12C6-4E2E-9317-ECB538FC4DFF Attachment 7
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 47, Packet Page 243 City Council Minutes September 29, 2021
2 Public comment was received from Nina Beety, who spoke against amending the agreement.

On a motion by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Haffa, and carried by the following vote, which was conducted by roll call, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 21- 102 C.S. to Authorize the City Manager or his Designee to Execute an Intergovernmental Support Agreement Amendment with the U.S. Army Garrison Presidio of Monterey on Behalf of the Presidio Municipal Services Agency to Extend the Contract Term and Establish 5th Option Period:

STUDY SESSION

2. Receive Presentation about Rent Control in California and the Potential Rent Stabilization Measures that could be Implemented in the City of Monterey, and an Overview of the City’s Current Housing Program (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Action: Received presentation, Discussed
Housing Analyst Leonard introduced outside counsel Karen M. Tiedemann, Goldfarb and Lipman, who gave the presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was received from: Demetrius Kastros, in favor of affordable housing on the peninsula; Dorit Gersh, Jason Reed, and Mike Rodriguez in support of rent stabilization; Luis Osorio, Nicholas McIlroy, Lindsey Knight, Veronica Miramontes, and Hector Azpilcueta in favor of rent control and tenant protections; Nelson Vega, who said that a community problem should not be blamed on landlords; Sasha Kingsley, Gabriela Chavez, and Morgan Ivens-Duran requesting continued conversations and to listen to renters; Tom Rowley, Scott Dick, John Tilley and Jeff Davi, on the relationship between the need for water and the need for housing; Brandon Naylor and Jason Asmus, in favor of lowering the barriers of entry for homeowners; Paula Pelot and Laurie Hambaro in favor of establishing a rental registry; Darlene Ruiz and Laura Pratt, who asked questions; and Esther Malkin, JoAnna Daum, and Gabriella James, who shared thoughts on the local rental market.

The Council recessed at 9:27 p.m. and reconvened at 9:41 p.m.

Ms. Tiedemann and Housing Analyst Leonard answered questions asked by commenters and the City Council.

The Council discussed the matter. It was suggested that the existing business license application process for landlords renting more than ten units could be used to collect information for a rental registry. It was stated that a rental registry would be the best way to obtain needed data, and could raise revenue to support housing programs. It was posed that perhaps a permit would be needed for a landlord to evict, to avoid people and children being evicted unnecessarily. It was proposed to find out more about rental registries and how much one would cost. It was stated that 20% affordability is not sufficient to meet the needs of the DocuSign Envelope ID: 49072719-12C6-4E2E-9317-ECB538FC4DFF Attachment 7
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 48, Packet Page 244 City Council Minutes September 29, 2021
3 most vulnerable people in the community and that the City needs both protection for renters and production to supply more housing.

The Council discussed what an appropriate timeline might be for staff to present more detailed information about rental registries. It was tentatively agreed by Council that two months would be acceptable. Concerns were expressed about the City’s potentially committing to new initiatives given the status of the budget and staff's existing workload. It was commented that the City should be intentional about reaching out to diverse communities on housing topics and keep a mindset of diversity, equity, and inclusion in these discussions. ***Adjourn to Closed Session (See additional agenda)*** Public comment on the closed session was received from Tom Rowley and Gabriela Chavez, who asked the Council to consider moving toward district-based elections.

The Council adjourned to closed session at 10:32 p.m.

ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CLOSED SESSION
cs1. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation, Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(e)(2) (Chris Shake and Sabu Shake, Jr. - Wharf Concession 33 (formerly Scales) - Under Consideration: Terms and Conditions for Surrendering Property/Building (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Action: On a roll call vote of 3-2, with Councilmembers Haffa and Williamson voting no, the Council gave confidential direction to its legal counsel cs2. Conference with Legal Counsel, Anticipated Litigation, Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2) Related to Notice of California Voting Rights Act Violation by the League of United Latin American Citizens, LULAC, District 12 Received on September 25, 2021 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Action: On a unanimous roll call vote, the Council gave confidential direction to its legal counsel

ADJOURNMENT
The Council adjoiurned at 11:05 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Clyde Roberson
City Clerk Mayor
DocuSign Envelope ID: 49072719-12C6-4E2E-9317-ECB538FC4DFF Attachment 7
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 49, Packet Page 245

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Wednesday, February 23, 2022
4:00 PM

ZOOM TELECONFERENCE

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers

Present: Albert, Haffa, Smith, Williamson, Roberson

Absent: None
City Staff

Present:

City Manager, Assistant City Manager, Community Development Director, Parks and Recreation Director, Finance Director, City Clerk, Administrative Analyst (Housing), Assistant City Attorney This meeting was held with teleconference attendance only, pursuant to the Ralph M. Brown Act, Calif. Government Code section 54953(e)(1)(C) and Resolution No. 22-015 C.S.

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Roberson called the meeting to order at 4:01 p.m. City Clerk Klein explained to the public how to participate in the meeting virtually. She called the roll with Councilmember Albert temporarily absent due to computer issues, and he rejoined the meeting at 4:06 p.m.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Roberson led the Pledge.

PUBLIC APPEARANCE

1. Receive a Report on Rent Registry Programs (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and General Rule Article 5 Section 15061) Action: Received report, discussed
Housing Analyst Leonard gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions with City Manager Uslar, Assistant City Attorney Salameh, and Community Development Director Cole.

Public comment was received from: Jean Rasch, who stated that housing issues are a natural sector for government involvement; Eloise Shim, who said that a rental registry would not hold landlords accountable or balance power between landlords and tenants; Gabriella SchlesingerJames, who expressed hesitation about a rental registry and said that the Council should already understand their constituents' housing-related needs and issues; Robert Evans, who said that the data is worth collecting and asked how accessory dwelling units (ADUs) would fit into the picture; Tom Rowley, who saiid that owners would resist registering and that there is no magic solution to housing problems; Esther Malkin, who asserted that a correlation exists between rent issues and homelessness and stated that the rental registry fee was a scare tactic; Scott Dick, who said that property owners take all the risk, and provided thoughts on the City of Salinas' rental registry model and outreach conducted; Berbara Meister, Monterey Bay Aquarium, who spoke about the ripple effect that workers' financial struggles have on the economy; Jeff Davi, who suggested the Council hold meetings about rent control if that is the goal; and Laurie Hambaro, who suggested a regional approach, greater advertising of the DocuSign Envelope ID: 3C43CB9A-FB1B-45E0-A8EA-809048E12F56 Attachment 8
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 50, Packet Page 246 City Council Minutes February 23, 2022
2 ECHO Housing advocacy program, and referred to details of the City of Pacific Grove's business licensing requirements for landlords.

The Council discussed the concept of a rental registry. On question, Housing Analyst Leonard and Assistant City Attorney Salameh clarified that the data collected could be distributed in aggregated reports that would not disclose any personally identifiable data. On question, Housing Analyst Leonard stated that accessory dwelling units (ADUs) could be included if desired by the Council.

It was stated by the Council that one apparent goal of some rental registries was related to code compliance, and the question was posed whether the City has enough code compliance. A concern was shared that once a bureaucracy is put into place, it can become expensive and can be complicated to dismantle, and the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) and Monterey Peninsula Regional Water Authority (MPRWA) were cited as examples. As an alternative to a database, it was proposed to determine what the problem is and then focus on solutions to that problem. It was stated that the proposed program could be considered "mission creep." It was stated that sustainable water is a missing piece of the puzzle that would allow the private sector to add more housing units. It was stated that rent control can make rental problems worse.

It was noted that two-thirds of residents are affected by and involved in the rental market, and that there was justification for the City's involvement from both an economic point of view as well as from the angle of the Council's adopted value driver, "Quality of Life." It was stated that the driving force behind interest in a registry was not code enforcement, but rather the exploding cost of rent. It was stressed that the data that could be collected would be beneficial, but not at the cost cited by staff to run the program. It was suggested to expand the business license collection process to include data collection, and it was suggested that City staff report back to the Council about what would be involved in changing the number of rental units that would require a business license. It was urged that the Council should refocus its intention on rent stabilization and what the City can do to make rents more affordable and encourage employers to provide housing for their essential workers.

It was urged that the Council address issues identified by the renter community in a timely matter for those residents who have been waiting for so long for solutions. In favor of a registry, the question was posed that without adequate data, the Council would have a difficult time pursuing rent stabilization. Stated benefits of a registry included up-to-date contact information for public safety and code compliance purposes and allowing the City to track its rental stock. It was proposed that the City could provide sample leases on its website. It was suggested that if a registry were adopted, it should track all rental units of every size. It was stressed that noncompliant rental businesses not up to date with their business license fees should incur enforcement action.

City Manager Uslar summarized the Council's requests to staff as follows: to look into the City's business license tax and to what degree the City can retool the process to get data, to look at what other cities are doing with respect to business license tax and the ideal number of units that should require paying the tax, and to look at adding a voluntary questionnaire along with the business license process that can produce an annual snapshot of rent-related information.

He stated that he heard a consensus from the Council that they were not ready to implement a rental registry. It was confirmed by the Council that the City Manager's summary was accurate, and it was added that the Council would like staff to work on identifying problems and whether DocuSign Envelope ID: 3C43CB9A-FB1B-45E0-A8EA-809048E12F56 Attachment 8
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 51, Packet Page 247 City Council Minutes February 23, 2022
3 maintenance and code compliance programs need improvement, including collecting hard data on the number of complaints, to make sure everyone has a safe, livable dwelling.

ADJOURNMENT
The Council adjourned at 6:17 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Clyde Roberson
City Clerk Mayor
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3C43CB9A-FB1B-45E0-A8EA-809048E12F56 Attachment 8
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 52, Packet Page 248

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Tuesday, April 18, 2023
4:00 PM 7:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 580 PACIFIC ST.

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers

Present: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Smith, Williamson

Absent: None
City Staff

Present:

City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Community Development Director, Police Chief, Parks and Recreation Director, Finance Director, Fire Chief, Library & Museums Director, City Clerk, Property Manager, Senior Engineer, Police Lieutenant, Police Lieutenant, Police Lieutenant, Fire Captain, Firefighter
***Afternoon Session Agenda ***

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Williamson called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. City Clerk Klein called the roll as highlighted above, and explained to the public how to participate in the meeting virtually.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Barber led the Pledge.

PRESENTATIONS

1. Recognition of Defense Language Institute Quarterly Joint Service Awards (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Presented proclamations to award recipients
The Mayor and Council honored Sergeant Mitchell Lacey (U.S. Marine Corps), Technical Sergeant Alec Richardson (U.S. Air Force), and Airman 1st Class Corey Case (U.S. Air Force), each of whom made brief remarks in their studied language, in thanks for the opportunity and recognition. Public comment was not received.

PUBLIC COMMENTS (MATTERS NOT ON AGENDA)
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from Steve Lightfoot, Tina Wong, Lorna Moffat, Audrey Hillen, Ross Pounds, and Nick Errichetto.

CONSENT ITEMS
Item 3 was pulled from Consent at the request of the public. Public comment on the Consent Items was not received.

Attachment 9
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 53, Packet Page 249 City Council Minutes April 18, 2023
2 On a motion by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following roll-call vote, the City Council approved the CONSENT ITEMS, except Item 3:

2. April 4, 2023 Regular Meeting (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Action: Approved
Award of Construction Contracts

3. Award a Construction Contract in the Amount of $1,630,297.00 to P. Brannon Corporation for the Iris Canyon Sediment Removal Project (Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Iris Canyon Sediment Removal Project approved on May 26, 2020) ***CIP*** Action: Pulled from Consent; Adopted Resolution No. 23-043 C.S. as amended to add language to the project description for the contractor stating that where possible, mature trees be preserved so long as it doesn't create a change to the CEQA project description Acting City Engineer Harty gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was received from Nick Errichetto, who volunteered to assist with tree replanting, and Lorna Moffat, who requested to delay acting on the proposal and seek further expert opinions, citing environmental concerns.

The Council expressed the importance of restoring the creek bed and improving health and safety for users of the area.

A motion was introduced by Councilmember Haffa, and seconded by Councilmember Smith, to adopt Resolution No. 23-043 C.S. to Award a Construction Contract in the Amount of $1,630,297.00 to P. Brannon Corporation for the Iris Canyon Sediment Removal Project, as amended to add language to the project description for the contractor stating that where possible, mature trees be preserved so long as it doesn't create a change to the CEQA project description.

On question, Acting City Engineer Harty provided an example of how herbicides would be used and explained that such use was the the expressed least preferred option for removing invasive species.

The motion carried by the following roll-call vote:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Attachment 9
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 54, Packet Page 250 City Council Minutes April 18, 2023
3 Resolutions

4. Authorize Acceptance of the Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) 2022-2023 Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant in the amount of $32,997.89 and Appropriate the Funds (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 23-044 C.S.

5. Accept and Appropriate $275,635.25 in Grant and Donated Funds to the 2022-2023 Library Trust Fund Budget and Authorize Increased Purchase Price for Bookmobile (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 23-045 C.S.
*** End of Consent Agenda ***
Adjourn to Successor Agency of the Redevelopment Agency Meeting: Consent Agenda The Council adjourned to the Successor Agency of the Redevelopment Agency meeting.

6. Adopt a Resolution Directing the Notification to the County Consolidated Oversight Board Regardin
Directing Dissolution Upon the County Consolidated Oversight Board's Adoption of the Final Resolution Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 34187(e) (Exempt from CEQA Section 15061(b)(3))
Action: Adopted SA/RDA Resolution No. 868
On a motion by Successor Agency Member Ed Smith, seconded by Successor Agency Member Kim Barber, and carried by the following roll-call vote, the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency adopted Resolution No. 868 Directing the Notification to the County Consolidated Oversight Board Regarding the Disposition of Assets in Connection with the Board:

AYES: 5 AGENCY MEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: (None)
ABSTAIN: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 AGENCY MEMBERS: (None)
Adjourn to City Council Meeting
The Successor Agency adjourned to the City Council meeting.

PUBLIC APPEARANCE

7. Receive Annual Report and Renew the Military Equipment Purchase and Use Ordinance - Monterey City Code, Chapter 27, Article 3, Section 27-10, and Authorize the Acquisition of Additional Military Equipment Including Five Unmanned Aircraft Systems and a Crisis Negotiating Team Command Vehicle (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 23-046 C.S.

Attachment 9
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 55, Packet Page 251 City Council Minutes April 18, 2023
4 Assistant Police Chief Bruno gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions together with Police Chief Hober. On question, Police Chief Hober agreed that a drone policy would be brought before the Council within six months to a year.

Public comment was received from Lorna Moffat, who expressed concern about militarization of the police and asked whether the drones would be weaponized, and Pat McNeill, who asked that the Police Department make it very clear to the public that they are not running an aggressive military operation.

On question from the public, Assistant Police Chief Bruno clarified that the drones would not be armed.

The Council discussed the matter, requesting that the Police Department conduct greater outreach to publicize this annual discussion in future years.

On a motion by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Haffa, and carried by the following roll-call vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 23-046 C.S. Receiving the Annual Report and Renewing the Military Equipment Purchase and Use Ordinance - Monterey City Code, Chapter 27, Article 3, Section 27-10, and Authorize the Acquisition of Additional Military Equipment Including Five Unmanned Aircraft Systems and a Crisis Negotiating Team Command Vehicle:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Smith, Williamson 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 5:26 p.m.

RECESS
The Council recessed at 5:34 p.m.

RECONVENE
The Council reconvened at 7:00 p.m.
*** Evening Session Agenda ***

CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENTS (MATTERS NOT ON AGENDA)
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from Demetrius Kastros and Esther Malkin.

ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CLOSED SESSION
City Clerk Klein announced:
cs1. Conference with Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1):

Attachment 9
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 56, Packet Page 252 City Council Minutes April 18, 2023
5 1. Lynne Denley v. City of Monterey, et. al (Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 23CV000133)

2. Clara Gilliland v. City of Monterey (Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 22CV003170)

3. Francisca Moralez v. City of Monterey et al. (United States District Court Norther District of California Case No. 22-CV-07540)

4. Yessenia Garcia Reveles, et al. v. City of Monterey et al (Monterey County Superior Court Case Nos. 22CV003162 and 22CV000736)

5. Richard Rosendale v. City of Monterey (Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 23CV000879)

6. Pacific Western Bank v. City and Stronghold Engineering, Inc. (San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. CIVSB2212212)

7. Stronghold Engineering, Inc. v. City of Monterey (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 18CV329015; Sixth District Court of Appeal Case No. H050157)

8. Stronghold Engineering, Inc. v City of Monterey (Riverside County Superior Court Case No.

CVR12103427; Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division 2, Case No. E080304)

9. Cynthia Wills v. City of Monterey (United States District Court, Northern District of California, San Francisco Division Case No. 21-CV-01998 EMC)

10. Sichel Young v. City of Monterey, et al (Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 22CV002243)
Action: On a unanimous roll call vote, the Council gave confidential direction to its legal counsel on the matter of Clara Gilliland v. City of Monterey. The remaining items were continued to the evening.

It was proposed by the Council to hear Item 9 as the first matter in the evening session. Public comment was not received on the proposal.

On a motion by Mayor Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Garcia, and carried by the following roll-call vote, the City Council determined they would hear Item 9 first, and then Item 8:

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

PUBLIC APPEARANCE (EVE)

9. Tenant Protections, Vacancy Tax and Rental Registry (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Council directed staff to begin work on a rental registry and return to Council in the future with more information on rent stabilization options (4-1, Councilmember Smith voting no)
This item was heard first in the evening session pursuant to the Council's above vote.

Community Development Director Cole and Nazanin Salehi, outside counsel with Goldfarb & Lipman LLP, gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment stressing that there was pent-up demand for housing supply and urging creativity in finding solutions was received from: Kevin Dayton, of Monterey Peninsula Chamber of Commerce; Logan Jensen; Adam Pinterets, of Monterey County Association of Realtors; Kathy Anderson; Demetrius Kastros; and Arleen Hardenstein.

Attachment 9
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 57, Packet Page 253 City Council Minutes April 18, 2023
6 Public comment providing insight into housing-related quality of life issues and urging the Council to protect renters was received from: an unidentified Middlebury Institute of International Studies student; Rona Alag; Maria; Sarah Blake; Kelly deWolfe, of United Way Monterey County, who shared statistics from the City of Monterey during the rental assistance program offered during the COVID-19 pandemic; and Kent Glenzer, of Gathering for Women, who shared that the number of precariously housed and unhoused women had surged in the prior few months.

Public comment focusing on the concept of a vacancy tax was received from: Lori Avey, who said that successful vacancy taxes help to increase housing supply and fund affordable housing programs, and that a vacancy tax should be based on the percentage of assessed property value; Golden Oak, who expressed concerns about rent control, spoke in favor of vacancy tax, and asked Council to find ways to incentivize owners either renting or letting go of their vacant properties; and Amanda Preece and Alora Daunt, who both spoke in favor of a vacancy tax.

Public comment focusing on the concept of a rental registry was received from: Lori Mazzuca, who spoke about the City of Alameda's rental registry and stated it reduced housing availability and increased rents; and Darius Mohsenin, who said a rental registry should also help landlords to submit documentation, and suggested an ombudsman for landlord-tenant disputes similar to the City of San Leandro's Rent Review Program.

Public comment voicing support for various protections (including a rental registry, rental assistance, regulating rental rates, strengthening just cause for eviction, limits on security deposits, requiring application fees to be refunded or applied to first-month rent, and a vacancy tax) was received from: Gabe, who suggested tying an emergency rental assistance program to accomplishing the City's unmet Regional Housing Needs Analysis ("RHNA") goals; Esther Malkin; Melissa; Elena Loomis; Kala Fossum, of Villa Del Monte Neighborhood Association; MaryAnn Boylan, who stated that housing needs are related to climate, citing that 86% of Monterey's workforce commutes into the City daily; and Jean Rasch.

Public comment voicing concern on behalf of landlords was received from: Monica Lal, of Monterey Peninsula Chamber of Commerce, who said that tenant protections would be a burden to landlords; Nelson Vega, who asked Council to allow the marketplace to work, and expressed concerns about unintended consequences of rent control; and an unnamed man, who shared details of difficulties and financial challenges that landlords can experience.

Public comment was also received from: Barbara Meister, of Monterey Bay Aquarium, who said she looked forward to engaging with the Council on solutions; and John Tilley, of Monterey Commercial Property Owners Association, who focused on the water moratorium as the main hurdle to a housing solution.

The Council recessed from 9:55 p.m. to 10:06 p.m.

The Council discussed the matter. The students who spoke were praised for their participation.

It was stated that even if a water supply became available and the RHNA numbers were accomplished, there were decades worth of pent-up demand for housing supply. It was stated that capitalism works well when there is competition and free access to resources needed to compete, but that this was not the situation in Monterey due to the water issue. It was questioned whether there could ever be enough housing supply to satisfy the demand to live on the coast.
onstant drum beat of concerns from renters and
other stakeholders about housing issues. Interest was expressed in having staff come back with Attachment 9
Council Regular Meeting, 9/5/2023, Item No. 16., Item Page 58, Packet Page 254 City Council Minutes April 18, 2023
7 more details showing more specific information about how various protections would work for Monterey. Equity was discussed, with it noted that many individuals could not attend or call in to the meeting due to their busy schedules working multiple jobs to make ends meet. It was stated that no one individual tool could be the sole solution, and that moving forward and doing nothing shouldn't be an option.

Regarding the concept of a rental registry, it was stated that the cost was not insignificant, but that the evidence provided by the consultant made the Council believe it would be a good investment into finding ways to support tenants and landlords. It was stated that the data was needed that a rental registry could provide, and that the money to support the program could be inspector position). It was stated that a task force may not be necessary. It was suggested to conduct periodic audits of a rental registry.

Regarding the potential to assist with mediation between tenants and landlords, it was stated by Council that ECHO may not be able to provide the needed service, and that their services may need to be augmented or mediation could be utilized in conjunction with a rental registry.

Regarding creating just cause eviction protections, it was stated that augmenting such protections would make sense.

Monterey City CouncilSeptember 5, 2023

Monterey City Council
September 5, 2023