Agenda packet — Monterey City Council, June 4, 2024 (part 1 of 2)

Council Chamber, 580 Pacific
St.

Monterey, California
City Council Agenda
Council Regular Meeting
Tuesday, June 4, 2024
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.gov/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).

PUBLIC COMMENT PROCEDURES AND TIME LIMITS:

The total amount of time allocated for public comment on a particular issue and for each individual speaker is generally as follows:

1. Up to three minutes per speaker.

2. For regular City Council meetings, there are two 15-minute public comment periods, one in the afternoon and one in the evening. Speakers may only comment during one session.

3. The total time allocated for public comment:
a. Items pulled from the consent agenda – 15 minutes each item b. Public Appearance items – 30 minutes each item
c. Public Hearing items – 30 minutes each item
d. Closed session items – 15 minutes each item
At the time an item is considered, the Mayor will ask those attending the meeting in person to line up at the podium or raise their hands, and for remote participants to use *9 on the telephone or the “raise hand” function in Zoom, if they wish to address the City Council. The maximum amount of time for each person to speak and the total amount of time allotted for each item will be determined based on the number of people indicating an interest in speaking and the amount of business to be conducted on the agenda. In exceptional circumstances and when necessary to ensure a full opportunity for public input, the Mayor may, with the legislative body’s consent, adjust the amount of time allowed for public input and/or the time allotted for each speaker.

CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to the Levine Act (Govt. Code section 84308), any party to a permit, license, contract, or other entitlement before the Council is 6/4/2024 4:00:00 PM
2 required to disclose on the record any contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $250 made by the party or the party's agents within the preceding 12 months to any City official. Participants and agents are requested to make this disclosure as well. The disclosure must include the name of the party, participant, or agent, and any other person making the contribution; the name of the recipient, the amount of the contribution, and the date the contribution was made.
***Afternoon Session Agenda ***
4:00 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER

PRESENTATIONS

1. Recognize June 2024 as Pride Month (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS
The public may speak to any item that is not on the agenda and that is in the City of Monterey’s subject matter jurisdiction.

CONSENT AGENDA
All matters listed under Consent Agenda are routine and will be adopted by one motion unless a member of the City Council or the public requests discussion or a separate vote.

Approval of Minutes

2. May 21, 2024 Regular Meeting (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Award of Construction Contracts

3. Awarding a Construction Contract in the Amount of $324,140.00 to Granite Rock Company for the Roberts Avenue and Surf Way Pavement Rehabilitation Project (Exempt from CEQA, Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) ***SB1 & Meas P/S*** Ordinances
An ordinance is a law adopted by the City Council and codified in the City Code. Through the adoption of an ordinance, the City may make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary, and other laws not in conflict with state or federal law. An ordinance generally becomes effective 30 days after approval at a second reading.

4. 1st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance to Amend Monterey City Code Section 28-14(i) to Except Private Development on Leased City Property from Competitive Procurement Requirements; and Amend Section 28-9(a) to Clarify the Proper Awarding Body for Job Order Contracts (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
6/4/2024 4:00:00 PM
3 Resolutions
A resolution is an expression of opinion or evidence of a decision made by the City Council and often relates to administrative business of the City. Resolutions generally become effective immediately upon adoption.

5. Call and Consolidate a General Municipal Election for November 5, 2024 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

6. Authorize Amendment to the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit (SRU) Memorandum of Understanding to Add the City of Del Rey Oaks as a Participating Agency (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

7. Award a Contract to Allied Universal Security Services Universal Protection Service LPP for Overnight Security Services in Parking Facilities in the Amount of $108,239.04 (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

8. Establish the 2024-25 Appropriation Limit (Gann Initiative) (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

9. Authorize the Appropriation of $15,000 from the Museum Trust Fund for ADA Accessibility Study Addendum and $5,000 from the Special Deposits Fund for Interpretive Panels (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

10. Consider and Approve the City of Monterey’s Investment Policy (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Other

11. Authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Letter of Support on Behalf of the City of Monterey for the California Department of Transportation to the Active Transportation Program (ATP) Grant Application for the Seaside State Route 218 Complete Streets Project (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
*** End of Consent Agenda ***

PUBLIC HEARING
Public Hearings are held to receive a staff presentation and public comment on certain items prior to City Council action. 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 public hearing. (Government Code section 65009.)

12. Open a Public Hearing to Receive Protests of Proposed Rates Effective July 1, 2024, for Wastewater (Sewer) Rates, and Adopt a Resolution Increasing Rates if a Majority Protest Does Not Exist (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
6/4/2024 4:00:00 PM
4 PUBLIC APPEARANCE
Public Appearance items are on non-routine issues that might stimulate public interest and comments.

13. Adopt the Community Wildfire Protection Plan Completed for the Cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea (Exempt from CEQA per Article 18, Section 15262)

14. Provide Direction on Draft Charter Amendments for the November 2024 Election (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) *** The City Council will take public comments on closed session items before convening to closed session.

RECESS

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

GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS CONTINUED
Any person who did not offer a general public comment in the afternoon session may speak to any item that is not on the agenda and that is in the City of Monterey’s subject matter jurisdiction.

ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CLOSED SESSION

PUBLIC APPEARANCE (EVE)
Public Appearance items are on non-routine issues that might stimulate public interest and comments.

15. Adopt the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 Operating Budget and Position Control List (PCL) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061

16. Approve the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan and Authorize the Finance Director to Make Any Necessary Administrative Budget Transfers for Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects for FY 2024/25 (Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15301, 15302, 15306, Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061 or Initial Study Mitigated Negative Previously Prepared and Certified)
6/4/2024 4:00:00 PM
5 COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmembers may ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement, or make a brief report on their activities. In addition, Councilmember or the City Council may provide a referral to staff or other resources for factual information. (Government Code section 54954.2(a)(3).)

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

ADJOURNMENT
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.gov/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. Members of the public who submit written public comment on an agenda item may be subject to the Levine Act which requires disclosure of campaign contributions of more than $250 to an officer of the City within the preceding 12 months.

CITY OF MONTEREY'S 24-HOUR SUGGESTION HOTLINES:

Voicemail: (831) 646-3799 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.monterey.gov 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: Hans Uslar, City Manager
Prepared By: Mark Ackermann, Management Analyst
SUBJECT: Recognize June 2024 as Pride Month (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council recognize June 2024 as Pride Month.

VALUE DRIVERS:

Preserve, promote, and maintain our City’s historic and cultural resources through responsible stewardship and historic preservation that highlights the contributions and perspectives of all people who are a part of Monterey’s diverse history.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The City of Monterey recognizes and celebrates Pride Month to show solidarity with the LGBTQ+ community in Monterey. The City proudly supports the continued advancement of quality for those in the LGBTQ+ community.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no costs incurred in connection with supporting this action.

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, Date: 6/4/2024
Item No.: 1.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 1., Item Page 1, Packet Page 6 this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

City Council could choose not to recognize June 2024 as Pride Month; however, that is not recommended.

DISCUSSION:

The month of June marks the anniversary of the Stonewall Riots that gave birth to the modern LGBTQIA2S+ civil rights movement in the United States. Many states and cities across the country recognize and celebrate the month of June as LGBTQ+ Pride Month. LGBTQ+ is an acronym for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and/or Questioning, and the plus reflects the countless affirmative ways in which people choose to self-identify.

By adopting the resolution, the month of June is recognized as LGBTQ+ Pride Month in the City of Monterey, and the Council authorizes the Pride flag to be flown at City Hall annually during the month of June. The City does not use its flagpoles to sponsor the expression of third parties.

The City declares its intent that the placement of the Intersex-Inclusive Progressive Pride flag is its own message, and the display of such flag by the City shall not function as the designation of a traditional public forum. This is also consistent with City Code section 31-3(F).

Monterey Peninsula Pride hosts an annual parade and celebration in the City of Monterey, and the theme for this year is “Be Queer Here.” The City of Monterey is committed to creating a space of acceptance, respect, and support for LGBTQ+ individuals and communities in Monterey.

The City of Monterey invites all residents to celebrate the culture, accomplishments, and contributions of the LGBTQ+ community and encourage everyone to help advance the cause of equality for LGBTQ+ individuals and their families in Monterey and around the world.

Attachments: 1. Proclamations
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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 1., Item Page 2, Packet Page 7

ATTACHMENT
Proclamation declaring
June 2024
LGBTQ+ Pride Month
WHEREAS, the Monterey City Council recognizes and proclaims the month of June as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual, Two Spirited, and the countless affirmative ways in which people choose to self-identify (LGBTQ+) “Pride Month” throughout the City of Monterey; and, WHEREAS, the City of Monterey joins our neighboring cities in observing Pride Month by raising a Pride flag to honor the history of the LGBTQ+ liberation movement and to support the rights of all citizens to experience quality and freedom from discrimination. The Intersex-Inclusive Progressive Pride Flag is recognized as a symbol of pride, inclusion, and support for social movements that advocate for the LGBTQ+ people in society; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey has a long and proud history of inclusion and civil rights and is committed to supporting visibility, dignity, and equality for LGBTQ+ people in our community; and, WHEREAS, the Supreme Court decision guaranteeing marriage equality in all 50 States was a historic victory for the LGBTQ+ community, our country still has far to go with respect to the equitable treatment of the LGBTQ+ community. While society at large increasingly supports LGBTQ+ equality, it is essential to acknowledge that the need for education and awareness remains vital to end discrimination and prejudice; and,
WHEREAS, the theme of Monterey Peninsula Pride’s 2024 parade and celebration is “Be Queer Here,” and the Monterey City Council is committed to creating a space of acceptance, respect, and support for LGBTQ+ individuals and communities in Monterey; and,
WHEREAS, celebrating Pride Month influences awareness and provides support and advocacy for cities across the world including here on the Monterey Peninsula, and is an opportunity to take action and engage in dialogue to strengthen alliances, build acceptance and advance equal rights. June has become a symbolic month in which the LGBTQ+ community and allies come together in various celebrations of pride; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED THAT I, Tyller Williamson Mayor of the City of Monterey, on behalf of the City Council and citizens, hereby proclaim the month of June 2024 as Pride Month in support of the LGBTQ+ community.

Dated: June 2024 ________________________
Tyller Williamson, Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 1., Item Page 3, Packet Page 8

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Tuesday, May 21, 2024
4:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 580 PACIFIC ST.

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers

Present: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Williamson

Absent: Smith
City Staff

Present:

City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Finance Director, Parks and Recreation Director, Human Resources Director, Public Works Director, City Clerk, Property Manager, Assistant Police Chief, Engineering Assistant, Harbormaster, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer, Associate Civil Engineer, Senior Engineer, Engineering Assistant, Planning Manager, Assistant Human Resources Director, Assistant Finance Director, Capital Programs Coordinator, Senior Engineer, Assistant City Attorney, Street & Utilities Supervisor, Engineering Projects Managers (2), Streets & Utilities Operations Manager, Sign Craftsworker, Intern (City Manager's Office) ***Afternoon Session Agenda ***

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Williamson called the meeting to order at 4:02 p.m. City Clerk Klein called the roll with the Council present as indicated above.

PRESENTATIONS

1. Recognize National Public Works Week 2024 (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Recognized National Public Works Week
Engineering Projects Manager Bradley and Street & Utilities Supervisor Bartoli gave the staff presentation celebrating the Monterey Public Works Department. Public comment was not received.

2. Update from California American Water on the Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Received update
Josh Stratton, of California-American Water ("Cal-Am"), gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was received from: Jean Rasch, who asked about aquifer storage pumping capacity; Melodie Chrislock, who stated that the Pure Water Monterey project would provide enough water and that desalination was not needed; Susan Schiavone, who said that the supply and demand numbers cited by Cal-Am were faulty; Esther Malkin, who questioned why Cal-Am had taken so long to produce desalinated water, and the costs to consumers under CalDate: 6/4/2024 Item No.: 2.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 1, Packet Page 9 City Council Minutes May 21, 2024
2 Am's ownership; and Margaret-Anne Coppernoll, who said that the Cal-Am desalination plant deliberately decimated aquifers.

On question from the public, Mr. Stratton stated that the pumps involved in aquifer storage pumping had been fixed.

GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS
Based on the number of individuals requesting to speak, Mayor Williamson reduced the speaking time per person to two minutes for general public comments. Public comment on nonagendized matters was received from Steve Lightfoot, Jean Rasch, Bryan Rosen, Tammy Jennings, Esther Malkin, and Tanja Roos.

City Manager Uslar and Mayor Williamson thanked members of the public for speaking out against offensive and hateful comments.

CONSENT AGENDA
Public comment on the Consent Agenda was received from Tanja Roos, of Blue Zones Project, who spoke in support of Item 9.

On a motion by Councilmember Haffa, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following vote, the City Council approved the CONSENT AGENDA:

3. May 7, 2024 Regular Meeting (Not a project under CEQA per Article 20 Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5 Section 15061)
Action: Approved (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
Resolutions

4. Authorize the City Manager to Enter into a Contract with the SPCA Monterey County (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 24-075 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)

5. Identify the Rehabilitation of Roberts Avenue as the Project to be Funded by SB 1: The Road Repair and Accountability Act (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 24-076 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)

6. Authorize the Appropriation and Expenditure of Funds in the Amount of $29,930.83 to Obtain Permits Required for the Laguna Grande Regional Park Trail and Vegetation Maintenance Strategy (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 24-077 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent) Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 2, Packet Page 10 City Council Minutes May 21, 2024
3 7. Public Disclosure of Binding Interest Arbitration Award between the City of Monterey and Monterey Firefighters’ Association (MFFA) Local 3707 Pursuant to City Charter Section 5.4(d) and Implementation Authorization (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 24-078 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent) Other

8. Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Letter on Behalf of the City Supporting AB 2410 (Wallis) Meal Program: Senior Citizens (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Authorized the Mayor to sign the letter (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)

9. Authorizing a Letter of Support for the Transportation Agency for Monterey County Application to the Active Transportation Program (ATP) for the Fort Ord Regional Trail & Greenway Project in Conjunction with the North Fremont Gap Project and Authorizing a Grant Application and Letter of Intent to be a Partner Agency (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 24-079 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)

10. Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 401 Pearl Street (Monterey Tennis Center); Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Montgomery Roth and Richard Snelling (Monterey Waves, LLC); Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Concession Agreement Extension (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Appointed Agency Real Property Negotiators Cole and Aldrete (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
*** End of Consent Agenda ***

PUBLIC HEARING

11. Levy Assessments to Fund the Cannery Row, New Monterey, and North Fremont Business Improvement Districts (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution Nos. 24-080, 24-081, and 24-082 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
Planning Manager Hill gave the staff presentation and confirmed that no written protests had been received from any of the businesses in the districts. No individuals came forward at the meeting to present any written protests, and public comment was not received.

On a motion by Councilmember Barber, seconded by Councilmember Haffa, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos. 24-080, 24-081, and 24-082 C.S. to Levy Assessments to Fund the Cannery Row, New Monterey, and North Fremont Business Improvement Districts:

AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 3, Packet Page 11 City Council Minutes May 21, 2024
4 REQUESTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS TO AGENDIZE NEW MATTERS

12. Councilmember Haffa and Councilmember Smith’s Request to Agendize a Recommendation to Direct City Staff to Budget for a Traffic Safety Study at the Intersection of Skyline Forest Drive and Highway 68 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378, and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Approved agendizing the matter for a future meeting Councilmember Haffa gave a short verbal presentation consistent with the written report in the agenda packet. On question from Council, Public Works Director Renny provided information on the potential cost that could be expected for an intersection control evaluation.

Public comment was received from: Jean Rasch, of Monterey Vista Neighborhood Association; Robin Domiter; Lori Calvery; Cathryn Chinn; Nancy Soule; and Esther Malkin, of the Del Monte Grove/Laguna Grande Neighborhood Association; who all spoke in support of agendizing the matter, citing neighborhood support.

The Council agreed on consensus, representing more than the required two "yeses" per Council's Governance Policy, to bring the matter to a future Council meeting.

13. Councilmember Haffa and Councilmember Smith’s Request to Agendize Consideration of a Request from the Skyline Forest Safety Committee to Authorize Accessing Voter Registration Information for a Survey of Neighborhood Residents on the Safety of the Skyline Forest and Highway 68 Intersection to be Conducted by the Committee (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378, and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Requester withdrew the request
Based on a remark made by Cathryn Chinn during public comments on Item 12, Councilmember Haffa withdrew his request to agendize, stating it was no longer needed because the survey had already been completed by the neighborhood group. *** Adjourn to Closed Session (See additional agenda) *** Public comment on the closed session was not received. The Council adjourned to closed session at 5:36 p.m.

RECESS
The Council recessed at 6:56 p.m.

RECONVENE
The Council reconvened at 7:03 p.m.
*** Evening Session Agenda ***

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Garcia led the Pledge.

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

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 4, Packet Page 12 City Council Minutes May 21, 2024
5 ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM CLOSED SESSION
Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira announced:
cs 1. Conference with Agency Labor Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 for Labor Negotiations; Agency Negotiators: Brette Neal, Gina Russo; Employee Organizations: General Employees of Monterey (GEM), Management Employees' Association (MEA), Monterey Police Association (MPA), Police Lieutenants' Management Association (PLMA), Monterey Fire Fighters' Association (MFFA), Monterey Fire Chief Officers' Association (MFCOA), Monterey Executive Management Employees' Association (MEMEA) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: On a roll call vote of 4-0-1 (Councilmember Smith absent), the Council gave confidential direction to labor negotiators
cs 2. Closed Session Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 401 Pearl Street (Monterey Tennis Center)
Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete
Negotiating Parties: Montgomery Roth and Richard Snelling (Monterey Waves, LLC) Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Concession Agreement Extension (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: On a roll call vote of 4-0-1 (Councilmember Smith absent), the Council gave confidential direction to property negotiators
cs 3. Conference with Legal Counsel, Anticipated Litigation, Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2), (e)(2): 2 Cases - Transient Occupancy Tax Audit Deficiency Finding Disputes with Casa Munras and Monterey Bay Inn (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: On a roll call vote of 4-0-1 (Councilmember Smith absent), the Council gave confidential direction to legal counsel

PUBLIC APPEARANCE (EVE)

14. Approve Selection Committee Recommendation to Issue Storefront Retail Cannabis Business Permits, Contingent Upon Successful Obtainment of a Zone Clearance, to 1) Monterey Responsible and Compliant Retail LLC, 2) Element 7 SF4 LLC, 3) Monterey Pacific Retail Holdings, Inc., and 4) OTC Monterey, LLC; and Establish a Waitlist for the Remaining Four (4) Applicants (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution Nos. 24-083, 24-084, 24-085, 24-086, and 24-087 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
Management Analyst Ackermann and Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions. Concern was expressed by the Council about emails that the Council had received that made accusations about cannabis applicants, including one that linked to a video that allegedly depicted the CEO of Off the Charts referring to not paying "mom and pop" cannabis operations. The selection committee clarified that, taking the video into consideration, they stood firm with their rating scores as presented.

Public comment was received from: Jhonrico Carr, who said that the City had failed to incorporate a social equity component to the cannabis permit application process; David Nola, Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 5, Packet Page 13 City Council Minutes May 21, 2024
6 of Dispo Monterey, LLC, who expressed concerns regarding the standards and methodology used by the selection committee, and made allegations regarding other applicants; Joey Espinoza, of Monterey Retail Group, Inc., who expressed displeasure with the committee's selections not including any of what he described as smaller, fully locally-owned operators; Nina Beety, who expressed full opposition to marijuana being sold at retail in Monterey; and Perla Silva, of Monterey Retail Services, LLC, who said that the City had chosen big chain retailers that she said had hiked cannabis prices to an unaffordable level. Support for granting a permit to OTC Monterey, LLC (“Off the Charts”), was expressed by: Megan Whilden and Amy Price of Community Human Service), and Dave Eckstaedt of Wahine Project, who said that Off the Charts would be beneficial partners with area non-profits; Joey Evans, of Off the Charts Van Nuys, who said that the video clip on the internet had been taken out of context; Jordan Kuhl, of Off the Charts San Francisco; Nicole Gonzales, of Stigma Wellness; Kayley Morgan, of Women of Cannabis and Ember Valley; Anthony Gonzales, of Big Pete's Treats and Off the Charts Monterey; and Sean Maddox, of OTC Monterey, LLC, who addressed the video by echoing remarks that it had been taken out of context and stating that many "mom and pop" cannabis companies supported Off the Charts in its aftermath. Support for granting a permit to Monterey Pacific Retail Holdings (Culture Cannabis Club) was expressed by Jeff Davi, who said that Culture Cannabis Club would partner beneficially with area non-profits. Support for granting a permit to Monterey Responsible and Compliant Retail, LLC (Embarc) was expressed by Lauren Carpenter, of Embarc, who expressed gratitude to the City Council for their work to this point, and Thomas Cussins, of Golden State Theatre and California Roots Music Festival, who said he looked forward to partnering with Embarc in bringing culture and live music to Monterey.

Support for granting a permit to Element 7 SF4 LLC was expressed by Josh Black, of Element 7 SF4 LLC, who said that if selected everything would be done as locally as possible. Numerous applicants thanked the City for its well-run, quick moving process.

The Council discussed the matter.

It was clarified that while the content of the video would be concerning if it were accurate, the selection committee's understanding of the vendor in question based on their application and interview had not been altered by the video. It was stated that paying vendors and taxes was important. It was stressed that the committee had made sure to adhere with integrity to the City’s selection process and that the ratings would continue to stand as submitted. It was stated that while the video in question was still troubling, the slate of top four applicants could be supported as presented. It was noted that a well rounded and diverse group of community members had spoken in support of OTC Monterey, LLC. It was stated that an applicant proposed to be waitlisted had made accusations in a manner that may have indicated it could be difficult to work with the accusing applicant.

It was stated that the City had used a fair process that was conducted fairly by the consultant and the committee. It was stressed that the randomized process without designated locations for applicants had been designed to incorporate social equity into the process. In the scoring of interviews it was stated that there had been consideration to social equity as well. It was stated that it would have been ideal to have included an element of legal compliance and litigation research in the process, and possibly a qualification for local ownership. It was stated that operators within Monterey County should qualify as local and that some applicants fit a countybased criterion for being local.

It was stated that this approval presented the Council the opportunity to move forward with its retail cannabis program, knowing that City staff would keep a sharp eye on the permittees, with mechanisms to rectify concerns as necessary.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 6, Packet Page 14 City Council Minutes May 21, 2024
7 On a motion by Councilmember Haffa, seconded by Councilmember Garcia, and carried by the following vote, the City Council approved the Selection Committee Recommendation adopting Resolution Nos. 24-083, 24-084, 24-085, and 24-086 C.S. to issue storefront retail cannabis permits, contingent upon successful obtainment of a zone clearance to Monterey Responsible and Compliant Retail LLC, Element 7 SF4 LLC, Monterey Pacific Retail Holdings, Inc., and OTC Monterey, LLC, and Resolution No. 24-087 C.S. to establish a waitlist for the remaining four (4) applicants:

AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Haffa, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)

15. Conduct a Drawing to Identify the Order By Which the Top Four (4) Commercial Cannabis Business Applicants Choose Their Preferred Business Location Zone From the Available Zone(s) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Conducted random drawing through which applicants selected zones as follows:

Element 7 SF4 LLC selected the Downtown zone (CB2); OTC Monterey LLC selected the Lighthouse zone (CB1); Monterey Pacific Retail Holdings, Inc. selected the Cannery Row zone (CB3); and Monterey Responsible and Compliant Retail LLC selected the North Fremont zone (CB4)
Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira gave the staff presentation. Public comment was not received.

Pursuant to the stipulations of City Code section 7-7.07(c), Acting Community Development Director Aldrete conducted the drawing. The process began with the four applicants selected by the Council during Item 14 of this meeting, and four available storefront retail cannabis zones (Lighthouse/CB1, Downtown/CB2, Cannery Row/CB3, and North Fremont/CB4) as dictated by City Code section 38-99.8(B)(1). Each applicant's name was drawn by Acting Community Development Director Aldrete at random from a glass vase, following which the applicant was asked to select a preferred zone from the remaining available zones. The applicants were drawn in the following order, and selected the following zones:

1. Element 7 SF4 LLC selected the Downtown zone (CB2);

2. OTC Monterey LLC selected the Lighthouse zone (CB1);

3. Monterey Pacific Retail Holdings, Inc. selected the Cannery Row zone (CB3); and

4. Monterey Responsible and Compliant Retail LLC selected the North Fremont zone (CB4).

COUNCIL COMMENTS
None made.

CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Uslar announced that the Monterey Public Library's summer reading game would run for the period June 1 through July 31. He said that the road work on Lighthouse Avenue was almost finished.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 7, Packet Page 15 City Council Minutes May 21, 2024
8 ADJOURNMENT
The Council adjourned at 8:12 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Tyller Williamson
City Clerk Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 2., Item Page 8, Packet Page 16 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Max Rieser, Associate Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Awarding a Construction Contract in the Amount of $324,140.00 to Granite Rock Company for the Roberts Avenue and Surf Way Pavement Rehabilitation Project (Exempt from CEQA, Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) ***SB1 & Meas P/S*** RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the attached resolution:

1. Approving the plans and specifications for the Roberts Avenue and Surf Way Pavement Rehabilitation Project (“Project”) which are available in the office of the City Engineer (Room 7), and granting the Public Works Director, or their designee, the authority to approve all amendments and addenda thereto as necessitated by conditions in the field;

2. Accepting all responsive, responsible bids;

3. Awarding a Construction Contract for the Total Bid to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, Granite Rock Company, in the amount of $324,140.00;

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

5. Authorizing staff to expend up to an additional 15% for unforeseen construction contingencies for timely completion of the Project.

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.

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action is consistent with the City Council’s Value Drivers and Strategic Priorities of Quality of Life – “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;” Fiscal Stewardship – “Prioritize funding models and sources for facility rehabilitation, repair, and replacement” and “Identify and seek grant funding opportunities for City services and infrastructure, including parks, recreation, library, museums, public safety, fire prevention, and planning.” This action is in accordance with Chapter 28-Purchasing of the City Code, which requires Public Works project contract awards exceeding $150,000 to be approved by City Council.

Date: 6/4/2024
Item No.: 3.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 3., Item Page 1, Packet Page 17 №10/24
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Three (3) bids were received and opened by the Finance Director’s designee on April 30, 2024 as follows:

Bidder Total Bid
Granite Rock Company $324,140.00
Coastal Paving & Excavating Inc. $336,160.00
Monterey Peninsula Engineering $338,436.00
Basis of award for this project is based on the Total Base Bid.

Total Project Construction Estimate:

Construction Contract (Total Base Bid) $324,140.00
Construction Contingency, 15% $48,621.00
Total Project Construction Estimate (This Authorization) $372,761.00 Construction Management $48,621.00
Total Estimated Cost to Complete the Project $421,382.00 Funding Sources:

SB1 (CIP2307) $728,358.00
Measure P/S – Pavement (35c1553) $1,287,179.00
As of May 8, 2024, sufficient funding is available to complete the project. The Project is funded by SB1 and Measure P funds.

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 involves pavement maintenance (i.e., removing and replacing the asphalt within the existing footprint and structural section of the roadway), ADA curb ramp improvements, and minor sidewalk repairs. 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 have an impact on 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 projects which are exempt under 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 maintenance project for existing facilities, and does not involve the creation of additional automobile lanes.

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 Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 3., Item Page 2, Packet Page 18 №10/24
due to unusual circumstances. No unusual circumstances are anticipated due to the improvements limited scope and distinct locations of improvements.

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 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. No impact to sites included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government code would occur.

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 is located in a Sensitive Archeological Area of the City as shown on the General Plan EIR Figure 8; however, the project would not include soil disturbance. Therefore, the project would not have an impact on historic or archeological resources.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Council could choose not to award the construction project for this Project; however, the proposed project implements maintenance activities with additional safety benefits that support the maintenance of existing infrastructure.

DISCUSSION:

This project primarily involves pavement rehabilitation Roberts Avenue and Surf Way, the entrance and exit to the Del Monte Beach neighborhood, by way of full-depth-reclamation (FDR). FDR is a “green” approach to pavement rehabilitation. The FDR process will recycle existing site materials to create a base for the roadway before a final asphalt surface is placed.

This process reduces energy consumption, material use, and trucking transportation compared to traditional reconstruction of deteriorated pavement. This project will also repair a portion of the settling sidewalk on Roberts Ave.

The contractor must maintain access to the Del Monte Beach neighborhood while rehabilitating the only two streets in and out of the neighborhood. The Contractor may completely close Roberts Avenue or Surf Way during the hours 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., but both streets cannot be closed at the same time. When either street is completely closed, detour traffic as shown on the contractor-prepared and City-approved traffic handling plans. The Contractor may close citystreet lanes using a one-way-reversing traffic-control lane closure on Casa Verde Way as shown on contractor-prepared, and City approved traffic control plans Mondays through Fridays, no work is permitted on weekends from Memorial Day to Labor Day The Project is in a series of planned improvement projects funded by Measure P/S and SB1.

Measure P/S is a 1% sales tax approved by voters in 2014 and continued in 2018 for fixing streets, sidewalks and storm drain systems. Since its adoption, the local district tax has been effective in improving the City’s average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) from 54 to 79 over the last decade. Measure P/S funds are a dedicated and reliable resource for fixing and maintaining the City’s streets, sidewalks, and storm drains. Without this resource the City would Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 3., Item Page 3, Packet Page 19 №10/24
not be able to maintain its streets to the same level of service.

Senate Bill 1 (SB1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, was signed into law on April 28, 2017. This legislative package invests $5.4 billion annually to fix roads, freeways, and bridges in communities across California and puts more dollars toward transit and safety. These funds are split equally between state and local investments.

The project plans and specifications were developed by City staff and consultants Kimley-Horn.

The Project was extensively advertised for construction bids and are available for public review in the Office of the City Engineer (580 Pacific St., Room 7). On April 30, 2024, the city received three (3) bids. The lowest responsive, responsible bid was submitted by Granite Rock Company, in the amount of $324,140.00.

Granite Rock Company has performed and successfully completed work in the City of Monterey, including Citywide Road Reconstruction Project Phase 4 and Citywide Street Resurfacing Phase 7. They have submitted references for their work product. Staff has checked the firm’s references and is comfortable with the ability of the contractor to perform the work successfully.

MR/pl
Attachments: 1. Resolution
e: Granite Rock Company
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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 3., Item Page 4, Packet Page 20 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $324,140.00 TO

GRANITE ROCK COMPANY FOR THE ROBERTS AVENUE AND SURF WAY PAVEMENT REHABILITATION PROJECT (EXEMPT FROM CEQA, ARTICLE 19, SECTION 15301, CLASS 1) ***SB1 & MEAS P/S***
WHEREAS, on the 30th day of April 2024, the City received three (3) electronic bids through the City’s e-Procurement Portal, OpenGov Procurement, for the Roberts Avenue and Surf Way Pavement Rehabilitation Project;
WHEREAS, Granite Rock Company, Coastal Paving & Excavating Inc., and Monterey Peninsula Engineering, submitted responsive, responsible bids; WHEREAS, the basis for determining the low bidder is the Total Base Bid; WHEREAS, Granite Rock Company submitted the lowest responsive, responsible bid in the amount of $324,140.00;
WHEREAS, sufficient funds are available in account SB1(CIP2307) and Measure P/S – Pavement (35c1553) to complete the project;
WHEREAS, the Project is funded by SB1 (CIP2307) and Measure P/S – Pavement (35c1553); 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 involves pavement maintenance (i.e., removing and replacing the asphalt within the existing footprint and structural section of the roadway), ADA curb ramp improvements, and minor sidewalk repairs. 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. No unusual circumstances are anticipated due to the improvements limited scope and distinct locations of improvements.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 3., Item Page 5, Packet Page 21 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 would not be visible from a scenic highway.

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

1. Approves the plans and specifications for the for the Roberts Avenue and Surf Way Pavement Rehabilitation Project (35C1553) (“Project”) which are available in the office of the City Engineer (Room 7), and grants the Public Works Director, or their designee, the authority to approve all amendments and addenda thereto as necessitated by conditions in the field;

2. Accepts all responsive, responsible bids;

3. Awards a Construction Contract for the Total Bid to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, Granite Rock Company, in the amount of $324,140.00;

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

5. Authorizes staff to expend up to an additional 15% for unforeseen construction contingencies for timely completion of the Project.

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

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 3., Item Page 6, Packet Page 22 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 3., Item Page 7, Packet Page 23 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Megan Beckman, Administrative Analyst
Kimberly Cole, Community Development Director
Janna Aldrete, Property Manager
SUBJECT: 1st Reading by Title Only of an Ordinance to Amend Monterey City Code Section 28-14(i) to Except Private Development on Leased City Property from Competitive Procurement Requirements; and Amend Section 28-9(a) to Clarify the Proper Awarding Body for Job Order Contracts (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 amend Monterey City Code section 28-14(j) to except private development on leased City property from competitive bidding requirements and Section 28-9(a) to clarify the proper awarding body for job order contracts.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Adoption of the proposed amendment has the potential to improve the efficiency of the City’s purchasing process for vehicles to ensure a safe and operable fleet. The City’s purchasing policy is set forth in Section 28-1 and it provides:

In order to establish efficient procedures for the purchase of equipment, supplies, materials, and services for the City at the lowest possible cost commensurate with quality needed, to exercise positive financial control over purchases, to clearly define authority for the purchasing function and to assure the quality of purchases, a purchasing system is hereby adopted. The purchase of equipment, supplies, materials, general services and professional services shall be by bid or request for proposal, or by the alternate procurement methods set forth in this chapter. In accordance with Section

4.8 of the Charter, the provisions of the Public Contract Code shall not apply unless otherwise adopted by the City Council.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None.

Date: 6/4/2024
Item No.: 4.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 4., Item Page 1, Packet Page 24 №10/24
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. The adoption of this ordinance is an organizational and administrative activity of the City, does not have the potential to result in either a direct or reasonably foreseeably indirect physical change in the environment, and is therefore not a project of purposes of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15061(b)(3); 15378(b)(5). 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. In the event adoption of this ordinance does constitute a project, it is categorically exempt under Class 20 (Changes in the Organization of Local Governments) categorical exemption (CEQA Guidelines section 15320). Further, none of the exceptions to exemptions found in CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2 apply.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose not to add an exception to competitive procurement requirements for projects funded in part with City funds on leased properties and/or could choose to have all job order contracts awarded by the City Council.

DISCUSSION:

City Charter section 4.8 “rejects and disavows application of the California Public Contracts Code” and allows the City Council to adopt its own purchasing rules by ordinance, which are codified in Chapter 28 of the City Code.

The City leases properties, including at Old Fisherman’s Wharf and Wharf No. 2, to private parties who operate recreational, fishing, maritime, and other concessions open to the public.

Lessees who receive rent concessions, loans, or other consideration in exchange for making building repairs or tenant improvements, for example, are required under state law to pay prevailing wages and under the City Code to comply with competitive bidding requirements.

The proposed amendment adds an exception to the City’s competitive bidding rules for projects undertaken on leased City property by City lessees. This will allow lessees to follow their own procurement processes so that they have the flexibility to find the most cost-effective solutions for their business. Lessees receiving consideration from the City will still be required to comply with the State’s prevailing wage law.

The purchasing ordinance also addresses job order contracts (“JOC”), which have been awarded by Council to expedite repairs and upgrades of common, repetitive work according to competitively bid unit pricing based on quantities that are unknown at the time of award of the contract. The intent of these contracts is to provide the City with a readily available workforce for repairs, upgrades to existing infrastructure, and emergency repairs of any value up to the contract limit, as the City deems appropriate. The proposed amendment will delegate authority to the Purchasing Agent to award JOC contracts that are capped at $150,000 or less per year, which is in line with the formal bidding threshold for public works contracts. Job order contracts over this amount will continue to be awarded by the City Council. This amendment promotes efficiency by utilizing informal purchasing procedures and aligning the formal bidding thresholds with other public works contracts.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 4., Item Page 2, Packet Page 25 №10/24
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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 4., Item Page 3, Packet Page 26 ORDINANCE NO. ____ C.S.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/24
ADDING MONTEREY CITY CODE SECTION 28-14(i) TO EXCEPT PRIVATE

DEVELOPMENT ON LEASED CITY PROPERTY FROM COMPETITIVE PROCUREMENT REQUIREMENTS; AND AMENDING SECTION 28-9(a) TO CLARIFY THE PROPER

AWARDING BODY FOR JOB ORDER CONTRACTS
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY DOES ORDAIN, as follows:

SECTION 1:

WHEREAS, job order contracts(“JOC”) have been awarded by Council to expedite repairs and upgrades of common, repetitive work according to competitively bid unit pricing based on quantities that are unknown at the time of award of the contract; WHEREAS, the intent of these contracts is to provide the City with a readily available workforce for repairs, upgrades to existing infrastructure, and emergency repairs of any value up to the contract limit, as the City deems appropriate; WHEREAS, delegating authority to the Purchasing Agent to award JOC contracts that are capped at $150,000 or less per year, promotes efficiency by utilizing informal purchasing processes ;
WHEREAS, the City leases properties, including on Old Fisherman’s Wharf and Wharf No. 2, to private parties who operate recreational, fishing, maritime, and other concessions open to the public;
WHEREAS, lessees who receive rent concessions, loans, or other consideration in exchange for making building repairs or tenant improvements, for example, are required under state law to pay prevailing wages and follow the City Code requirements relating to competitive bidding. The amendment will continue to require payment of prevailing wages while allowing lessees to follow their own procurement processes so that they have flexibility to find the most cost-effective solutions for their business; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the adoption of this ordinance 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. The adoption of this ordinance is an organizational and administrative activity of the City, does not have the potential to result in either a direct or reasonably foreseeably indirect physical change in the environment, and is therefore not a project of purposes of CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15061(b)(3); 15378(b)(5).

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. In the event adoption of this ordinance does constitute a project, it is categorically exempt under the Class 20 (Changes in Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 4., Item Page 4, Packet Page 27 the Organization of Local Governments) categorical exemption (State CEQA Guidelines section 15320). Further, none of the exceptions to exemptions found in State CEQA Guidelines section 15300.2 apply.

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 28, Section 14(i) is hereby amended to read as follows:
“i. Contracts by City lessees for improvements to leased City property whether or not funded in whole or in part by the City. Nothing in this section shall be read to repudiate the application of Labor Code section 1772 or any successor state statute, or this Chapter’s provisions concerning the payment of prevailing wages on public works contracts.”
SECTION 4: Monterey City Code, Chapter 28, Section 9(a) is hereby amended to read as follows:
“a. Individual annual contracts, referred to as “job order contracts,” none of which may exceed one million dollars ($1,000,000), may be awarded for repair, maintenance, remodeling, paving, sidewalk repair, or other work to be done according to unit prices. Job order contracts may only be utilized for new construction totaling less than one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000). The contracts shall be awarded to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder and shall be based on plans and specifications for typical work. Job order contracts that are capped at $150,000 or less per year shall be awarded by the Purchasing Agent; all other job order contracts shall be awarded by the City Council. No job order contract shall exceed three (3) years (including any extensions), except as necessary to complete outstanding work orders that were awarded within the three (3) year period.

For purposes of this section, the term “unit price” shall mean the amount paid for a single unit of an item of work, the term “typical work” shall mean a work description applicable universally or applicable to a large number of individual projects, as distinguished from work specifically described with respect to an individual project, and the term “repair, remodeling, paving, sidewalk repair, or other repetitive work to be done according to unit prices” shall not include design or contract drawings.”
SECTION 5: All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

SECTION 6: 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:

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 4., Item Page 5, Packet Page 28 ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 4., Item Page 6, Packet Page 29 Council
Agenda Report
№09/24
FROM: Clementine Bonner Klein, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Call and Consolidate a General Municipal Election for November 5, 2024 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council:

1. Adopt a resolution calling the election for November 5, 2024; and

2. Adopt a resolution requesting the Board of Supervisors consolidate the general municipal election with the statewide general election, and authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with the County of Monterey to administer the election.

VALUE DRIVER:

This recommendation is consistent with the value driver to “foster a local government that is transparent and collaborative; and solicits, welcomes and appreciates input from all.” POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

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

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: Yes, it applies to the authorization to contract.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Pursuant to Elections Code section 10002, the City will reimburse the County of Monterey’s Elections Department in full for its proportionate share of election services performed. The Elections Department estimates the cost for the November election to be $7 to $10 per registered voter and reported 15,764 registered voters in the City of Monterey to the California Secretary of State as of February 20, 2024, though the voter count is likely to increase in the lead-up to a Presidential election. Therefore, the estimated cost range for conducting the election could range from $110,348 to $166,190 or more. The FY2024-2025 budget has sufficient funds to cover this necessary expense. The true total cost will not be known until after the election has been conducted and all costs and proportionate shares have been calculated by the Elections Department.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that calling for and consolidating the election is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for Date: 6/4/2024
Item No.: 5.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 1, Packet Page 30 causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

No alternatives are considered. Elections Code section 10402.5 requires any municipal election held on a statewide election date to be consolidated with the statewide election. City of Monterey Charter section 2.3 and California Elections Code section 1000(e) both call for elections to be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November this year; therefore, the November 5, 2024 General Municipal Election must be consolidated.

DISCUSSION:

Pursuant to Section 2.3 of the City Charter, November 5, 2024 is the next general municipal election date for the election of the Mayor and two Councilmembers. For the first time, Monterey’s voters will elect district-based Councilmembers for Districts 3 and 4 pursuant to a district-based elections system set forth in City Code section 2-2.00 et seq. This process was adopted in February 2022 and resulted in the first Districts 1 and 2 Councilmembers’ election in November 2022.

Any proposed measure for the ballot must be placed on the ballot by Council resolution and submitted to the County of Monterey Board of Supervisors by August 9, 2024. The last regular Council meeting prior to that deadline is August 6, 2024.

Consolidating the City’s general municipal election with the statewide general election on the same date, as required by State law, means that the County of Monterey’s Elections Department will conduct all printing and mailing of sample ballots, computer tabulation, hiring and management of precinct workers, and canvassing of results. Other requirements will be performed by the City Clerk as the City’s elections official, such as the publication of required notices, and administration of all City filings, including candidates’ nomination papers and optional statements of qualification, and Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) conflict of interest and financial reporting.

Staff recommends that the Council adopt the resolution calling for, and requesting consolidation of, the election, and authorizing the City Manager to sign the agreement with the County of Monterey. A Statement of Election Facts, which will be submitted to the County’s Elections Department following the Council’s calling of the election, is included as Attachment 2.

CBK
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Statement of Election Facts
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 2, Packet Page 31 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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 3, Packet Page 32 1 RESOLUTION NO. ____

A RESOLUTION OF THE MONTEREY CITY COUNCIL
CALLING A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION FOR NOVEMBER 5, 2024 AND

REQUESTING CONSOLIDATION WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION WHEREAS, pursuant to the Elections Code of the State of California and the Charter of the City of Monterey, the City Council must call for an election to be held on November 5, 2024 for the purpose of electing municipal officers, and the municipal election must be consolidated with the Statewide general election; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that calling the election is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

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

2. The City Council hereby calls and orders a general municipal election (“Election”) on November 5, 2024.

3. For purposes of the Election the polls shall be open from 7:00 a.m. on the day of the Election until 8:00 p.m. on that same day when the polls shall be closed, pursuant to California Elections Code sections 10242 and 14212, except as provided in California Elections Code section 14401.

4. The following elective offices shall be submitted to qualified voters of the City at the Election pursuant to Monterey Charter section 2.3 and Monterey City Code section 2-2.00 et seq.:
a. One (1) Mayor for a two (2) year term, representing the City at large; b. One (1) Council Member for a four (4) year term, representing District 3; and c. One (1) Council Member for a four (4) year term, representing District 4.

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

6. Each candidate for office in the City of Monterey may choose to submit with the nomination papers an optional Statement of Qualifications of no more than 200 words and the candidate is responsible for the cost of the printing and mailing of the candidate’s Statement of Qualifications unless proven to be indigent, pursuant to Resolution No. 20-093 C.S. and California Elections Code sections 13307 and 13309.

7. The Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey is hereby requested to direct the County of Monterey’s Elections Department to consolidate the Election with the statewide general election to be held on the same date and with all other elections to be held by Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 4, Packet Page 33 2 jurisdictions within Monterey County on the same date, pursuant to California Elections Code sections 10002 and 10400, and to provide any and all services necessary for conducting the Election in the manner prescribed by the California Elections Code. The City of Monterey will reimburse the County of Monterey in full for services performed.

8. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the Monterey County Board of Supervisors and the Monterey County Elections Department, and to take all other steps necessary to conduct the Election.

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

10. In the event of a tie vote (if any two or more persons receive an equal, and the highest, number of votes for an office) as certified by the County of Monterey Registrar of Voters, the City Council, in accordance with California Elections Code section 15651(a), shall set a date and time and place and summon the candidates who have received the tie votes to appear and will determine the tie by lot.

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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 5, Packet Page 34 ATTACHMENT 2 Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 5., Item Page 6, Packet Page 35 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: David J. Hober, Chief of Police
Prepared By: Karen Faurot, Senior Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: Authorize Amendment to the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit (SRU) Memorandum of Understanding to Add the City of Del Rey Oaks as a Participating Agency (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution amending the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit (SRU) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to add the City of Del Rey Oaks as a participating agency.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action is consistent with the Council’s previous direction to pool and share local resources and regionalize efforts.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: Yes.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There will be no financial impact to the City of Monterey for this action.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 6., Item Page 1, Packet Page 36 №10/24
CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The Council could determine not to amend the SRU MOU by adding the City of Del Rey Oaks as a participating agency.

DISCUSSION:

In 2010, the cities of Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, Marina, Pacific Grove, Sand City, and Seaside, and California State University Monterey Bay entered into a Memorandum of Understanding to form the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit, a tactical unit comprised of a Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team, a Crisis Negotiations Team (CNT), and a Tactical Medical (TM) team. Participating agencies dedicate resources and personnel in support of the SRU’s objective, which is to provide specialized support in handling critical field operations where intense negotiations and/or special tactical deployment methods are required that are beyond the normal scope of field officers.

The City of Del Rey Oaks was the only Monterey Peninsula agency not to join the SRU. The City of Del Rey Oaks has now requested to be added as an SRU participating agency. Section 8 of the current SRU MOU allows a new agency to join the SRU if agreed upon by all participating parties and the agencies are in agreement to add Del Rey Oaks to the SRU MOU.

Adding Del Rey Oaks will increase SRU resources and allow for more effective response times to critical incidents that require SRU capabilities.

It is recommended that the City Council authorize amending the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit Memorandum of Understanding to add the City of Del Rey Oaks as a participating agency.

DJH/kf
Attachment: 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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 6., Item Page 2, Packet Page 37 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24

AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT TO THE MONTEREY PENINSULA REGIONAL SPECIAL

RESPONSE UNIT (SRU) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING TO ADD THE

CITY OF DEL REY OAKS AS A PARTICIPATING AGENCY
WHEREAS, Section 8 of the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit (SRU) Memorandum of Understanding allows a new agency to join the SRU if agreed upon by all parties. All parties are currently in agreement to add Del Rey Oaks as a participating agency to the SRU MOU; and
WHEREAS, on December 1, 2009, the City Council adopted Resolution 09-198 authorizing the City’s participation in the Regional SUR. In 2010 the cities of Monterey, Seaside, Marina, Pacific Grove, Sand City, and Carmel-by-the-Sea, and California State University Monterey Bay entered into an MOU to implement and deploy the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit. The City of Del Rey Oaks was the only Peninsula agency not to join the SRU; and
WHEREAS, the City of Del Oaks has requested to be added as an SRU participating agency. Adding Del Rey Oaks will increase SRU resources and allow for more effective response times to critical incidents that require SRU capabilities; 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 an amendment to the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit (SRU) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to add the City of Del Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 6., Item Page 3, Packet Page 38 Rey Oaks as a participating agency, and the City Manager, or designee, is authorized to execute the SRU MOU. .

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 6., Item Page 4, Packet Page 39 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared by: Cristie Steffy, Parking Superintendent
SUBJECT: Award a Contract to Allied Universal Security Services Universal Protection Service LPP for Overnight Security Services in Parking Facilities in the Amount of $108,239.04 (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the attached resolution:

1. Awarding a contract to Allied Universal Security Services Universal Protection Service LPP dba Allied Universal Security Services, for an initial term of one (1) year in an amount not to exceed $108,239.04, with an option to extend for two additional two-year terms. The total not-to-exceed amount of this contract, should the City exercise all extensions of the contract, is $573,634.88; and,

2. Authorizing the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the Contract upon the receipt of information required by the Request for Proposal (“RFP”).

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

None. This action is consistent with the Council’s commitment to ensuring that Monterey maintains a safe environment and in alignment with the Parking Division’s mission to administer the parking programs of the City of Monterey with the objective of providing safe, clean, legal and optimal parking to the citizens of, and visitors to, the City of Monterey CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: Yes.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The Parking Division is operated through the Parking Fund, an Enterprise Fund of the City of Monterey and is not funded by the General Fund.

The cost for the first year of private security services will be $108,239.04 with the option to extend two (2) additional two-year options. Should the City exercise all options, the notDate: 6/4/2024 Item No.: 7.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 1, Packet Page 40 №10/24
to-exceed amount of the five-year contract is $573,634.88.

Allied Universal Security Services Fee Schedule – 5-year fee schedule Fee Schedule –
Parking Fund Annually beginning 07/01/2024
Year 1 $108,239.04
Year 2 $111,471.36
Year 3 $114,732.80
Year 4 $118,023.36
Year 5 $121,168.32
TOTAL $573,634.88
Sufficient funding is included in the FY 24-25 proposed budget for the first year to be available for this contract in the Parking Attendant Section Contractual Services account (625-310-3540-0000-4220). Funding for future years, if exercised, will be included in the annual budget process.

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:

Council could reject all proposals received and decide not to proceed with overnight private security in the parking facilities; however, this is not recommended. Private security is sought to protect the City’s parking assets and ensure safety.

DISCUSSION:

The Parking Division is seeking the services of an outside firm to provide dedicated overnight security services in parking facilities seven days a week. Security services will be focused on the parking facilities in the Downtown District including Downtown East and West Parking Garages and the Calle Principal Garage, in addition to intermittent patrolling in the Cannery Row Garage located in the Cannery Row District. The security services will be a visible presence onsite and utilized between the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 2, Packet Page 41 №10/24
The selection of the best-qualified firm was made in accordance with Section 28-10 of the City’s Purchasing Ordinance. On March 29, 2024, a Request for Proposal (“RFP”) was issued and advertised through the City’s e-Procurement Portal, OpenGov Procurement. Ten (10) proposals were received on April 19, 2024. A selection committee consisting of Public Works Department staff independently evaluated the following ten (10) proposals in accordance with the qualifications-based selection process:
 Valus Security
 Security Services Northwest, Inc.
 Security Prime Consultants, Inc.
 SafeRock
 Protection Corps Security Service
 OPS Inc. Security Services
 HKC Protective Services
 American Global Security, Inc.
 Allied Universal Security Services
 A&A Security Group
The selected firm, Allied Universal Security Services was rated the superior firm through the evaluation process. Allied Universal Security Services provides a wealth of experience in security patrol service as a visual deterrent to crime in order to protect assets and ensure safety. Allied Universal Security Services provides security solutions throughout the region and is familiar with Monterey, and can provide local office support.

Allied Universal Security Services will assign an unarmed security officer to patrol the parking facilities from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., seven days a week. The primary responsibility of the security officer is to deter criminal activity and protect people and property. As part of their roving patrol, they will check the exterior, interior, and stairwells of the parking facilities, which include the Downtown East and West Parking Garages, Calle Principal Garage, and intermittent patrolling of the Cannery Row Garage. They will also provide daily, monthly, and yearly activity reports for review by management.

The initial twelve (12) month contract will take effect July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025. The Parking Division will evaluate the value and effectiveness of the private security service and consider the possibility of extending the contract as provided in the RFP. Should the City exercise its options, the contract could extend through June 30, 2029, with a not to exceed the amount of $573,634.88.

AR/cs
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Consultant Rating Sheet
e: Erik Homan, Allied Universal Security Services
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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 3, Packet Page 42 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24

AWARDING A CONTRACT TO ALLIED UNIVERSAL SECURITY SERVICES UNIVERSAL

PROTECTION SERVICE LPP FOR OVERNIGHT SECURITY SERVICES IN PARKING FACILITIES IN THE AMOUNT OF $108,239.04
WHEREAS, on March 29, 2024, the City issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) to solicit proposals from qualified firms to provide private security services in parking facilities seven days a week from 10:00pm to 6:00am;
WHEREAS, on April 19, 2024, the City received ten (10) proposals from the following firms: Valus Security, Security Services Northwest, Inc., Security Prime Consultants, Inc., SafeRock, Protection Corps Security Service, OPS Inc. Security Services, HKC Protective Services, American Global Security, Inc., Allied Universal Security Services, A&A Security Group;
WHEREAS, selection of the best-qualified firm was made in accordance with Section 28- 10 of the City’s Purchasing Ordinance and rated in response to the criteria identified in the RFP; WHEREAS, Allied Universal Security Services was rated the superior firm due to their wealth of experience in security patrol service; 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:

1. Awards a contract to Allied Universal Security Services Universal Protection Service LPP, for an initial term of one (1) year in an amount not to exceed $108,239.04, with an option to extend for two additional two-year terms. The total not-to-exceed amount of this contract, should the City exercise all extensions of the contract, is $573,634.88; and, Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 4, Packet Page 43

2. Authorizes the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the Contract upon the receipt of information required by the Request for Proposal (“RFP”).

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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 5, Packet Page 44 ATTACHMENT 2
Project Name: Project Code:

Service Area:Rater’s Name:Criteria Max Points Values Security Security Services Norwest Inc. Security Prime Consultants, Inc SafeRock Protection Corps Security Service OPS Inc Security HKC Protective Services American Global Security, Inc Allied Universal A&A Security Group Ability to Design Project 20 16.67 16.67 15.00 18.33 20.00 16.67 5.00 20.00 20.00 13.33Ability to Manage ProjectRequirements 10 5.00 8.67 8.33 7.67 8.33 7.67 1.67 9.33 10.00 5.00 Staff / Organizational Approach 10 8.67 6.67 7.00 10.00 8.67 6.00 1.67 9.33 10.00 6.00 Familiarity with Monterey 10 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.67 1.67 1.67 3.33 3.33 10.00 0.00 Responsiveness / willingness to
comply with agreement terms 10 9.33 10.00 8.33 10.00 10.00 9.33 3.33 10.00 10.00 8.33Reputation, References, Stability 10 4.33 6.67 5.00 5.00 4.33 5.00 1.67 8.33 8.33 5.00 Performance on Similar Projects 10 5.00 6.67 4.00 5.00 2.33 5.00 1.67 7.67 8.33 5.00 Cost's 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Other QR Codes or NFC Tracking 10 5.00 6.67 6.67 3.33 6.67 3.33 3.33 10.00 10.00 0.00Total Points: 90 54.67 62.00 54.33 60.00 62.00 54.67 21.67 78.00 86.67 42.67Rank 648 5 3 610219 Consolidated Average of Staff Review Date: 4/23/2024
Consultant Selection Evaluation Scorecard
Overnight Security Services to the City of Monterey Parking Division N/A MONTEREY PARKNIG DIVISION Include On‐Call Services: Yes

Page 1 of 1 ends

Capital Projects Division
Last Modified: 07/11/13 Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 7., Item Page 6, Packet Page 45 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Rafaela T. King, CPA, MBA, Finance Director
Prepared by: Youssef Hanalla, CPA, Finance Manager
SUBJECT: Establish the 2024-25 Appropriation Limit (Gann Initiative) (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, required by the 1979 passage of Proposition 4, an initiative constitutional amendment, to establish the appropriation limitation for the City of Monterey for fiscal year 2024-25.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

At the November 6, 1979, statewide general election, the voters approved Proposition 4, also known as the Gann Initiative. This law placed a ceiling on the amount of tax revenues that governmental agencies in the State of California could spend in any fiscal year. This ceiling must be calculated each year based upon a formula, which takes into consideration the California per capita income increase, and the population increase or decrease within each governmental jurisdiction. The legislative body in each jurisdiction must set, by resolution, this appropriation limitation.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

This action has no direct fiscal impact on the City. The attached resolution establishes the appropriation limit for the City of Monterey at $163,865,965 for fiscal year 2024-25, pursuant to Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Article 5, Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, this matter is not a project.

Date: 6/4/2024
Item No.: 8.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 8., Item Page 1, Packet Page 46 №10/24
Because this matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

None. The City must comply with State of California legislation.

DISCUSSION:

In November of 1979, the voters approved Proposition 4, an initiative that added Article XIII B to the California Constitution. This constitutional amendment, popularly known as the Gann initiative, placed limits on the growth of expenditures for publicly funded programs. In 1980, legislation was enacted to implement the limits on government appropriations established by Proposition 4. Adding Division 9 of Title 1, beginning with Section 7900, of the Government Code, this legislation specified the calculation of state and local government appropriation limits and appropriations subject to limitation. These limits were to take effect beginning with the 1980-81 fiscal year. The sections added by the constitutional and statutory amendments explain and define the appropriations limit and appropriations subject to limitation as they apply to state and local government and require that each entity of government formally “adopt” its appropriations limit for a given fiscal year.

In order for the City to calculate its appropriation limit, it was necessary to establish what the agency appropriated from tax revenues in fiscal year 1978-79, the base year of the Gann Initiative from which all the figures are calculated.

Using the base year and the annual inflation factors since the initiative passed in 1979, the allowable appropriations limit for fiscal year 2024-25 has reached $163,865,965, as shown in the attached chart. This figure, when compared with the applicable taxes expected to be collected of $96,606,064, shows that the City is well within its limits. The City is at approximately 58.95% of the allowable taxing limit.

RTK/yh
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. State of CA Price and Population Letter April 2024

3. Article XIIIB Appropriation Limit Calculations
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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 8., Item Page 2, Packet Page 47 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24

MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS IN COMPLIANCE WITH

SECTION XIIIB OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION (GANN INITIATIVE) WHEREAS, the City of Monterey is required to comply with Section XIIIB of the California Constitution, enacted by Proposition 4 in 1979; WHEREAS, the appropriations limit for the fiscal year 2024-25 was found to be $163,865,965; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Article 5, Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, this matter is not a project. Because this matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project.

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

1. That during the fiscal year 2023-24 the California per capita income increased 3.62% and the population of the County of Monterey increased by 0.94%.

2. That the appropriations limit for fiscal year 2024-25 is $163,865,965.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 8., Item Page 3, Packet Page 48

3. That the appropriations subject to limitation for fiscal year 2024-25 are $96,606,064.

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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 8., Item Page 4, Packet Page 49 April 30, 2024
Dear Fiscal Officer:

Price Factor and Population Information
Appropriations Limit
California Revenue and Taxation Code section 2227 requires the Department of Finance to transmit an estimate of the percentage change in population to local governments.

Each local jurisdiction must use their percentage change in population factor for January 1, 2024, in conjunction with a change in the cost of living, or price factor, to calculate their appropriations limit for fiscal year 2024-25. Attachment A provides the change in California’s per capita personal income and an example for utilizing the factors to calculate the 2024-25 appropriations limit. Attachment B provides the city and unincorporated county population percentage change. Attachment C provides the population percentage change for counties and their summed incorporated areas. The population percentage change data excludes federal and state institutionalized populations and military populations.

Population Percent Change for Special Districts
Some special districts must establish an annual appropriations limit. California Revenue and Taxation Code section 2228 provides additional information regarding the appropriations limit. Article XIII B, section 9(C) of the California Constitution exempts certain special districts from the appropriations limit calculation mandate. Special districts required by law to calculate their appropriations limit must present the calculation as part of their annual audit. Any questions special districts have on this requirement should be directed to their county, district legal counsel, or the law itself. No state agency reviews the local appropriations limits.

Population Certification
The population certification program applies only to cities and counties. California Revenue and Taxation Code section 11005.6 mandates Finance to automatically certify any population estimate that exceeds the current certified population with the State Controller’s Office. Finance will certify the higher estimate to the State Controller by June 1, 2024. Please note: The prior year’s city population estimates may be revised. The per capita personal income change is based on historical data.

If you have any questions regarding this data, please contact the Demographic Research Unit at (916) 323-4086.
/s Richard Gillihan

RICHARD GILLIHAN
Chief Operating Officer
Attachment
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 8., Item Page 5, Packet Page 50 May 2024
Attachment A
A. Price Factor: Article XIII B specifies that local jurisdictions select their cost of living factor to compute their appropriation limit by a vote of their governing body. The cost of living factor provided here is per capita personal income. If the percentage change in per capita personal income is selected, the percentage change to be used in setting the fiscal year 2024-25 appropriation limit is:

Per Capita Personal Income
Fiscal Year Percentage change
(FY) over prior year
2024-25 3.62
B. Following is an example using sample population change and the change in California per capita personal income as growth factors in computing a 2024-25 appropriation limit.
2024-25:

Per Capita Cost of Living Change = 3.62 percent
Population Change = 0.17 percent
Per Capita Cost of Living converted to a ratio: 3.62 + 100 = 1.0362 100
Population converted to a ratio: 0.17 + 100 = 1.0017
100
Calculation of factor for FY 2024-25: 1.0362 x 1.0017 = 1.0379

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 8., Item Page 6, Packet Page 51

Fiscal Year 2024-25
Attachment B
Annual Percent Change in Population Minus Exclusions*
January 1, 2023 to January 1, 2024 and Total Population, January 1, 2024 County
City
Percent Change
23-24
--- Population Minus Exclusions ---
1-1-23 1-1-24
Total
Population
1-1-24
Monterey
Carmel-By-The-Sea
Del Rey Oaks
Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monterey
Pacific Grove
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
Unincorporated

0.55 0.64

0.98 2.01

1.78 1.91

0.56 0.63

0.73 0.26

0.04 2.94

0.75 3,105
1,559
8,384
20,155
13,968
22,269
24,096
14,872
160,870
378
28,075
19,565
104,372
3,122
1,569
8,466
20,561
14,216
22,695
24,232
14,966
162,037
379
28,085
20,140
105,157
3,122
1,569
8,466
20,561
14,216
22,695
27,106
14,966
162,037
379
30,197
26,966
105,334
County Total 0.94 421,668 425,625 437,614
*Exclusions include residents on federal military installations and group quarters residents in state mental institutions, state and federal correctional institutions and veteran homes.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 8., Item Page 7, Packet Page 52 ATTACHMENT 3
Price Adjustment Population Adjustment
Fiscal
Year
The Lessor of C.P.I. or Per Capita
Income (% change) % Change in City Population
Combined
Adjustment
Appropriation
Limit
1978-79 Base Year Base Year $ 14,797,091
1979-80 10.17 -1.17 1.0888 16,111,222
1980-81 12.11 -2.10 1.0976 17,682,983
1981-82 9.12 1.11 1.1033 19,509,853
1982-83 6.79 -0.61 1.0614 20,707,481
1983-84 2.35 2.97 1.0539 21,823,572
1984-85 4.74 1.15 1.0594 23,120,867
1985-86 3.74 2.13 1.0595 24,496,480
1986-87 2.30 2.74 1.0510 25,746,540
CA Per Capita Income % Change * City or County Population % Change 1987-88 3.50 1.51 1.0506 27,050,049
1988-89 4.70 2.13 1.0693 28,924,647
1989-90 5.19 0.88 1.0612 30,693,583
1990-91 4.21 1.62 1.0590 32,503,953
1991-92 4.14 2.65 1.0690 34,746,632
1992-93 -0.64 2.29 1.0164 35,314,859
1993-94 2.72 2.53 1.0532 37,193,610
1994-95 0.71 3.69 1.0443 38,841,287
1995-96 4.72 1.97 1.0678 41,474,726
1996-97 4.67 1.51 1.0625 44,066,896
1997-98 4.67 2.63 1.0742 47,336,660
1998-99 4.15 4.70 1.0904 51,615,894
1999-00 4.53 2.93 1.0759 55,533,540
2000-01 4.91 3.32 1.0839 60,192,804
2001-02 7.82 1.73 1.0969 66,022,477
2002-03 -1.27 1.35 1.0006 66,064,071
2003-04 2.31 1.11 1.0345 68,340,639
2004-05 3.28 1.56 1.0489 71,682,496
2005-06 5.26 0.13 1.0530 75,481,668
2006-07 3.96 0.38 1.0436 78,768,895
2007-08 4.42 0.67 1.0510 82,786,109
2008-09 4.29 1.56 1.0592 87,684,563
2009-10 0.62 1.45 1.0207 89,499,633
2010-11 -2.54 1.37 0.9879 88,416,687
2011-12 2.51 0.63 1.0316 91,210,654
2012-13 3.77 0.91 1.0471 95,510,324
2013-14 5.12 0.81 1.0597 101,212,290
2014-15 -0.23 0.95 1.0072 101,941,019
2015-16 3.82 0.26 1.0409 106,110,406
2016-17 5.37 0.96 1.0638 112,881,897
2017-18 3.69 1.00 1.0473 118,217,712
2018-19 3.67 0.35 1.0403 122,985,249
2019-20 3.85 0.91 1.0480 128,882,434
2020-21 3.73 -0.31 1.0341 133,275,311
2021-22 5.73 -0.48 1.0522 140,235,609
2022-23 7.55 -0.62 1.0688 149,888,292
2023-24 4.44 0.08 1.0452 156,668,567
2024-25 3.62 0.94 1.0459 163,865,965
*Monterey County total used

ARTICLE XIIIB APPROPRIATION LIMIT CALCULATIONS
(Gann Limit)
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 8., Item Page 8, Packet Page 53 Summary of Tax Revenue - from Proposed Budget 04/30/2024 FY 2024-25
Proposed Budget % of Limit
General Fund
Property Taxes 15,795,810
Sales Taxes 15,748,711
Transient Occupancy Tax 30,240,000
Business License Tax 4,800,000
Utility Users Tax 4,997,218
Other Taxes 528,214
Special Revenue Funds
216 TOT - Neighborhood Improvement 5,760,000
251 Gas Tax 784,111
252 Measure S (Previously Meas P) Tax 11,952,000
918 Conference Center Fac Dist Tax 6,000,000
Total Taxes $ 96,606,064 58.95%
Allowable appropriations Limit FY 2024-25 $ 163,865,965 Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 8., Item Page 9, Packet Page 54 Council
Agenda Report
№09/24
FROM: Brian Edwards, Library & Museums Director
SUBJECT: Authorize the Appropriation of $15,000 from the Museum Trust Fund for ADA Accessibility Study Addendum and $5,000 from the Special Deposits Fund for Interpretive Panels (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 authorizing the expenditure and appropriation of $15,000 from the Museum Trust Fund for an updated Pacific Biological Laboratories Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility study and $5,000 from the Special Deposits Fund for interpretive panel signage.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Per Section 21-4 of the Monterey City Code, expenditures from the Trust Fund need to be recommended by the Museum and Cultural Arts Commission to City Council The City shall establish and maintain a "Museum Trust Fund”, and all gifts, donations, bequests, or grants of a financial nature shall be placed in this fund. Expenditures from the fund shall be for Museum purposes only, as approved by the City Council on recommendation from the Colton Hall Museum and Cultural Arts Commission.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The total amount needed for the Pacific Biological Laboratories ADA Accessibility Study and Interpretive Panel Signage is $20,000. Specifically, $15,000 in Museum Trust Funds would be appropriated to the ADA Accessibility Study, and $5,000 from the Special Deposits Fund (900- 2096) would fund the interpretive panels for Bruce Ariss Way on Cannery Row.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action, authorizing appropriation of funds for interpretive panels and ADA Accessibility Study Addendum, is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general Date: 6/4/2024
Item No.: 9.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 1, Packet Page 55 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, including ADA accessibility improvements and placement of interpretive panels, will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose to postpone approving the expenditure for the projects.

DISCUSSION:

At its March 7, 2024 regular meeting, the Museums and Cultural Arts Commission approved the recommendation to appropriate funding for the following projects:

Interpretive Panels recognizing Booth’s Cannery and Bruce Ariss – $5,000 Booth’s Cannery—Monterey’s first cannery—once stood near Fisherman’s Wharf on the Monterey Bay Coastal Recreational Trail. Several years ago, the City of Monterey installed ceramic cannery labels in the sidewalks of Cannery Row. The Cannery Row Business Association funded the labels. The labels have recently been replaced or will be replaced by the City of Monterey. The City received a ceramic cannery label from the Cannery Row Business Association to install on the sidewalk at the site of Booth’s Cannery in alignment with the labels installed at other canning labels along Cannery Row. The Museums Division will be designing a new interpretive panel to highlight Booth’s Cannery for public view. Funding will be used for the City of Monterey to purchase interpretive panels and posts that are consistent with other panels installed throughout the City.

In 1989, the City of Monterey’s Cultural Arts Commission and Colton Hall Museum worked with Bruce Ariss on a 400-foot mural along Cannery Row to cover a failed construction project and to highlight Monterey's history. Fifty community artists were chosen by Bruce Ariss and provided a stipend by the City of Monterey to recreate his early sketches of Cannery Row. The four-foot by eight-foot wood panels from 1989 were originally slated to last five years and were replaced in 1999 after significant wear. The remaining mural pieces were removed and placed in storage or auctioned when a new hotel was constructed on Cannery Row. The centerpiece two panels painted by Bruce Ariss that highlighted the view from Ricketts’ Lab were prominently moved to Bruce Ariss Way. During the storms of January 2023, the panels were removed due to storm damage and have additional damage due to pests, wear, and paint loss. Art conservators have reviewed the condition of the existing art, and the panels are in very poor shape and cannot be displayed again. Staff recommends installing an interpretive panel on Bruce Ariss Way with a copy of the original Cannery Row painting by Bruce Ariss. The mural was an interpretation of an original painting created during the era when Bruce Ariss frequented the Pacific Biological Laboratories with Ed Ricketts and John Steinbeck. This painting is in a private collection, and the owner is willing to have the image duplicated on an interpretive panel with attribution listed.

The panel would include a brief description of Bruce Ariss written by City staff. Funding will be Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 2, Packet Page 56 used by the City of Monterey to purchase and install interpretive panels and posts in alignment with others throughout the City. Special Deposits Fund (900-2096), Cannery Row Mural Restoration, was set aside to fund restoration efforts for the Bruce Ariss mural project.

Pacific Biological Laboratories ADA Accessibility Study Update - $15,000 In 2019, consultant Architectural Resources Group (ARG) completed a Pacific Biological Laboratories accessibility study that provided two options to increase ADA accessibility to the building. The building is on the National Register of Historic Places due to its association with John Steinbeck and Ed Ricketts. Options at the time looked at providing access through the front of the building with considerable building modifications due to the slope of the property and the low height of the garage entry. These options consist of considerable building modifications to the façade and interior living spaces and it is not recommended as it would disrupt the architecture and character of a nationally recognized historic building.

Staff is currently requesting an updated accessibility study that would direct public access through the rear of the building with an ADA lift and a second restroom, as highlighted in the earlier ARG study. While the City is undergoing the ADA Transition Plan Update that provides an inventory of ADA improvements for all City-owned facilities, including the Pacific Biological Laboratories, this study would provide detailed new plans and cost estimates for the architectural work on a historic building in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act Guidelines Section §202.5 Alterations to Qualified Historic Buildings and Facilities. The total cost for the study is estimated at $15,000.

Currently, private tours, free public tours, and open hours on the second Saturday of the month are allowed by the City; however, public programming is not due to disability access impediments. Staff believes this updated study is vital for future grant opportunities and potential partnerships to expand access to this resource listed on the National Register of Historic Places and Historic Landmarks—a site deeply treasured by locals and people worldwide.

BE/fg
Attachment: 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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 3, Packet Page 57 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF $15,000 FROM THE MUSEUM TRUST FUND FOR ADA ACCESSIBILITY STUDY ADDENDUM AND $5,000 FROM THE

SPECIAL DESPOSITS FUND FOR INTERPRETIVE PANELS
WHEREAS, on March 7, 2024, the Museums & Cultural Arts Commission approved the recommendation to appropriate funding from the Museum Trust Fund for new interpretive panels and toward the funding of an updated Pacific Biological Laboratories accessibility study; WHEREAS, creating interpretive panels that highlight Monterey’s first cannery and Bruce Ariss Way will provide locals and visitors with opportunities to learn of our shared history; WHEREAS, an updated Pacific Biological Laboratories ADA accessibility study will provide an option for improved access to this historical site with less impact on the building’s integrity and is essential for future grant opportunities and potential partnerships; and WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action, authorizing appropriation of funds for interpretive panels and ADA Accessibility Study Addendum, 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 it hereby authorizes the Finance Director to appropriate the following funding for expenditure from the Museum Trust Fund:

1. $5,000 from SPECIAL DEPOSITS FUND (900-2096) for interpretive panels to recognize Monterey’s first cannery—Booth’s Cannery—and Monterey artist Bruce Ariss at Bruce Ariss Way.

2. $15,000 toward an updated Pacific Biological Laboratories accessibility study Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 4, Packet Page 58 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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 9., Item Page 5, Packet Page 59 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Rafaela T. King, CPA, MBA, Finance Director
Prepared By: Youssef Hanalla, CPA, Finance Manager
SUBJECT: Consider and Approve the City of Monterey’s Investment Policy (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council consider and approve the attached Investment Policy.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The Legislature has declared that the deposit and investment of public funds by local officials agencies, and the solvency and creditworthiness of local agencies are issues of statewide concern. (Government Code sections 53600.6; 53630.1.)
State law provides that the treasurer (Finance Director) may annually render to the legislative body of the local agency a statement of investment policy, which the legislative body of the local agency shall consider at a public meeting. Any changes in the policy shall also be considered by the legislative body of the local agency at a public meeting. (Government Code section 534646(a)(2.))
Although approval of the policy is not mandated by law, the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission states:
[w]hile not required by statute, it is in the best interest of the local agency to present and discuss the policy with the agency’s legislative body or oversight committee, and then have the policy approved by a vote of the legislative body. A public vote signifies that the legislative body shares fiduciary responsibility with the treasurer, increases the authority and legitimacy of the investment policy, and provides transparency and disclosure.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

A good investment policy helps to safeguard City assets and generate maximum investment earnings given the restrictions of State law.

Date: 6/4/2024
Item No.: 10.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 1, Packet Page 60 №10/24
Oher than the staff time spent preparing and reviewing the proposed changes to the Investment Policy, there are no direct fiscal impacts related to reviewing and approving the investment policy.

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:

None considered. Although the review of the investment policy is no longer a legal mandate, it is encouraged in Government Code section 53646(g).

DISCUSSION:

The City Treasurer/Finance Director is authorized to invest unexpended cash in the City Treasury. State law establishes the types of investments allowed, the maximum allowable percentage limits for each investment type, acceptable maturities, quality of ratings allowed, and the maximum allowable percentage by the issuer (Government Code section 53601.) While one of the City’s goals is to achieve a reasonable rate of return, since these are public funds, the safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program, followed by liquidity and yield.

The investment portfolio is kept sufficiently liquid to meet all operating requirements that may be reasonably anticipated. This is accomplished by structuring the portfolio so that securities mature concurrent with projected cash needs. Since all possible cash demands cannot be anticipated, a portion of the portfolio is invested in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), a money market fund managed by the State that allows local agencies to pool their investment resources and withdraw funds as needed.

Other authorized investments include U.S. Treasury Bills, Bonds, and Notes, Obligations issued by government-sponsored agencies, including the Govt. National Mortgage Assn., Federal Farm Credit Bank, Federal Home Loan Bank, and the Federal National Mortgage Assn. Additional investment instruments are outlined in the attached Policy and are utilized on a minimal basis.

In August 2023, the City established the Internal Revenue Code Section 115 trust from the Pension Reserve Account with initial funding of $2.0M to meet the growing Pension and OPEB obligations.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 2, Packet Page 61 №10/24
Securities purchased from any bank or dealer are placed with an independent third party for custodial safekeeping. All trades are executed by delivery vs. payment (DVP). This ensures that securities are deposited in the eligible financial institution before the release of funds.

The City currently contracts with Union Bank (now U.S. Bank) to safekeep its securities.

The City Treasurer/Finance Director is authorized to invest unexpended funds. Daily management of the investment program has been delegated to the Deputy City Treasurer/Finance Manager (Revenue). In his absence, the Finance Analyst is authorized to initiate investment transactions. To prevent the potential for fraud by converting assets or concealing transactions, procedures are in place that require all wire transfers initiated by the Deputy City Treasurer or Finance Analyst to be verified by the City Treasurer/Finance Director or Assistant Finance Director.

As per Government Code section 53646, the Investment Policy may be presented to the City Council on an annual basis and any changes to the Policy shall be considered at a public meeting.

Changes to the 2023 Policy included the implementation of SB 1489, effective January 1, 2023, which required an investment’s term or remaining maturity to be measured from the settlement date to final maturity, prohibited the purchase of a security with a forward settlement date exceeding 45 days from the time of investment, and extended the reporting time from 30 days to 45 days for issued quarterly reports on the deposit of public funds. Changes also included the expansion of the qualifications of the Broker/Dealers, expansion of specifications of the authorized investments, and a glossary of investment terms. (Government Code sections 53601 and 53646.)
There are no proposed changes to the current Investment Policy.

RTK/yh
Attachments: 1. Investment Policy
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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 3, Packet Page 62

ATTACHMENT

THE CITY OF MONTEREY

INVESTMENT POLICY
Policy
Under authority granted by the City Council, the City Treasurer is responsible for investing the unexpended cash in the City Treasury.

The investment of the funds of the City of Monterey is directed to the goals of safety, liquidity and yield. The authority governing investments for municipal government is set forth in the California Government Code, Sections 53601 through 53659.

The primary objective of the investment policy of the City of Monterey is safety of principal. Investments shall be placed in those securities as outlined by type and maturity sector in this document. Effective cash flow management and resulting cash investment practices are recognized as essential to good fiscal management and control. The City's portfolio shall be designed and managed in a manner responsive to the public trust and consistent with the state and local law. Portfolio management requires continual analysis, and as a result, the balance between the various investments and maturities may change in order to give the City of Monterey the optimum combination of necessary liquidity and optimal yield based on cash flow projections.

Scope
The investment policy applies to all financial assets of the City of Monterey as accounted for in the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). Policy statements outlined in this document focus on the City of Monterey's pooled funds, but will also apply to all funds under the City Treasurer's span of control unless specifically exempted by statute or ordinance.

Prudence
Prudent Investor Standard: Management of the City’s investments is governed by the Prudent Investor Standard as set forth in the California Government Code section 53600.3:
“…all governing bodies of local agencies or persons authorized to make investment decisions on behalf of those local agencies investing public funds pursuant to this chapter
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 4, Packet Page 63 2 DRAFT-RESOA_INVESTMENT POLICY.DOCX ATTACHMENT
are trustees and therefore fiduciaries subject to the prudent investor standard. When investing, reinvesting, purchasing, acquiring, exchanging, selling, or managing public funds, a trustee shall act with care, skill, prudence, and diligence under the circumstances then prevailing, including, but not limited to, the general economic conditions and the anticipated needs of the agency, that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the agency. Within the limitations of this section and considering individual investments as part of an overall strategy, investments may be acquired as authorized by law.”
It is recognized that market prices of securities will vary depending on economic and interest rate conditions at any point in time. It is further recognized that in a well-diversified investment portfolio, occasional measured losses are inevitable due to economic, bond market or individual security credit analysis. These occasional losses must be considered within the context of the overall investment program objectives and the resultant long-term rate of return.

The City Treasurer and other individuals assigned to manage the investment portfolio, acting within the intent and scope of the investment policy and other written procedures and exercising due diligence, shall be relieved of personal responsibility and liability for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely manner and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments.

Objectives
Safety of Principal
Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the City of Monterey. Each investment transaction shall seek to ensure that capital losses are avoided, whether from securities default, broker-dealer default or erosion of market value.

The City shall seek to preserve principal by mitigating the two types of risk, credit risk and market risk.

Liquidity
Historical cash flow trends are compared to current cash flow requirements on an ongoing basis in an effort to ensure that the City's investment portfolio will remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet all reasonably anticipated operating requirements.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 5, Packet Page 64 3 DRAFT-RESOA_INVESTMENT POLICY.DOCX ATTACHMENT
Return
The investment portfolio will be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the investment risk constraints for safety and liquidity needs.

Performance Evaluation
Investment performance is continually monitored and evaluated by the City Treasurer. Investment performance statistics and activity reports are generated on a quarterly basis for presentation to the City Manager and City Council.

Delegation of Authority
Under authority granted by City Council assign the responsibility of investing unexpended cash to the City Treasurer/Finance Director. Daily management responsibility of the investment program has been delegated to the Deputy City Treasurer/Finance Manager - Revenue, who shall establish procedures for the operation consistent with the investment policy. In the City Treasurer's and Deputy City Treasurer's absence, the Finance Analyst is authorized to initiate investment transactions.

The City may engage the services of one or more external investment managers to assist in the management of the City's investment portfolio in a manner consistent with the City's objectives. Such external managers may be granted discretion to purchase and sell investment securities in accordance with this Investment Policy. Such managers must be registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.

Ethics and Conflicts of Interest
Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that conflicts with proper execution of the investment program or impairs their ability to make impartial investment decisions.

Additionally, the City Treasurer, the Deputy City Treasurer, the Finance Analyst and the Assistant Finance Director are required to annually file applicable financial disclosures as required by the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC).

Safekeeping of Securities
To protect against fraud or embezzlement or losses caused by collapse of an Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 6, Packet Page 65 4 DRAFT-RESOA_INVESTMENT POLICY.DOCX ATTACHMENT
individual securities dealer, all securities owned by the City shall be held in safekeeping by a third-party bank trust department, acting as agent for the City under the terms of a custody agreement. All trades executed by a dealer will settle delivery vs. payment (DVP) through the City's safekeeping agent.

All exceptions to this safekeeping policy must be approved by the City Treasurer in written form and included in the quarterly reporting to the City Council.

Internal Control
Separation of functions between the City Treasurer's Office and the Accounting Division is designed to provide ongoing internal review to prevent the potential for converting assets or concealing transactions.

Existing procedures require all wire transfers initiated by the Deputy City Treasurer or the Finance Analyst be verified by the City Treasurer or Assistant Finance Director. Proper documentation obtained from confirmation and cash disbursement wire transfers is required for each investment transaction. Timely bank reconciliation is conducted to insure proper handling of all transactions.

The investment portfolio and all related transactions are reviewed and balanced to appropriate general ledger accounts by the Revenue Division on a monthly basis.

Reporting
In accordance with California Government Code section 53646(b), the City Treasurer shall review and render quarterly reports to the City Manager and City Council within 45 days following quarter end. The report shall include the face amount of the cash investment, the classification of the investment, the name of the institution or entity, the rate of interest, the maturity date, and the current market value.

Qualified Broker/Dealers
The Treasurer shall maintain procedures for establishing a list of authorized broker/dealers and financial institutions which are approved for investment purposes that are selected through a process of due diligence as determined by the City. Due inquiry shall determine whether such authorized broker/dealers, and the individuals covering the City are reputable and trustworthy, knowledgeable and experienced in public agency investing and able to meet all of their financial obligations. These institutions may include "primary" dealers or regional dealers that qualify under Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 15c3-1 (uniform net capital rule).

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 7, Packet Page 66 5 DRAFT-RESOA_INVESTMENT POLICY.DOCX ATTACHMENT
In accordance with Government Code section 53601.5, not purchased directly from the issuer, shall be purchased either from an institution licensed by the state as a broker-dealer, as defined in Corporations Code section 25004, or from a member of a federally regulated securities exchange, from a national or state-chartered bank, from a savings association or federal association, as defined by Financial Code section 5102, or from a brokerage firm designated as a primary government dealer by the Federal Reserve Bank. Examples of such institutions eligible to transact investment business with the City include:
 Primary government dealers as designated by the Federal Reserve Bank and non-primary government dealers.
 Nationally or state-chartered banks.
 The Federal Reserve Bank.
 Direct issuers of securities eligible for purchase.

Selection of financial institutions and broker/dealers authorized to engage in transactions will be at the sole discretion of the City, except where the City utilizes an external investment adviser in which case the City may rely on the adviser for selection.

All financial institutions which desire to become qualified bidders for investment transactions (and which are not dealing only with the investment adviser) must supply the Treasurer with audited financials and a statement certifying that the institution has reviewed the California Government Code, Section 53600 et seq. and the City’s investment policy. The Treasurer will conduct an annual review of the financial condition and registrations of such qualified bidders.

Public deposits will be made only in qualified public depositories as established by State law. Deposits will be insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or, to the extent the amount exceeds the insured maximum, will be collateralized in accordance with State law.

Selection of broker/dealers used by an external investment adviser retained by the City will be at the sole discretion of the adviser. Where possible, transactions with broker/dealers shall be selected on a competitive basis and their bid or offering prices shall be recorded. If there is no other readily available competitive offering, best efforts will be made to document quotations for comparable or alternative securities. When purchasing original issue instrumentality securities, no competitive offerings will be required as all dealers in the selling group offer those securities at the same original issue price.

The City Treasurer shall periodically send a copy of the current investment policy to all broker/dealers approved to do business with the City. Confirmation of receipt of this policy shall be considered evidence that the dealer understands the City's investment policies and intends to sell the City only appropriate investments authorized by this investment policy.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 8, Packet Page 67 6 DRAFT-RESOA_INVESTMENT POLICY.DOCX ATTACHMENT
Collateral Requirements
Collateral is required for investments in certificates of deposit. In order to reduce market risk, the collateral level will be at least 102% of market value of principal and accrued interest.

In order to conform with the provisions of the Federal Bankruptcy Code, which provides for the liquidation of securities held as collateral, the only securities acceptable as collateral shall be certificates of deposit, commercial paper, eligible banker's acceptances, medium-term notes, or securities that are the direct obligations of, or are fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, the United States or any agency of the United States.

Authorized Investments
Investment of City funds is governed by the California Government Code Sections 53600 et seq. Within the context of the limitations, the following investments are authorized.

1. United States Treasury Bills, Bonds, and Notes or those for which the full faith and credit of the United States are pledged for payment of principal and interest. There is no percentage limitation of the portfolio which can be invested in this category, although a five year maturity limitation is applicable.

2. Federal Agency or United States government-sponsored enterprise obligations, participations, or other instruments, including those issued by or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by federal agencies or United States government-sponsored enterprises. There is no percentage limitation of the portfolio which can be invested in this category, although a five year maturity limitation is applicable, no more than 25% of the portfolio may be invested in any single Agency/GSE issuer, and the maximum percent of agency callable securities in the portfolio is limited to 20%.

3. Bills of exchange or time drafts drawn on and accepted by commercial banks, otherwise known as banker's acceptances. Banker's acceptances purchased may not exceed 180 days to maturity or 40% of the cost value of the portfolio. Moreover, banker’s acceptances must be issued by institutions which have short-term debt obligations rated “A-1” or its equivalent or better by at least one Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (NRSRO); or long-term debt obligations which are rated in a rating category of “A” or its equivalent or better by at least one NRSRO. No more than 5% of the portfolio may be invested in any single issuer.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 9, Packet Page 68 7 DRAFT-RESOA_INVESTMENT POLICY.DOCX ATTACHMENT

4. Commercial paper provided that the securities are issued by an entity that meets all of the following conditions in either paragraph (a) or (b) and other requirements specified below:
a. Securities issued by corporations:
(i) A corporation organized and operating in the United States with assets more than $500 million.
(ii) The securities are rated “A-1” or its equivalent or better by at least one NRSRO.
(iii) If the issuer has other debt obligations, they must be rated in a rating category of “A” or its equivalent or better by at least one NRSRO. b. Securities issued by other entities:
(i) The issuer is organized within the United States as a special purpose corporation, trust, or limited liability company.
(ii) The securities must have program-wide credit enhancements including, but not limited to, overcollateralization, letters of credit, or a surety bond.
(iii) The securities are rated “A-1” or its equivalent or better by at least one NRSRO.
 No more than 10% of the outstanding commercial paper of any single issuer.
 No more than 25% of the City’s investment assets under management may be invested in Commercial Paper. Under a provision sunsetting on January 1, 2026, no more than 40% of the portfolio may be invested in Commercial Paper if the City’s investment assets under management are greater than $100,000,000.
 No more than 5% of the portfolio may be invested in any single issuer.  The maximum maturity does not exceed 270 days.

5. Negotiable Certificates of deposit issued by nationally or state chartered banks, a savings association or federal savings associations, a state or federal credit union, or by a federally-licensed or statelicensed branch of a foreign bank. Purchases of negotiable certificates of deposit may not exceed 30% of total portfolio. A maturity limitation of five years is applicable. No more than 5% of the portfolio may be invested in any single issuer. The amount of the negotiable certificate of deposit insured up to the FDIC limit does not require any credit ratings. Any amount above the FDIC insured limit must be issued by institutions which have short-term debt obligations rated “A-1” or its equivalent or better by at least one NRSRO; or long-term obligations rated in a rating category of “A” or its equivalent or better by at least one NRSRO.

6. Repurchase agreements that specify terms and conditions may be transacted with banks and broker-dealers. The maturity of the repurchase agreements shall not exceed 90 days. The market value of Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 10, Packet Page 69 8 DRAFT-RESOA_INVESTMENT POLICY.DOCX ATTACHMENT
the securities used as collateral for the repurchase agreements shall be monitored by the investment staff and shall not be allowed to fall below 102% of the value of the repurchase agreement. A PSA Master Repurchase Agreement is required between the City of Monterey and the broker-dealer or financial institution for all repurchase agreements transacted.

7. Local Agency Investment Funds (LAIF), which is a State of Californiamanaged investment pool, may be used up to the maximum permitted by LAIF statutory limits.

8. Time deposits, non-negotiable and collateralized in accordance with the California Government Code, may be purchased through banks or savings and loan associations. Since time deposits are not liquid, no more than 25% of the investment portfolio may be invested in this investment type.

9. Medium Term Corporate Notes, issued by corporations organized and operating within the United States or by depository institutions licensed by the United States or any state and operating within the United States, with a maximum maturity of five years may be purchased.

Securities eligible for investment shall be rated in a rating category of A or its equivalent or better by one NRSRO. Purchase of medium-term notes may not exceed 30% of the market value of the portfolio and no more than 5% of the market value of the portfolio may be invested in notes issued by one corporation.

10.Asset-backed, mortgage-backed, mortgage passthrough securities, and collateralized mortgage obligations from issuers not defined in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Authorized Investments Section of this policy, provided that no more than 20% of the total portfolio may be invested in these securities. The securities must be rated in a rating category of “AA” or its equivalent or better by a NRSRO. No more than 5% of the portfolio may be invested in any single Asset-Backed or Commercial Mortgage security issuer. The maximum legal final maturity does not exceed five (5) years.

11.Mutual funds and Money Market Mutual Funds that are registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Company Act of 1940.
a. Mutual funds that invest in the securities and obligations as authorized under California Government Code, Section 53601 (a) to (k) and (m) to (q) inclusive and that meet either of the following criteria:
i. Attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two (2) NRSROs; or
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 11, Packet Page 70 9 DRAFT-RESOA_INVESTMENT POLICY.DOCX ATTACHMENT
ii. Have retained an investment adviser registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years’ experience investing in the securities and obligations authorized by California Government Code, Section 53601 and with assets under management in excess of $500 million.

No more than 10% of the total portfolio may be invested in the shares of any one Mutual Fund.
b. Money Market Mutual funds registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Company Act of 1940 and issued by diversified management companies and meet either of the following criteria:
i. Have attained the highest ranking or the highest letter and numerical rating provided by not less than two (2) NRSROs; or ii. Have retained an investment adviser registered or exempt from registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission with not less than five years’ experience managing money market mutual funds with assets under management in excess of $500 million.

No more than 20% of the total portfolio may be invested in the shares of any one Money Market Mutual Fund.

12.Supranational securities that are US dollar denominated senior unsecured unsubordinated obligations issued or unconditionally guaranteed by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, International Finance Corporation, or Inter-American Development Bank. The securities are rated in a rating category of “AA” or its equivalent or better by a NRSRO. No more than 30% of the total portfolio may be invested in these securities. No more than 10% of the portfolio may be invested in any single issuer. The maximum maturity may not exceed five (5) years.

13.Municipal securities which include obligations of the City, the State of California and any local agency within the State of California. Municipal securities must be rated in the rating category of “A” or better by at least one NRSRO. No more than 5% of the portfolio may be invested in any single issuer. No more than 30% of the portfolio may be invested in municipal securities. The maximum maturity may not exceed five (5) years.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 12, Packet Page 71

EXHIBIT A
10 14.Municipal securities (registered treasury notes or bonds) of any of the other 49 states in addition to California, including bonds payable solely out of the revenues from a revenue-producing property owned, controlled, or operated by a state or by a department, board, agency, or authority of any of the other 49 states, in addition to California. These securities must be rated in the rating category of “A” or better by at least one NRSRO. No more than 5% of the portfolio may be invested in any single issuer. No more than 30% of the portfolio may be invested in municipal securities. The maximum maturity may not exceed five (5) years.

15.Collateralized bank deposits. City’s deposits with financial institutions will be collateralized with pledged securities per California Government Code, Section 53651. There are no limits on the dollar amount or percentage that the City may invest in collateralized bank deposits Prohibited Investment Vehicles and Practices
Ineligible investments are those that are not described herein, including but not limited to futures, options, and common stocks. Ineligible investments are prohibited from use in this portfolio. In accordance with Government Code section 53601.6, investment in inverse floaters, range notes, or mortgage derived interest-only strips is prohibited. Investment in any security that could result in a zero-interest accrual if held to maturity is prohibited. Under a provision sunsetting on January 1, 2026, securities backed by the U.S.

Government that could result in a zero- or negative-interest accrual if held to maturity are permitted. Trading securities for the sole purpose of speculating on the future direction of interest rates is prohibited. Purchasing or selling securities on margin is prohibited. The use of reverse repurchase agreements, securities lending or any other form of borrowing or leverage is prohibited. The purchase of foreign currency denominated securities is prohibited.

Legislative Changes
Any State of California legislative action that further restricts allowable maturities, investment type, or percentage allocations will be incorporated into the City of Monterey's Investment Policy and supersede any and all previous applicable language.

Interest Earnings
All moneys earned and collected from investments authorized in this policy shall be allocated monthly to the General Fund and various special funds of the City which legally require interest proration or when council action dictates such proration. This distribution will be based on the cash balance in the fund as a Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 13, Packet Page 72

EXHIBIT A
11 percentage of the entire pooled portfolio.

Maximum Maturity
To the extent possible, investments shall be matched with anticipated cash flow requirements and known future liabilities.

The City will not invest in securities maturing more than five (5) years from the date of trade settlement, unless the City Council has by resolution granted authority to make such an investment.

Furthermore, in accordance with Section 53601, an investment’s term or remaining maturity shall be measured from the settlement date to final maturity.

Also, in accordance with California Government Code, the forward settlement date of an investment cannot exceed 45 days from the time of the investment.

Risk Management and Diversification
Mitigating Credit Risk in the Portfolio
Credit risk is the risk that a security or a portfolio will lose some or all its value due to a real or perceived change in the ability of the issuer to repay its debt. The City will mitigate credit risk by adopting the following strategies:
 The diversification requirements included in the “Authorized Investments” section of this policy are designed to mitigate credit risk in the portfolio.
 No more than 5% of the total portfolio may be deposited with or invested in securities issued by any single issuer unless otherwise specified in this policy.
 The City may elect to sell a security prior to its maturity and record a capital gain or loss in order to manage the quality, liquidity or yield of the portfolio in response to market conditions or City’s risk preferences.
 If the credit ratings of any securities owned by the City are downgraded by an NRSRO to a level below the quality required by this investment policy, making the security ineligible for additional purchases, the following steps will be taken:
o Any actions related to the downgrade will be communicated to the City Treasurer in a timely manner.
o If a decision is made to retain the security, the credit situation Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 14, Packet Page 73

EXHIBIT A
12 will be monitored and reported monthly to the City Council.

Mitigating Market Risk in the Portfolio
Market risk is the risk that the portfolio value will fluctuate due to changes in the general level of interest rates. The City recognizes that, over time, longer-term portfolios have the potential to achieve higher returns. On the other hand, longer-term portfolios have higher volatility of return. The City will mitigate market risk by providing adequate liquidity for short-term cash needs, and by making longer-term investments only with funds that are not needed for current cash flow purposes.

The City further recognizes that certain types of securities, including variable rate securities, securities with principal paydowns prior to maturity, and securities with embedded options, will affect the market risk profile of the portfolio differently in different interest rate environments. The City, therefore, adopts the following strategies to control and mitigate its exposure to market risk:
 The City will maintain a minimum of six months of budgeted operating expenditures in short term investments to provide sufficient liquidity for expected disbursements.
 The maximum stated final maturity of individual securities in the portfolio will be five (5) years, except as otherwise stated in this policy.
 The duration of the portfolio will generally be approximately equal to the duration (typically, plus or minus 20%) of a Market Benchmark, an index selected by the City based on the City’s investment objectives, constraints and risk tolerances.

Portfolio Management Activity
The investment program shall seek to augment returns consistent with the intent of this policy, identify risk limitations and prudent investment principals. These objectives will be achieved by use of the following strategies:

Active Portfolio Management - Through active fund and cash flow management taking advantage of current economic and interest rate trends, the portfolio yield may be enhanced with limited and measurable increases in risk by extending the weighted maturity of the total portfolio.

Portfolio Maturity Management - When structuring the maturity composition of the portfolio, the City shall evaluate current and expected interest rate yields and necessary cash flow requirements. It is recognized that in normal market conditions longer maturities produce Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 15, Packet Page 74

EXHIBIT A
13 higher yields. However, the securities with longer maturities also experience greater price fluctuations when the level of interest rates change.

Security Swaps - The City may take advantage of security swap opportunities to improve the overall portfolio yield. A swap which improves the portfolio yield may be selected even if the transactions result in an accounting loss. Documentation for swaps will be included in the City's permanent investment file documents.

Competitive Bidding - It is the policy of the City to require competitive bidding for investment transactions that are not classified as "new issue" securities. For the purchase of non "new issue" securities and the sale of all securities at least three bidders must be contacted. Competitive bidding for security swaps is also suggested, however, it is understood that certain time constraints and broker portfolio limitations exist which would not accommodate the competitive bidding process. If a time or portfolio constraining condition exists, the pricing of the swap should be verified to current market conditions and documented for auditing purposes.

Policy Review
The City of Monterey's investment policy shall be approved by the City Council on an annual basis. This investment policy shall be reviewed at least annually to ensure its consistency with the overall objectives of preservation of principal, liquidity and yield, and its relevance to current law and financial and economic trends. Any amendments to the policy shall be forwarded to the City Council for approval.

Glossary of Investment Terms
AGENCIES. Shorthand market terminology for any obligation issued by a government-sponsored entity (GSE), or a federally related institution. Most obligations of GSEs are not guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the US government. Examples are:

FFCB. The Federal Farm Credit Bank System provides credit and liquidity in the agricultural industry. FFCB issues discount notes and bonds.

FHLB. The Federal Home Loan Bank provides credit and liquidity in the housing market. FHLB issues discount notes and bonds.

FHLMC. Like FHLB, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation provides credit and liquidity in the housing market. FHLMC, also called “Freddie Mac” issues discount notes, bonds and mortgage pass-through securities.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 16, Packet Page 75

EXHIBIT A
14 FNMA. Like FHLB and Freddie Mac, the Federal National Mortgage Association was established to provide credit and liquidity in the housing market. FNMA, also known as “Fannie Mae,” issues discount notes, bonds and mortgage passthrough securities.

GNMA. The Government National Mortgage Association, known as “Ginnie Mae,” issues mortgage pass-through securities, which are guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the US Government.

PEFCO. The Private Export Funding Corporation assists exporters. Obligations of PEFCO are not guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the US government.

TVA. The Tennessee Valley Authority provides flood control and power and promotes development in portions of the Tennessee, Ohio, and Mississippi River valleys. TVA currently issues discount notes and bonds.

ASKED. The price at which a seller offers to sell a security.

ASSET BACKED SECURITIES. Securities supported by pools of installment loans or leases or by pools of revolving lines of credit.

AVERAGE LIFE. In mortgage-related investments, including CMOs, the average time to expected receipt of principal payments, weighted by the amount of principal expected.

BANKER’S ACCEPTANCE. A money market instrument created to facilitate international trade transactions. It is highly liquid and safe because the risk of the trade transaction is transferred to the bank which “accepts” the obligation to pay the investor.

BENCHMARK. A comparison security or portfolio. A performance benchmark is a partial market index, which reflects the mix of securities allowed under a specific investment policy.

BID. The price at which a buyer offers to buy a security.

BROKER. A broker brings buyers and sellers together for a transaction for which the broker receives a commission. A broker does not sell securities from his own position.

CALLABLE. A callable security gives the issuer the option to call it from the investor prior to its maturity. The main cause of a call is a decline in interest rates. If interest rates decline since an issuer issues securities, it will likely call its current securities and reissue them at a lower rate of interest. Callable securities have reinvestment risk as the investor may receive its principal back when interest rates are lower than when the investment was initially made.

CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT (CD). A time deposit with a specific maturity Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 17, Packet Page 76

EXHIBIT A
15 evidenced by a certificate. Large denomination CDs may be marketable.

CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT ACCOUNT REGISTRY SYSTEM (CDARS). A private placement service that allows local agencies to purchase more than $250,000 in CDs from a single financial institution (must be a participating institution of CDARS) while still maintaining FDIC insurance coverage. CDARS is currently the only entity providing this service. CDARS facilitates the trading of deposits between the California institution and other participating institutions in amounts that are less than $250,000 each, so that FDIC coverage is maintained.

COLLATERAL. Securities or cash pledged by a borrower to secure repayment of a loan or repurchase agreement. Also, securities pledged by a financial institution to secure deposits of public monies.

COLLATERALIZED MORTGAGE OBLIGATIONS (CMO). Classes of bonds that redistribute the cash flows of mortgage securities (and whole loans) to create securities that have different levels of prepayment risk, as compared to the underlying mortgage securities.

COMMERCIAL PAPER. The short-term unsecured debt of corporations.

COST YIELD. The annual income from an investment divided by the purchase cost. Because it does not give effect to premiums and discounts which may have been included in the purchase cost, it is an incomplete measure of return.

COUPON. The rate of return at which interest is paid on a bond.

CREDIT RISK. The risk that principal and/or interest on an investment will not be paid in a timely manner due to changes in the condition of the issuer.

CURRENT YIELD. The annual income from an investment divided by the current market value. Since the mathematical calculation relies on the current market value rather than the investor’s cost, current yield is unrelated to the actual return the investor will earn if the security is held to maturity.

DEALER. A dealer acts as a principal in security transactions, selling securities from and buying securities for his own position.

DEBENTURE. A bond secured only by the general credit of the issuer.

DELIVERY VS. PAYMENT (DVP). A securities industry procedure whereby payment for a security must be made at the time the security is delivered to the purchaser’s agent.

DERIVATIVE. Any security that has principal and/or interest payments which are subject to uncertainty (but not for reasons of default or credit risk) as to timing and/or amount, or any security which represents a component of another Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 18, Packet Page 77

EXHIBIT A
16 security which has been separated from other components (“Stripped” coupons and principal). A derivative is also defined as a financial instrument the value of which is totally or partially derived from the value of another instrument, interest rate, or index.

DISCOUNT. The difference between the par value of a bond and the cost of the bond, when the cost is below par. Some short-term securities, such as T-bills and banker’s acceptances, are known as discount securities. They sell at a discount from par and return the par value to the investor at maturity without additional interest. Other securities, which have fixed coupons, trade at a discount when the coupon rate is lower than the current market rate for securities of that maturity and/or quality.

DIVERSIFICATION. Dividing investment funds among a variety of investments to avoid excessive exposure to any one source of risk.

DURATION. The weighted average time to maturity of a bond where the weights are the present values of the future cash flows. Duration measures the price sensitivity of a bond to changes in interest rates. (See modified duration).

FEDERAL FUNDS RATE. The rate of interest charged by banks for short-term loans to other banks. The Federal Reserve Bank through open-market operations establishes it.

FEDERAL OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE. A committee of the Federal Reserve Board that establishes monetary policy and executes it through temporary and permanent changes to the supply of bank reserves.

LEVERAGE. Borrowing funds in order to invest in securities that have the potential to pay earnings at a rate higher than the cost of borrowing.

LIQUIDITY. The speed and ease with which an asset can be converted to cash.

LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF). A voluntary investment fund open to government entities and certain non-profit organizations in California that is managed by the State Treasurer’s Office.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT POOL. Investment pools that range from the State Treasurer’s Office Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) to county pools, to Joint Powers Authorities (JPAs). These funds are not subject to the same SEC rules applicable to money market mutual funds.

MAKE WHOLE CALL. A type of call provision on a bond that allows the issuer to pay off the remaining debt early. Unlike a call option, with a make whole call provision, the issuer makes a lump sum payment that equals the net present value (NPV) of future coupon payments that will not be paid because of the call.

With this type of call, an investor is compensated, or "made whole." Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 19, Packet Page 78

EXHIBIT A
17 MARGIN. The difference between the market value of a security and the loan a broker makes using that security as collateral.

MARKET RISK. The risk that the value of securities will fluctuate with changes in overall market conditions or interest rates.

MARKET VALUE. The price at which a security can be traded.

MARKING TO MARKET. The process of posting current market values for securities in a portfolio.

MATURITY. The final date upon which the principal of a security becomes due and payable.

MEDIUM TERM NOTES. Unsecured, investment-grade senior debt securities of major corporations which are sold in relatively small amounts on either a continuous or an intermittent basis. MTNs are highly flexible debt instruments that can be structured to respond to market opportunities or to investor preferences.

MODIFIED DURATION. The percent change in price for a 100 basis point change in yields. Modified duration is the best single measure of a portfolio’s or security’s exposure to market risk.

MONEY MARKET. The market in which short-term debt instruments (T-bills, discount notes, commercial paper, and banker’s acceptances) are issued and traded.

MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH SECURITIES. A securitized participation in the interest and principal cash flows from a specified pool of mortgages. Principal and interest payments made on the mortgages are passed through to the holder of the security.

MUNICIPAL SECURITIES. Securities issued by state and local agencies to finance capital and operating expenses.

MUTUAL FUND. An entity which pools the funds of investors and invests those funds in a set of securities which is specifically defined in the fund’s prospectus.

Mutual funds can be invested in various types of domestic and/or international stocks, bonds, and money market instruments, as set forth in the individual fund’s prospectus. For most large, institutional investors, the costs associated with investing in mutual funds are higher than the investor can obtain through an individually managed portfolio.

NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED STATISTICAL RATING ORGANIZATION
(NRSRO).

A credit rating agency that the Securities and Exchange Commission in the Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 20, Packet Page 79

EXHIBIT A
18 United States uses for regulatory purposes. Credit rating agencies provide assessments of an investment's risk. The issuers of investments, especially debt securities, pay credit rating agencies to provide them with ratings. The three most prominent NRSROs are Fitch, S&P, and Moody's.

NEGOTIABLE CD. A short-term debt instrument that pays interest and is issued by a bank, savings or federal association, state or federal credit union, or statelicensed branch of a foreign bank. Negotiable CDs are traded in a secondary market and are payable upon order to the bearer or initial depositor (investor).

PREMIUM. The difference between the par value of a bond and the cost of the bond, when the cost is above par.

PREPAYMENT SPEED. A measure of how quickly principal is repaid to investors in mortgage securities.

PREPAYMENT WINDOW. The time period over which principal repayments will be received on mortgage securities at a specified prepayment speed.

PRIMARY DEALER. A financial institution (1) that is a trading counterparty with the Federal Reserve in its execution of market operations to carry out U.S. monetary policy, and (2) that participates for statistical reporting purposes in compiling data on activity in the U.S. Government securities market.

PRUDENT PERSON (PRUDENT INVESTOR) RULE. A standard of
responsibility which applies to fiduciaries. In California, the rule is stated as “Investments shall be managed with the care, skill, prudence and diligence, under the circumstances then prevailing, that a prudent person, acting in a like capacity and familiar with such matters, would use in the conduct of an enterprise of like character and with like aims to accomplish similar purposes.” REALIZED YIELD. The change in value of the portfolio due to interest received and interest earned and realized gains and losses. It does not give effect to changes in market value on securities, which have not been sold from the portfolio.

REGIONAL DEALER. A financial intermediary that buys and sells securities for the benefit of its customers without maintaining substantial inventories of securities and that is not a primary dealer.

REPURCHASE AGREEMENT. Short-term purchases of securities with a simultaneous agreement to sell the securities back at a higher price. From the seller’s point of view, the same transaction is a reverse repurchase agreement.

SAFEKEEPING. A service to bank customers whereby securities are held by the bank in the customer’s name.

STRUCTURED NOTE. A complex, fixed income instrument, which pays interest, Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 21, Packet Page 80

EXHIBIT A
19 based on a formula tied to other interest rates, commodities or indices.

Examples include inverse floating rate notes which have coupons that increase when other interest rates are falling, and which fall when other interest rates are rising, and "dual index floaters," which pay interest based on the relationship between two other interest rates - for example, the yield on the ten-year Treasury note minus the Libor rate. Issuers of such notes lock in a reduced cost of borrowing by purchasing interest rate swap agreements.

SUPRANATIONAL. A Supranational is a multi-national organization whereby member states transcend national boundaries or interests to share in the decision making to promote economic development in the member countries.

TOTAL RATE OF RETURN. A measure of a portfolio’s performance over time. It is the internal rate of return, which equates the beginning value of the portfolio with the ending value; it includes interest earnings, realized and unrealized gains, and losses in the portfolio.

U.S. TREASURY OBLIGATIONS. Securities issued by the U.S. Treasury and backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Treasuries are considered to have no credit risk and are the benchmark for interest rates on all other securities in the US and overseas. The Treasury issues both discounted securities and fixed coupon notes and bonds.

TREASURY BILLS. All securities issued with initial maturities of one year or less are issued as discounted instruments and are called Treasury bills. The Treasury currently issues three- and six-month T-bills at regular weekly auctions. It also issues “cash management” bills as needed to smooth out cash flows.

TREASURY NOTES. All securities issued with initial maturities of two to ten years are called Treasury notes and pay interest semi-annually.

TREASURY BONDS. All securities issued with initial maturities greater than ten years are called Treasury bonds. Like Treasury notes, they pay interest semiannually.

VOLATILITY. The rate at which security prices change with changes in general economic conditions or the general level of interest rates.

YIELD TO MATURITY. The annualized internal rate of return on an investment which equates the expected cash flows from the investment to its cost.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 10., Item Page 22, Packet Page 81 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Marissa Garcia, Engineering Assistant
SUBJECT: Authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Letter of Support on Behalf of the City of Monterey for the California Department of Transportation to the Active Transportation Program (ATP) Grant Application for the Seaside State Route 218 Complete Streets Project (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign a letter on behalf of the City of Monterey supporting the Application by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to the Active Transportation Program (ATP) Grant for the Seaside State Route 218 Complete Streets Project.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

Recognize that City government’s role is to provide core services to the public, and partnerships with nonprofit, military, business, and other government agencies can be an effective means of supporting the public good.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The grant application for the Seaside State Route 218 Complete Streets Project submitted by Caltrans would support regional efforts to improve transportation safety and access for people of all modes and abilities.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no fiscal implications with the City Council authorizing the Mayor to sign the letter.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 11., Item Page 1, Packet Page 82 №10/24
the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose not to support this letter.

DISCUSSION:

The Active Transportation Program (ATP) is a competitive statewide program created to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation, such as biking and walking. Senate Bill 99 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review, Chapter 359, Statutes of 2013) and Assembly Bill 101 (Committee on Budget, Chapter 354, Statutes of 2013) created the ATP, and Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) (Beall, Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017) directs additional funding from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account to the ATP.

The City of Monterey supports Caltrans’s application for the Seaside State Route 218 Complete Streets Project will implement new bicycle and pedestrian enhancements to accommodate all transportation modes. Project elements include, but are not limited to, narrowing vehicle travel lanes, striping buffered bike lanes, adding green bicycle striping at intersections, sidewalks, pedestrian refuge medians, bus pullouts, and enhancements at three main intersections. The Project will enhance safety, accessibility, and health for all users of the roadway, primarily the underserved residents of the Seaside community. This project also improves bicycle and pedestrian access for the nearby City of Monterey residents who utilize State Route 218.

Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Improvements to State Route 218 will provide significant safety and mobility improvements not only to Seaside residents but also to all Monterey County residents. This includes many City of Monterey residents who utilize State Route 218 for shopping, recreation, or commuting to work. This project is consistent with the region’s collaborative efforts to improve regional bicycle and pedestrian projects, including the support for the Fort Ord Regional Trail and Greenway and the North Fremont Gap Closure Project.

This letter would be signed by the Mayor on behalf of the City and addressed to Executive Director Tanisha Taylor of the California Transportation Commission.

AR/mg
Attachments: 1. Draft Letter of Support
e: Andrew Easterling, City Engineer
Mari Stusser, Caltrans District 5 Transportation Planner 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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 11., Item Page 2, Packet Page 83

ATTACHMENT
CITY HALL • MONTEREY • CALIFORNIA • 93940 • 831.646.3760 Website • www.monterey.org
June 4, 2024
Executive Director Tanisha Taylor
California Transportation Commission
1120 N Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Subject: Letter of Support for the Active Transportation Program (ATP) Grant Application for the Seaside State Route 218 Complete Streets Project Dear Director Taylor:

The City of Monterey supports the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) application to the 2025 Active Transportation Program (ATP) Cycle 7 for the Seaside State Route 218 Complete Streets Project. Caltrans is requesting $13.332 million in ATP grant funds to complete project development and construction of the project.

The Seaside State Route 218 Complete Streets Project will implement new bicycle and pedestrian enhancements to accommodate all transportation modes. Project elements include, but are not limited to narrowing vehicle travel lanes, striping buffered bike lanes, adding green bicycle striping at intersections, sidewalks, pedestrian refuge medians, bus pullouts, and enhancements at three main intersections. The Project will enhance safety, accessibility, and health for all users of the roadway, primarily the underserved residents of the Seaside community.

Pedestrian, Bicycle and Transit Improvements to State Route 218 will provide significant safety and mobility improvements not only to Seaside residents, but also to all Monterey County residents. This includes many City of Monterey Residents who utilize State Route 218 for shopping, recreation or commuting to work. This project is consistent with the region’s collaborative efforts to improve regional bicycle and pedestrian projects.

We greatly appreciate the California Transportation Commission’s consideration of the Seaside State Route 218 Complete Streets Projects application for ATP Cycle 7 funding. This project will implement Complete Streets features to reduce vehicle roadway speeds, protect pedestrian and bicycle movement, and improve equitable access for all.

Sincerely,
Mayor Tyller Williamson
On behalf of the Monterey City Council
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 11., Item Page 3, Packet Page 84 Council
Agenda Report
№09/24
FROM: Andrea Renny, PE, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Tom Harty, PE, Senior Engineer
SUBJECT: Open a Public Hearing to Receive Protests of Proposed Rates Effective July 1, 2024, for Wastewater (Sewer) Rates, and Adopt a Resolution Increasing Rates if a Majority Protest Does Not Exist (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council open a public hearing, consider all protests against the proposed rates, and adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment 1) establishing new wastewater collection rates if a majority protest is not established.

VALUE DRIVERS:

Protect and preserve our natural environment by addressing climate change through ecologically responsible and pragmatic solutions, including protecting the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and our environmental assets from pollution.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action is consistent with prior action by the City Council and is consistent with the City Council’s strategic initiatives, one of which is to “update the storm drain utility, sanitary sewer and pavement maintenance needs and financing mechanism.” It is also consistent with the strategic initiative “Ensure long term revenue / expenditure balance in the City’s operating budget and develop an infrastructure re-capitalization strategy.” Proposition 218 Requirements:

The substantive provisions of Article XIII D appear in Section 6, Subdivisions (b)(1)-(5) of the California Constitution, which require a property-related fee to satisfy these standards:

1. Revenues derived from the fee or charge must not exceed the funds required to provide the property-related service;
Date: 6/4/2024
Item No.: 12.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 12., Item Page 1, Packet Page 85

2. Revenue derived from the fee or charge must not be used for any purpose other than that for which the fee is imposed;

3. The amount of a fee or charge imposed upon any parcel or person as an incident of property ownership must not exceed the proportional cost of the service attributable to the parcel;

4. The fee or charge may not be imposed for a service unless the service is actually used by, or immediately available to, the owner of the property subject to the fee or charge; fees or charges based on potential or future use of a service are not permitted, and stand-by charges must be classified as assessments subject to the ballot protest and proportionality requirements for assessments; and

5. No fee or charge may be imposed for general governmental services, such as police, fire, ambulance, or libraries, where the service is available to the public in substantially the same manner as it is to property owners.

Procedurally, Proposition 218 requires that notices of a proposed rate increase be mailed to all property owners in the affected area, and that a public hearing be held not less than 45 days after the mailing.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The current sewer rates are inadequate to pay for the cost to operate and maintain the sewer system by approximately $400,000 per year. The recommended rate adjustment will help to recover the cost of service, maintenance, and future improvements of the enterprise fund for wastewater. These actions are in line with the City’s strategic priorities of managing revenues and expenditures, and to consider appropriate revenue enhancements to support City services and operations, and to prioritize funding models and sources for facility rehabilitation, repair, and replacement.

The City’s consultant determined that the City’s sewer system requires significant capital improvements and rehabilitation to prevent sewer backups, spills, and regulatory fines. The cash flow projections indicate loans are needed to finance upfront capital costs. To obtain loan funding, the City must increase rates to meet its additional debt service requirements. (Rate Study, Executive Summary, page 2.)
The cost of preparing and mailing the Proposition 218 notices is included in the Consultant’s scope of services for the Sewer Utility and Master Plan and Rate Study Capital Improvement Project.

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 Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 12., Item Page 2, Packet Page 86 CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Council could choose not to set rates as recommended in the attached Resolution or could return the issue to staff for further review and evaluation, but this is not recommended.

Delaying implementation of the rate adjustments will further limit the revenue available for the operation and maintenance of the wastewater collection system. A rate adjustment is necessary to bring rates in line with funding needs, to help eliminate budget deficits, and to comply with state-mandated permit requirements.

DISCUSSION:

Background
In 2022, the City Council approved retaining a consultant to develop a wastewater financing plan and rate study. Key objectives of the rate study were to:
• Develop long-term financial projections for the wastewater enterprise, including operations, maintenance, debt, and capital improvement costs; • Determine rate revenue requirement sufficient to provide service and generate adequate funding for capital needs;
• Conduct a cost-of-service study to determine the ratepayer share of expenses attributable to each customer class; and
• Recommend wastewater rates designed to equitably recover the costs of providing service in compliance with Proposition 218.

Based on input from City staff, vital guiding principles included developing rates that:
• Are fair and equitable to all customer classes;
• Recover the costs of providing service and generate adequate funding for capital needs; • Are easy to understand and implement; and
• Comply with the legal requirements of Proposition 218 and other California laws Sewer Line Maintenance Fund: Significant Shortfall Projected In Fiscal Year 2021-22, the Sewer Line Maintenance Fund had $2,431,727 in expenditures and $2,048,989 in revenue, which was a $382,738 shortfall. Final numbers for Fiscal Year 2022-23 are not yet available, but, as of February 2024, the projected shortfall is estimated over $400,000. In recent years, the Sewer Line Maintenance Fund has had increasing costs over time without proportional revenue increases, resulting in a structural deficit and general fund subsidies. The shortfall is a result of multiple factors that necessitated additional operations and maintenance tasks to be implemented annually, and increasing equipment, materials, and labor costs that are needed to meet the operations, maintenance, repair, and regulatory demands of utility ownership in California.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 12., Item Page 3, Packet Page 87 Net Revenue and Expenses (Shortfall)
FY 2017 $ 988,112
FY 2018 $ 892,970
FY 2019 ($1,079,027)
FY 2020 ($ 654,844)
FY 2021 $ 1,247,357
FY 2022 ($ 399,809)
FY 2023 ($ 67,018)
FY 2024 ($ 544,000) projected shortfall
Sewer Rates and Fees Not Adjusted in Over 13 Years
The City of Monterey last adjusted its sewer rates and fees in 2011, including annual stepped rate increases for five years through 2015 that generated the revenue needed to maintain and operate its sewer collection system and fund citywide utility repair and rehabilitation needs. City monthly sewer rates have remained flat at 2015 rates for eight years, even as the costs of utility ownership and operation have increased over this time. The 2011 rate adjustments were necessary to augment the cost of the anticipated citywide sewer collection system rehabilitation project, which was financed by two (2) low-interest Clean Water State Revolving Fund Program loans in coordination with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). These loans are currently in repayment.

The citywide Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project was completed in 2019. Overall, the project made significant improvements to the wastewater collection system by rehabilitating those structures in greatest need for repair. The result has been a demonstrable reduction in sewage overflows from the system and better protection of the environment citywide. Even so, Monterey’s wastewater collection system requires sustained revenue to support the everincreasing maintenance and repair demands of an aging collection system to ensure its longterm operational viability and remain in compliance with State sewer system regulations. To this end, a utility must generate sufficient revenue over time to fund all necessary needs and actions to remain in good working order and remain in compliance with applicable water quality regulations.

In 2019, the City began developing a detailed Sewer Utility Master Plan that analyzes the City’s wastewater collection system to identify inadequacies and plan for projects to resolve them for future conditions. The Sewer Utility Master Plan assesses the impact of future scenarios and identifies projects that can be undertaken within the next 10 years to address system inadequacies. Concurrently with the development of the Sewer Utility Master Plan, the City began developing the Wastewater Rate and Capacity Fee Study which looks at the expected level of effort needed over the next 10 years to meet the financial obligation expected. The Wastewater Rate and Capacity Fee Study identifies the monthly rates and fees necessary to generate the revenue needed to meet the City’s capital and operating expenses for the next five (5) years, as allowed under the California Proposition 218 process.

Potential Sewer Rate Increase Does Not Impact M1W Shift to Property Tax Billing In parallel, Monterey One Water (M1W) has also undertaken a process to adopt a new ordinance which includes, among other items, changes to its collection of revenue for operating their regional collection system and the Monterey Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant. M1W will begin a new property tax roll billing process on July 1, 2024 to bill its ratepayers annually for their services through the County of Monterey’s Property Tax collection process. Invoices for 12 Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 12., Item Page 4, Packet Page 88 months of service will be included on the property tax bill for all parcels that M1W serves.

M1W’s current bi-monthly billing cycle will cease on June 30, 2024. The City of Monterey also intends to move to property tax collection; this item will be heard separately on July 16, 2024.

Subsequently, as a member agency of M1W, the City of Monterey must provide any rate adjustments to M1W by mid-June 2024 to allow time for processing the invoices by M1W and the Monterey County Treasurer-Tax Collector. M1W staff in 2023 and again in March 2024 stated that member agencies such as the City of Monterey can adjust their rates in 2024 with no adverse or negative effects on M1W’s efforts to shift to property tax billing. M1W staff is fully aware and engaged with City staff to prepare for a potential sewer rate increase, should the City Council support it.

Proposed Rates
The proposed funding is intended to bridge the gap between expected operating expenses and predicted revenue that begins in fiscal year 2024/25 (FY25). In FY25, adjusted monthly rates will meet the 10-year Renewal and Replacement costs (R&R). In FYs 26 – 29, in addition to R&R costs, rates will include the costs of implementing system modifications to address sea level rise predictions through 2030.

PROPOSED MONTHLY RESIDENTIAL SEWER RATES
Current
Rate
(FY2024)
Proposed
Rate
(FY2025)
Proposed
Rate
(FY2026)
Proposed
Rate
(FY2027)
Proposed
Rate
(FY2028)
Proposed
Rate
(FY2029)
SFR: $ 10.77 $ 14.11 $ 16.93 $ 19.47 $ 21.42 $ 22.92
Change: 3.34 2.82 2.54 1.95 1.50
MFR: $ 7.88 $ 10.33 $ 12.40 $ 14.26 $ 15.68 $ 16.78
Change: 2.45 2.07 1.86 1.42 1.10
Note: SFR: Single-Family Residential; MFR: Multi-Family Residential Survey of Local Sewer Monthly User Charges - Single-Family Residential Salinas Monterey
(current)
Monterey
proposed
Seaside,
DRO,
Sand City
Marina
Coast
WDMarina
Pacific
Grove
Carmel
Area WW
District
Marina
Coast
WDFort Ord
City: $ 5.45 $ 10.77 $ 14.11 $ 16.52 $ 17.98 $ 33.07 - $ 43.15 M1W: $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 $ 44.00 - $ 44.00 Total: $ 49.45 $ 54.77 $ 58.11 $ 60.52 $ 61.98 $ 77.07 $ 88.83 $ 87.15 Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 12., Item Page 5, Packet Page 89 At its meeting on April 2, 2024, the City Council considered several scenarios to address future system funding needs. After deliberation, Council supported increasing the rates to generate the funding needed to operate the system, while being mindful of not increasing rates excessively for ratepayers.

Sewer Rate Adjustment - Adoption Schedule (2024)
March 19 At the City Council meeting, the Draft Sewer Utility Master Plan and Draft 2024 Wastewater Rate and Capacity Fee Study were introduced April 2 At the City Council meeting, Council: received a report on the Sewer Utility Master Plan; received a report on the Wastewater Rate and Capacity Fee Study; and directed staff to initiate the property owner notice, hearing, and protest process as required by Proposition 218 April 19 Proposition 218 Rate Adjustment Notices were mailed to owners of property served by the City wastewater (sewer) collection system June 4 At the City Council meeting: if a majority protest is not established, Council will consider establishing new wastewater rates July 1 Effective date of new wastewater rates
Public Noticing Requirements
The California Constitution requires: (1) notice; (2) a public hearing; and (3) a protest process before increasing the rate of a property-related fee. In accordance with Proposition 218, notices of the proposed rates were mailed on April 19, 2024 to the owner of each parcel whose name and address appears on the last equalized secured property tax assessment roll or in the case of any public entity, the State of California, or the United States, to the address of that entity known to the City (Government Code section 53750(j)).

A majority protest exists if at least 50% plus one vote of representatives from affected parcels file written protests. The Notice was mailed out to the property owners of 9,038 parcels that are served by the City’s wastewater collection system. Therefore, 4,520 protest votes would establish a majority protest resulting in the rates not increasing. Each property will be counted as one vote, regardless of the number of owners. Only one protest per property will be accepted. Written protests must be received at or before the time set for the public hearing.

Procedure
Ballots remain sealed until the protest hearing. Once public testimony is closed, ballots will no longer be accepted. At the conclusion of the public hearing, an impartial person designated by the agency who does not have a vested interest in the outcome of the proposed will tabulate the ballots.

Summary
Staff recommends that the City Council open a public hearing, receive public comments and protests, and consider adopting the attached Resolution (Attachment 1) establishing new wastewater (sewer) rates if a majority protest is not established.

AR/th
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 12., Item Page 6, Packet Page 90 Attachments:

1. Proposed Resolution

2. Exhibit A – Rate Schedule
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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 12., Item Page 7, Packet Page 91 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№010/23
SETTING RATES EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2024 FOR WASTEWATER (SEWER) RATES WHEREAS, Monterey City Code (MCC) Section 19-103 lists services provided by the City and the percentage of the cost of the services that are to be recovered and adopted as a fee;
WHEREAS, for Fiscal year 2021-22, the Sewer Line Maintenance Fund (279) had $2,431,727.00 in expenditures and $2,048,989.00 in revenue, which was a $382,738.00 shortfall;
WHEREAS, final numbers for fiscal years 2022-23 and 2023-24 are not yet available, but, as of February 2024, the projected shortfall is estimated over $400,000.00 per year; WHEREAS, Proposition 218 requires that fees cannot exceed the cost of service, must be fair and equitable, and are based on the actual cost of providing the entire service. Each customer must be charged their proportional cost of service attributable to the customer; WHEREAS, the California Constitution requires (1) notice; (2) a public hearing; and (3) a protest process before increasing the rate of a property-related fee; WHEREAS, the City desires to adjust the wastewater rates it charges to recover the cost of service, maintenance and future improvements of the City wastewater collection system; WHEREAS, Bartle Wells Associates conducted a 2024 Wastewater Rate and Capacity Fee Study to develop proposed rates to recover costs and the proposed rates are based on that fee study;
WHEREAS, revenue derived from the fee will not be used for any purpose other than that for which the fee is imposed;
WHEREAS, the rates imposed upon any parcel or person as an incident of property ownership must not exceed the proportional cost of the service attributable to the parcel; WHEREAS, the wastewater (sewer) rates are not imposed unless used by, or immediately available to, the owner of the property subject to the fee or charge; WHEREAS, pursuant to Proposition 218, a notice of the proposed rate increase was mailed on April 19, 2024 to all affected parcels;
WHEREAS, on June 4, 2024, the City held a public hearing to consider all protests against the proposed rate increase;
WHEREAS, the total number of written protests presented by the close of the public hearing was less than 50% plus one of the total number of property owners subject to the rate and fee increases; and
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 12., Item Page 8, Packet Page 92 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. 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 adopts the attached Wastewater Collection System Rate Schedule in Exhibit A hereto and that said rates shall become effective on July 1, 2024, and that all previous conflicting resolutions are hereby rescinded.

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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 12., Item Page 9, Packet Page 93

EXHIBIT A
CITY OF MONTEREY – WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM

RATE SCHEDULE
1 Single-Family Residential Sewer Charge
The proposed single-family dwelling (SFD) sewer charges are based on the estimated sewage generated by an Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) which is 189 gallons per day (gpd). The following table outlines the monthly single-family residential sewer charge:

MONTHLY SFD SEWER CHARGE
Current 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29
Residential $10.77 $14.11 $16.93 $19.47 $21.42 $22.92
Monthly Increase $3.34 $2.82 $2.54 $1.95 $1.50
Multi-Family Residential and Condominium Sewer Charge
The proposed multi-family dwelling (MFD) sewer charges, including condominium units, are based on sewerage generated, which has been calculated to be 73.22% of 189 gpd. The following table outlines the monthly multi-residential and condominium sewer charge, per dwelling unit:

PROPOSED MONTHLY MFD SEWER CHARGE
Current 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29
Residential $7.88 $10.32 $12.38 $14.24 $15.66 $16.76
Monthly Increase $2.44 $2.06 $1.86 $1.42 $1.10
Non-Residential Sewer Charge
The proposed non-residential sewer charges will vary based on sewage generated by customer type.

Non-residential sewer charges will be converted to an equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) cost using sewage flow estimates. One residential EDU is equivalent to 189 gallons per day (gpd) of flow. The monthly non-residential sewer charges will be calculated based on the following formula:
- Daily flow / 189 gpd = Total Number of EDUs (to 2 decimal places) - Total Number of EDUs x Monthly EDU Rate = Monthly Non-Residential Sewer charge The proposed non-residential sewer charges listed below are per one unit of sewer charge. For special user or categories not listed, call the City for an individual determination.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 12., Item Page 10, Packet Page 94

EXHIBIT A
CITY OF MONTEREY – WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEM

RATE SCHEDULE
2 NOTIFICATION OF STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
Pursuant to Government Code section 53759, there is a 120-day statute of limitations for challenging any increased fee or charge.

DESCRIPTION UNITS Current 7/1/2024 7/1/2025 7/1/2026 7/1/2027 7/1/2028 Business/Government (1-10 employees) Location/Each Business $8.29 $10.86 $13.03 $14.98 $16.48 $17.63 Business/Government (11-20 employees) Location/Each Business $16.59 $21.73 $26.08 $29.99 $32.99 $35.30 Business/Government (21-30 employees) Location/Each Business $24.99 $32.74 $39.29 $45.18 $49.70 $53.18 Business/Government (31-40 employees) Location/Each Business $33.28 $43.60 $52.32 $60.17 $66.19 $70.82 Business/Government (41-50 employees) Location/Each Business $41.57 $54.46 $65.35 $75.15 $82.67 $88.46 Business/Government (51-60 employees) Location/Each Business $49.87 $65.33 $78.40 $90.16 $99.18 $106.12 Business/Government (61-70 employees) Location/Each Business $58.27 $76.33 $91.60 $105.34 $115.87 $123.98 Business/Government (71-80 employees) Location/Each Business $66.56 $87.19 $104.63 $120.32 $132.35 $141.61 Business/Government (81-90 employees) Location/Each Business $74.85 $98.05 $117.66 $135.31 $148.84 $159.26 Business/Government (91-100 employees) Location/Each Business $83.14 $108.91 $130.69 $150.29 $165.32 $176.89 Business/Government (101-110 employees) Location/Each Business $91.55 $119.93 $143.92 $165.51 $182.06 $194.80 Business/Government (111-120 employees) Location/Each Business $99.84 $130.79 $156.95 $180.49 $198.54 $212.44 Business/Government (141-150 employees) Location/Each Business $124.82 $163.51 $196.21 $225.64 $248.20 $265.57 Business/Government (171-180 employees) Location/Each Business $149.70 $196.11 $235.33 $270.63 $297.69 $318.53 Business/Government (181-190 employees) Location/Each Business $158.10 $207.11 $248.53 $285.81 $314.39 $336.40 Business/Government (210-220 employees) Location/Each Business $182.98 $239.70 $287.64 $330.79 $363.87 $389.34 Business/Government (271-280 employees) Location/Each Business $232.52 $304.60 $365.52 $420.35 $462.39 $494.76 Business/Government (721-730 employees) Location/Each Business $607.32 $795.59 $954.71 $1,097.92 $1,207.71 $1,292.25 Hotel/Motel Each Room $4.63 $6.07 $7.28 $8.37 $9.21 $9.85 Supermarket Each Location $45.45 $59.54 $71.45 $82.17 $90.39 $96.72 Medical Office Each Licensed Physician $11.09 $14.53 $17.44 $20.06 $22.07 $23.61 Dental Office Each Licensed Dentist $15.29 $20.03 $24.04 $27.65 $30.42 $32.55 Rest Home/Convalescent Each Bed of Licensed Capacity $3.12 $4.09 $4.91 $5.65 $6.22 $6.66 Animal Hospital Location/Each Licensed Business $20.79 $27.23 $32.68 $37.58 $41.34 $44.23 Restaurant - 1 Meal/day Each Restaurant Seat $0.43 $0.56 $0.67 $0.77 $0.85 $0.91 Restaurant - 2 Meals/day Each Restaurant Seat $0.65 $0.85 $1.02 $1.17 $1.29 $1.38 Restaurant - 3 Meals/day Each Restaurant Seat $1.18 $1.55 $1.86 $2.14 $2.35 $2.51 Restaurant with Bar Each Restaurant Seat $1.18 $1.55 $1.86 $2.14 $2.35 $2.51 Bar Location/Each Business $18.09 $23.70 $28.44 $32.71 $35.98 $38.50 Night Club Location/Each Business $54.17 $70.96 $85.15 $97.92 $107.71 $115.25 Take-Out Small Location/Each Business $20.14 $26.38 $31.66 $36.41 $40.05 $42.85 Take-Out Medium Location/Each Business $49.65 $65.04 $78.05 $89.76 $98.74 $105.65 Take-Out Large Location/Each Business $90.47 $118.52 $142.22 $163.55 $179.91 $192.50 Bakery Location/Each Business $16.37 $21.44 $25.73 $29.59 $32.55 $34.83 Theatre Per screen @ each Location $26.82 $35.13 $42.16 $48.48 $53.33 $57.06 Gym - 500 Members Location/Each Business $8.29 $10.86 $13.03 $14.98 $16.48 $17.63 Mortuary Location/Each Business $22.08 $28.92 $34.70 $39.91 $43.90 $46.97 School - Minimum Location/Each Business $8.29 $10.86 $13.03 $14.98 $16.48 $17.63 School - Pre-Grade 6 School Population $0.11 $0.14 $0.17 $0.20 $0.22 $0.24 School - Grade 7 - College School Population $0.22 $0.29 $0.35 $0.40 $0.44 $0.47 School - Boarding School Population $2.26 $2.96 $3.55 $4.08 $4.49 $4.80 Instructional Facility School Population $8.29 $10.86 $13.03 $14.98 $16.48 $17.63 Church - 1-100 Members Location/Each Business $8.29 $10.86 $13.03 $14.98 $16.48 $17.63 Church - Over 100 Members Location/Each Business $16.59 $21.73 $26.08 $29.99 $32.99 $35.30 Photo Developer Location/Each Business $8.29 $10.86 $13.03 $14.98 $16.48 $17.63 Laboratory - 10 Employees Location/Each Business $8.29 $10.86 $13.03 $14.98 $16.48 $17.63 Laboratory - 20 Employees Location/Each Business $16.59 $21.73 $26.08 $29.99 $32.99 $35.30 Printer - 10 Employees Location/Each Business $8.29 $10.86 $13.03 $14.98 $16.48 $17.63 Printer - 20 Employees Location/Each Business $16.59 $21.73 $26.08 $29.99 $32.99 $35.30 Garage/Repair Location/Each Business $7.97 $10.44 $12.53 $14.41 $15.85 $16.96 Paint Shop - 10 Employees Location/Each Business $8.29 $10.86 $13.03 $14.98 $16.48 $17.63 Paint Shop - 20 Employees Location/Each Business $16.59 $21.73 $26.08 $29.99 $32.99 $35.30 Dry Cleaner Location/Each Business $27.57 $36.12 $43.34 $49.84 $54.82 $58.66 Laundromat Each Washing Machine $7.22 $9.46 $11.35 $13.05 $14.36 $15.37

PROPOSED MONTHLY SEWER CHARGES
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 12., Item Page 11, Packet Page 95 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Andrew Miller, Fire Chief
Prepared By: Cheryl Kouretas, Senior Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: Adopt the Community Wildfire Protection Plan Completed for the Cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea (Exempt from CEQA per Article 18, Section 15262)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council pass a resolution adopting the Community Wildfire Protection Plan.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This Community Wildfire Protection Plan is consistent with the City Council’s Vision and Strategic Initiative of “Working to improve the quality of life of our residents” by helping residents and the region better prepare for and respond to wildfires.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no fiscal impact for the adoption of the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP).

However, implementation of the CWPP action plan items will require funding and staff resources. Future funding requests will come before the Council for consideration as part of the budget process or on a case-by-case basis.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The CWPP is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(b) and (c), because adopting the CWPP will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and because it is not a project as defined in CEQA Guidelines section 15378, as it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Additionally, or alternatively, the CWPP is exempt from CEQA pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Sections 15262, which exempts feasibility and planning studies for possible future actions that have not been approved, adopted, or funded from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report or negative declaration provided environmental factors are considered. The CWPP provides recommendations for potential future actions and information to plan, assess, and prioritize wildfire prevention and preparation activities, including public education and fuel reduction projects, and enables such activities to be eligible for State and federal funding. The CWPP Date: 6/4/2024
Item No.: 13.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 1, Packet Page 96 does not commit the City or any other entity to any particular course of action. Future activities are contingent upon motivated project proponents, available funding, and review and approval by the authorizing jurisdiction. Any activities that are recommended or included in the CWPP Project List may be modified or denied in their entirety. If any wildfire prevention and preparation activities are later undertaken, the public agencies authorizing such activities will be required to comply with CEQA, as applicable.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose not to adopt the CWPP. This alternative is not recommended, as the Council goal to complete a CWPP would not be met and may also prevent the City from receiving future grant opportunities for related projects.

DISCUSSION:

Monterey County and the City of Monterey are potentially vulnerable to a wide range of natural and technological (man-made) hazards. These hazards can threaten the life and safety of residents and visitors and have the potential to damage or destroy both public and private property and disrupt the local economy and overall quality of life. While the threats from hazard events may never be fully eliminated, there is much that can be done to lessen their potential impact. The purpose of a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) is to help residents and the region better prepare for and respond to wildfires. The CWPP will be used to determine effective, prioritized wildfire mitigation and fuel reduction projects and to assist in qualifying for state and federal grant funding.

The Monterey Fire Department serves the City of Monterey, and under service contracts, the cities of Pacific Grove, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Sand City, as well as the Monterey Peninsula Airport District. In 2022, the city councils and staff from the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea expressed a desire to complete a joint CWPP due to the increase in wildfires across California. The project, coordinated by the Monterey Fire Department, began in November 2022, and the final document was completed in November 2023. The cities created a working group with stakeholders from each city and selected Dudek as the consultant for the project. The final project resulted in a final comprehensive CWPP document, including a recommended action plan and an online story map with interactive maps and wildfire modeling, which is still active today. The following tasks were conducted for the completion of the CWPP:
 Dudek came onsite for a field assessment and reviewed existing reports, documents, and local policies to better understand the fire environment in the plan area.  GIS maps were created to model hazards and risks related to wildfires.  A public survey was conducted in English and Spanish for public input on wildfire risk areas, preparedness, and what the cities can do to help prepare.  The CWPP working group met monthly for input.
 The Monterey Fire Department also met monthly with Dudek for project coordination.  Three (3) community workshops were held for in-person public input (1 workshop was held in each city).

The CWPP is a living document and was created to allow for ongoing management, updates and community input intended to reduce the impact of wildfires in the plan area. The department intends to work towards completing the identified action plan items, monitor the Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 2, Packet Page 97 progress and update the document as projects are completed and new projects are identified.

The action plan was developed using six (6) guiding principles:

1. An informed community
Example action items:
 Conduct seminars, create materials, and maintain the online story map to educate residents on wildfire preparedness, mitigation, and evacuation  Collaborate with Fire Safe Councils to leverage existing constituents to disseminate educational information

2. Cohesive fire adaptation built on partnerships
Example action items:
 Collaborate with Pebble Beach Community Services District and CAL FIRE to create cohesive wildfire mitigation strategies that foster a holistic approach to wildfire risk reduction
 Work with recreational facilities, campgrounds, and other guest-oriented businesses to develop evacuation preplans and preparedness for wildfire

3. Hardened infrastructure
Example action items:
 Conduct roadside fuel reduction along major roadways and roads identified as evacuation routes by each city
 Encourage structural retrofits for Plan Area structures through assessments, community education, and grant funding opportunities

4. Healthy, fire-adapted ecosystems
Example action items:
 Remove dead and down woody debris following winter storms

5. Coordinated response to wildfires
Example action items:
 Hold annual meetings with mutual aid partners to discuss emergency response goals and ensure targets are being met

6. Sufficient funding and resources
Example action items:
 Identify and pursue grant funding opportunities for wildfire projects  Empower neighborhood councils, community groups, homeowners’ associations, etc., to pursue grant funding for community-scale retrofits Since the completion of the CWPP, the Monterey Fire Department has been actively working towards completing the identified action plan items, including applying for a grant to provide chipping services for residents, conducting presentations regarding the CWPP and wildfire preparedness to community groups, working with the City of Monterey’s Urban Forestry Division on fuels reduction plans, and coordinating with neighboring jurisdictions on joint efforts for wildfire mitigation. As an addition, the city will be a higher priority for grants with an adopted CWPP.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 3, Packet Page 98 In October 2023, the City Council approved a resolution to accept a $950,000 CAL FIRE California Climate Investments (CCI) Wildfire Prevention Grant for the City’s Greenbelt Fuel Reduction Action Plan. The City identified eight target areas within the City's greenbelt system where the fire hazard is high due to high fuel loads. Wildfires in these greenbelts could result in substantial impacts to natural resources and substantial health, safety, and welfare impacts to the built/human environment adjacent to these areas. To reduce the risk of wildfire, the City developed a Greenbelt Fuel Reduction Plan, providing a roadmap for mitigating the fire risk in our community and maintaining these efforts. This two-year project aligns with the Plan to reduce fire hazards through clearing, chipping, grazing, and creating fuel breaks throughout the City's Greenbelt System. The goal is to reduce high fuel loads, prevent catastrophic wildfires and protect the approximate 1,000 homes within close proximity of the City's greenbelts.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution adopting the Community Wildfire Protection Plan completed for the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea.

AM/ck
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Community Wildlife Protection Plan
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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 4, Packet Page 99 RESOLUTION NO. __- ___ C.S.

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

ADOPTING THE COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN COMPLETED FOR THE

CITIES OF MONTEREY, PACIFIC GROVE, AND CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA WHEREAS, a Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) is a plan developed to help residents and the region better prepare for and respond to wildfires; WHEREAS, the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove and Carmel-by-the-Sea expressed a desire to complete a joint CWPP and the Monterey Fire Department was the lead on the project; WHEREAS, the final CWPP document was completed in November 2023 and included recommended actions;
WHEREAS, a completed CWPP document will give the city a higher priority for grant award opportunities; and
WHEREAS, the CWPP is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(b) and (c), because adopting the CWPP will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and because it is not a project as defined in CEQA Guidelines section 15378, as it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Additionally, or alternatively, the CWPP is exempt from CEQA pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Sections 15262, which exempts feasibility and planning studies for possible future actions that have not been approved, adopted, or funded from the requirement to prepare an environmental impact report or negative declaration provided environmental factors are considered. The CWPP provides recommendations for potential future actions and information to plan, assess, and prioritize wildfire prevention and preparation activities, including public education and fuel reduction projects, and enables such activities to be eligible for State and federal funding. The CWPP does not commit the City or any other entity to any particular course of action. Future activities are contingent upon motivated project proponents, available funding, and review and approval by the authorizing jurisdiction. Any activities that are recommended or included in the CWPP Project List may be modified or denied in their entirety. If any wildfire prevention and preparation activities are later undertaken, the public agencies authorizing such activities will be required to comply with CEQA, as applicable.

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

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY it hereby adopts the Community Wildfire Protection Plan prepared by DUDEK and completed for the cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea dated November 2023.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 5, Packet Page 100 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 6, Packet Page 101 FINAL
Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea,
and Pacific Grove
NOVEMBER 2023
Prepared for:

MONTEREY FIRE DEPARTMENT
610 Pacific Street
Monterey, California 93940
Contact: Gaudenz Panholzer
Prepared by:
621 Chapala Street
Santa Barbara, California 93101
Contact: Dana Link-Herrera
__________________________
Dana Link-Herrera
Project Manager
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 7, Packet Page 102 Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 8, Packet Page 103 14887 i
NOVEMBER 2023
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.

Acronyms and Abbreviations............................................................................................................................................ iii Acknowledgements............................................................................................................................................................ v 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................................1

1.1 StoryMap.................................................................................................................................................1

1.2 Purpose and Need..................................................................................................................................1

1.3 Community Wildfire Protection Plan Goals ...........................................................................................4

1.4 Plan Development..................................................................................................................................4 2 Executive Summary..............................................................................................................................................7

2.1 Plan Area.................................................................................................................................................7

2.2 Fire Protection ........................................................................................................................................7

2.2.1 Monterey Fire Department.......................................................................................................7

2.2.2 Monterey County Regional Fire District...................................................................................8

2.2.3 Presidio of Monterey Fire Department ....................................................................................8

2.2.4 U.S. Forest Service....................................................................................................................8

2.2.5 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection...........................................................8

2.2.6 Mutual Aid .................................................................................................................................9

2.3 Existing Wildfire Conditions ................................................................................................................ 10

2.4 Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................ 15

2.4.1 Hazard/Risk Analysis............................................................................................................. 15

2.4.2 Community Engagement....................................................................................................... 19

2.5 Key Strategies for Wildfire Resilience ................................................................................................ 24 3 Action Plan......................................................................................................................................................... 29

3.1 Plan Monitoring and Management..................................................................................................... 29

3.2 Action Plan ........................................................................................................................................... 29 4 Community Wildfire Protection Plan Authorization ......................................................................................... 37 5 References ........................................................................................................................................................ 39 TABLES
1 Wildland–Urban Interface in the Plan Area........................................................................................................3 2 Fire Hazard Severity Zones in the Plan Area ......................................................................................................3 3 Community Wildfire Protection Plan Goals.........................................................................................................4 4 Monterey Fire Department Plan Area Fire Stations ...........................................................................................7 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 9, Packet Page 104

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 ii NOVEMBER 2023
5 Principles of Fire Resistance to Tree-Dominated Vegetation Types .............................................................. 12 6 Effects of Topographic Features on Fire Behavior.......................................................................................... 14 7 Wildland–Urban Interface Communities in the Plan Area by City .................................................................. 16 8 Relative Risk Ranking of Plan Area Communities........................................................................................... 17 9 Working Group Members.................................................................................................................................. 19 10 Working Group Key Insights ............................................................................................................................. 20 11 Community Group Discussion Takeaways....................................................................................................... 23

EXHIBITS

1. Major Wildfires in Monterey County History .......................................................................................................2 2 CWPP Process ......................................................................................................................................................5 3 Fire Behavior Triangle....................................................................................................................................... 10 4 Bead activity results.......................................................................................................................................... 22

FIGURES
1 Plan Area ........................................................................................................................................................... 41 2 Fire Hazard Severity Zones............................................................................................................................... 43 3 Wildland–Urban Interface ................................................................................................................................ 45 4 Community Relative Risk.................................................................................................................................. 47

APPENDICES
A
B
C
D
E
F
Wildfire Hazard and Risk Assessment Methodology for Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove Community Wildfire Protection Plan
Community Outreach
Vegetation Management Techniques and Best Management Practices Prioritized Vegetation Management Projects
Planning and Regulatory Environment
Funding Opportunities
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 10, Packet Page 105 14887 iii NOVEMBER 2023
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CERT Community Emergency Response Team
CWPP community wildfire protection plan
FHSZ Fire Hazard Severity Zone
GIS geographic information system
MFD Monterey Fire Department
Plan Area Cities of Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove SRA State Responsibility Area
USFS U.S. Forest Service
WUI wildland–urban interface
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 11, Packet Page 106

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 iv NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 12, Packet Page 107 14887
v
NOVEMBER 2023
Acknowledgements
Monterey Fire Department
City Staff at Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove Working Group
Community Members
Dudek, Urban Forestry Division
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 13, Packet Page 108

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 vi NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 14, Packet Page 109 14887 1
NOVEMBER 2023
1 Introduction
The Cities of Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove (Plan Area) are located on the Monterey Peninsula in Monterey County. The Plan Area landscape exhibits a complex wildfire environment that presents risks to communities, public and firefighter safety, land use practices, and the built and natural environments. Although this area has not faced many damaging wildland fires, the local microclimate, wind patterns, vegetation types, and existing built environment can exacerbate wildfire risk. With the increased severity and frequency of wildfires in California, community wildfire planning is increasingly important to help prepare for and adapt to wildfire.

Community wildfire protection plans (CWPPs) are a tool to help reduce the severity and impact of wildfires and increase community resilience. This CWPP is the first to cover the Plan Area.

As a key component of the Healthy Forest Restoration Act of 2003, a CWPP serves as a mechanism for community input and identification of areas presenting high wildfire risk, as well as identification of potential projects intended to mitigate such risk. Further, the CWPP process is intended to provide the community a forum for identifying values at risk from wildfire, which may include people, property, natural resources, agricultural lands, cultural resources, economic interests, and infrastructure. The identification of these values at risk strongly influences the potential wildfire hazard mitigation projects identified in this CWPP.

This CWPP has been developed by the Monterey Fire Department (MFD), in coordination with the Cities of Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove, with input and direction from interested parties, agency representatives, and community members. This CWPP is intended to serve as a fire protection planning document that presents the community’s physical characteristics, wildfire hazard, assets at risk from wildfire, wildfire risk reduction approaches, vegetation/fuel management projects, and goals and action items intended to reduce wildfire risk in the Plan Area.

1.1 StoryMap
An ArcGIS StoryMap was created to accompany this CWPP and serves as an interactive mapping tool and hub for all project data and analysis. This tool was used to disseminate project information to the public and provide a platform for community members to get involved in plan development. Additionally, the StoryMap serves as an adaptive approach to community wildfire planning and allows for revisions as the plan progresses to keep the CWPP up to date. References to the StoryMap are made throughout this document to allow for a concise but effective CWPP and ensure the written CWPP remains current as edits to the StoryMap are made.

The CWPP StoryMap is accessible at the following link: https://ims.dudek.com/MontereyCarmelPacificGroveCWPP.

1.2 Purpose and Need
The Monterey Peninsula community and MFD recognize the potential for significant loss of life, property, and resources from wildland fire. The Plan Area, through MFD and city efforts, has a history of proactively addressing wildfire risk reduction through implementation of various pre-fire mitigation programs. Additionally, the Monterey Fire Safe Council has taken on a leading role in furthering plans and programs throughout Monterey County intended to mitigate wildfire risk. Through coordination and collaboration in recent years, MFD and the representative cities in the Plan Area have identified the need for a CWPP for the Monterey Peninsula.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 15, Packet Page 110

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 2
NOVEMBER 2023
The frequency and intensity of wildfires has increased throughout California, and the Plan Area and surrounding region are no exception. Monterey County has a significant wildfire history (see Exhibit 1), with an average of four wildfires per year and 17,000 acres burned annually since 1911 (County of Monterey 2023). To date, no significant Exhibit 1. Major Wildfires in Monterey County History
Source: Monterey County Fire Safe Council 2023.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 16, Packet Page 111

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 3
NOVEMBER 2023
wildfires have burned into the Plan Area (CAL FIRE 2022). However, significant and record-breaking wildfires have burned in recent years within the surrounding areas, such as Los Padres National Forest, Ventana Wilderness, and Big Sur, as well as multiple smaller fires within local open space areas, such as Del Monte Forest, Jacks Peak County Park, along the Highway 101 corridor, and within private property. Wildfires in the surrounding area affect the Plan Area through smoke and air quality impacts and through the risk of fires spreading or spotting into the Plan Area.

The Plan Area has approximately 4,545 acres of wildland–urban interface (WUI), as shown in Table 1. The WUI is the geographic area where urban development either abuts, intermingles, or intermixes with wildland vegetation.

These areas are particularly vulnerable to wildfire threats due to proximity to wildland vegetation and terrain that is capable of supporting a wildfire. Further, the Plan Area contains approximately 4,544 acres of land designated as High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZs) (as designated by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection [CAL FIRE]), which represents approximately 57% of the Plan Area (see Table 2). FHSZs are geographical areas designated by CAL FIRE (pursuant to California Government Code Sections 51175–51189 and Public Resources Code Sections 4201–4204) as areas of significant fire hazard based on fuels, terrain, weather, and other relevant factors.

In addition to a significant amount of land that is considered at risk of wildfire, the Plan Area has many older neighborhoods that were not developed with wildfire concerns at the forefront. As wildfires have become more frequent, severe, and impactful to communities, new communities and homes are required to build to more stringent fire protection standards that are not present in older neighborhoods and structures. For example, many older homes constructed with wood siding or wood shake roofs with varying degrees of defensible space are present throughout the Plan Area, some of which are accessed by narrow and windy streets that can make evacuation difficult.

Table 1. Wildland–Urban Interface in the Plan Area
Plan Area City Acres of Wildland–Urban Interface Percent of City Pacific Grove 691 38
Carmel-by-the-Sea 334 49
Monterey 3,520 63
Total 4,545 56
Table 2. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in the Plan Area
City Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) Acres Percent of City Pacific Grove Non FHSZ 927 51
Moderate 194 11
High 618 34
Very High 87 5
Carmel-by-the-Sea Non FHSZ 0 0
Moderate 53 8
High 404 60
Very High 219 32
Monterey Non FHSZ 1905 35
Moderate 413 7
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 17, Packet Page 112

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 4
NOVEMBER 2023
Table 2. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in the Plan Area
City Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) Acres Percent of City High 1885 34
Very High 1331 24

1.3 Community Wildfire Protection Plan Goals
The guiding principles and goals shown in Table 3 were developed for the CWPP, through a collaborative approach with MFD; the Cities of Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove; and the Working Group. Goals for the CWPP were developed in consideration of local priorities and concerns, as well as the National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy, which focuses on three key areas: restoration and maintenance of landscapes, fire-adapted communities, and response to fire.

Table 3. Community Wildfire Protection Plan Goals
Guiding Principle Goal
An informed community Community members will be informed about wildfire risks through educational outreach efforts and will work together to create fire-adapted neighborhoods and communities.

Cohesive fire adaptation
built on partnerships
Adjacent jurisdictions and affiliated organizations will be included in fire adaptation and management efforts to create a network of fire-safe communities.

Hardened infrastructure Infrastructure will be hardened against wildfire to allow for safe access and the ability of structures and landscapes to withstand wildfire.

Healthy, fire-adapted
ecosystems
Landscapes and open space areas will be maintained with ecosystem health, environmental protection, and respect for cultural significance as a priority.

Coordinated response to
wildfires
The Monterey Fire Department and mutual aid partners will have the capacity to respond to wildfire emergencies while maintaining firefighter and community safety.

Sufficient funding and
resources
Wildfire management efforts will be supported through sufficient financial investment and staffing.

1.4 Plan Development
Exhibit 2 shows the process taken to develop the CWPP. MFD is the main entity responsible for overseeing the CWPP’s development, in coordination with the Cities of Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove, as well as interested parties. The project involved review of existing information, community and interested party engagement, a hazard risk analysis, assessment of community scale risks, and development of an action plan and recommended priority projects. City staff served on the project Working Group, participated in community engagement and public workshops, and provided key insights into each city’s issues and concerns related to wildfire. Implementation of the CWPP will require collaborative efforts between neighboring jurisdictions, landowners/managers, community groups, and the public.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 18, Packet Page 113

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 5
NOVEMBER 2023
Exhibit 2. CWPP Process
November 2022:

Project Kickoff
January 2023: Begin
Community
Outreach
January–June 2023:

CWPP Working
Group Meetings
February–July
2023: Prepare the
CWPP
May 2023: Develop
Community Risk
Assessment
May 2023: Close
Public Survey and
Host Community
Workshops
July 2023:

Recommend
Community Hazard
Reduction Priorities
July 2023: Submit
Draft CWPP
July–August 2023:

Finalize and Submit
CWPP
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 19, Packet Page 114

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 6
NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 20, Packet Page 115 14887 7
NOVEMBER 2023
2 Executive Summary

2.1 Plan Area
The Plan Area encompasses the Cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea (see Figure 1). The Plan Area has an estimated population of 49,000, with approximately 30,218 people in Monterey, approximately 15,090 people in Pacific Grove, and approximately 3,220 people in Carmel-by-the-Sea (U.S. Census 2022).

2.2 Fire Protection

2.2.1 Monterey Fire Department
MFD provides a complete range of fire protection, prevention, and educational services in the Plan Area (Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea), as well as Sand City, the Naval Postgraduate School, La Mesa Village, and the Monterey Regional Airport. MFD has been providing fire services since 1882 and began as a brigade formed by a group of citizens. In 1890, MFD was officially chartered by the City of Monterey and has since grown to serve Monterey and surrounding communities. Due to fire service contracts and tourism, MFD services a population exceeding 100,000. MFD operates out of six fire stations in Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea, shown in Table 4.

MFD employs approximately 83 full-time employees and responds to an average of over 8,500 incidents annually. Staffing consists of 25 personnel per shift plus a Division Chief, a minimum staffing of 22 personnel per shift plus a Division Chief, and administrative staffing of one fire chief, one assistant chief, three division chiefs, one training division chief, one deputy fire marshal, up to two part-time fire inspectors, and administrative support personnel. Front line fire apparatus includes six engines, one 100-foot tractor-drawn aerial truck, one urban search and rescue truck and trailer, one type 3 wildland unit, one aircraft rescue fire-fighting truck, one 37- foot fire boat, and one command vehicle. MFD also will staff one Office of Emergency Services fire engine in its fleet. Numerous reserve apparatus provide back-up capabilities to the front-line fleet (MFD 2023).

Table 4. Monterey Fire Department Plan Area Fire Stations Station Number Location
Station No. 11 600 Pacific Street, Monterey
Station No. 12 582 Hawthorne Street, Monterey
Station No. 13 401 Dela Vina Avenue, Monterey
Station No. 14 600 Pine Avenue, Pacific Grove
Station No. 15 On 6th Avenue between Mission and San Carlos Streets, Carmel-by-the-Sea Station No. 16 150 Olmsted Way, Monterey Regional Airport ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 21, Packet Page 116

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 8
NOVEMBER 2023

2.2.2 Monterey County Regional Fire District
The Monterey County Regional Fire District responds to structure, wildland, vehicle, and other types of fires in a service area of approximately 400 square miles with a population of about 40,000 residents, consisting of unincorporated areas of Monterey County. A map of the Monterey County Regional Fire District service area can be found at the following link: https://www.mcrfd.org/files/b503d8e7c/MCRFD+Map+2017.pdf. The Monterey County Regional Fire District staffs seven fire stations with 70 full-time employees and is also supported by volunteer firefighters. The Monterey County Regional Fire District also participates in the Monterey County Fire Service Mutual Aid system (Monterey County Regional Fire District 2023).

2.2.3 Presidio of Monterey Fire Department
The Presidio of Monterey Fire Department provides fire and emergency services to federal properties within its jurisdiction, which includes the U.S. Army Garrison Presidio of Monterey, the former Fort Ord U.S. Army installation (Fort Ord National Monument), and the housing areas at Ord Military Community, Presidio of Monterey, and La Mesa. The Presidio of Monterey Fire Department has mutual aid agreements with the Monterey County Regional Fire District, MFD, the Salinas Fire Department, the Seaside Fire Department, the Marina Fire Department, and the North County Fire Protection District (U.S. Army Garrison Presidio of Monterey 2023).

2.2.4 U.S. Forest Service
The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Monterey Ranger District has jurisdiction in the Los Padres National Forest. USFS provides wildland fire suppression across national forest lands within Monterey County and also participates in mutual aid. USFS provides engine crews, hand crews, helitack crews, hotshots, and smoke jumpers. In addition to fire suppression, USFS also facilitates fuel management projects such as prescribed burns and mechanical treatments, and aids in fire prevention via community mitigation assistance teams and fire-adapted communities. The USFS Pacific Southwest Region Fire and Aviation Management is primarily responsible for fire suppression and management within the Los Padres National Forest lands and lands managed by USFS partners. The Pacific Southwest Region Fire and Aviation Management is responsible for wildland fire protection in the northeast portion of the Plan Area (USDA 2022).

2.2.5 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CAL FIRE is charged with wildland fire protection for State Responsibility Areas (SRAs) within Monterey County. The San Benito-Monterey Unit of CAL FIRE encompasses over 3 million acres, of which 2.1 million acres are an SRA, representing one of the largest state responsibility jurisdictions in CAL FIRE. According to the Unit Strategic Fire Plan for San Benito-Monterey, “The San Benito-Monterey Unit is operationally divided into three divisions and further into seven battalions offering a wide variety of programs which includes:

Fire Prevention, Resource Management, Law Enforcement, Air Attack, Helitack, Conservation Camp, Emergency Command Center (communications), and Cooperative Fire Protection” (CAL FIRE 2020). CAL FIRE also “maintains several Automatic and Mutual Aid Agreements” (CAL FIRE 2020).

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 22, Packet Page 117

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 9
NOVEMBER 2023

2.2.6 Mutual Aid
MFD and surrounding agencies participate in mutual aid and automatic aid agreements. Automatic aid is a contractual agreement between agencies and/or fire districts, and aid is dispatched to all first alarms. Mutual aid agreements differ from automatic aid in that outside assistance typically is provided when the agreement is activated, and aid is requested by the primary responding agency. Fire agencies in Monterey County are party to a countywide mutual aid agreement, including the following:

Cities
▪ Monterey
▪ Pacific Grove
▪ Carmel-by-the-Sea
▪ Seaside
▪ Salinas
▪ King City
▪ Del Rey Oaks
▪ Greenfield
▪ Soledad
▪ Gonzales
▪ Marina
▪ Sand City
Fire Protection Districts
▪ Pebble Beach Community Services District
▪ Carmel Highlands Fire Protection District
▪ Monterey County Regional Fire District
▪ North Monterey County Fire District
▪ Aromas Tri-County Fire District
▪ Cachagua Fire Protection District
▪ Cypress Fire Protection District
▪ South Monterey County Fire
Protection District
Volunteer Fire Departments/Brigades
▪ Big Sur Volunteer Fire Brigade
▪ Mid-Coast Volunteer Fire Department
▪ San Ardo Volunteer Fire Department
State
▪ CAL FIRE
▪ Department of Corrections-Correctional Training Facility Soledad ▪ California National Guard-Camp Roberts
Federal
▪ Presidio of Monterey Fire Department
▪ Fort Hunter Liggett Fire Department
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 23, Packet Page 118

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 10 NOVEMBER 2023

2.3 Existing Wildfire Conditions
Wildfire conditions can be described through the local fire environment and fire regimes. The fire environment
describes the surrounding conditions that interact to
influence wildfire behavior, and the fire regime is a general pattern of fire occurrence in a particular location or
vegetation type. The main components that contribute to the fire environment, and, thus, wildfire behavior, include weather (temperature, wind, relative humidity), fuel
conditions, and topography (see Exhibit 3). Wildfire
conditions in the Plan Area are summarized below, and the project StoryMap includes detailed descriptions of the Plan Area wildfire conditions, including interactive maps that depict Plan Area slopes, vegetation cover, canopy cover, building density, fire history, and other factors that
contribute to the local fire environment and fire regime.

Climate
The Plan Area is generally characterized by a
Mediterranean climate with dry summers followed by cool, wet winters. Average annual rainfall is roughly 20 inches, the majority falling between November and April (U.S. Climate Data 2023). Fog is often present during the summer months as a result of warm air from inland areas meeting cold marine air. Peak fire season is considered to be in the fall when air temperatures are highest and relative humidity drops (CAL FIRE 2020). This leads to the drying of vegetation and higher potential for wildfire spread. However, wildfires can occur during all times of the year due to local weather variations including drought conditions, high winds, or unusually high temperatures, all of which occur throughout California.

On average, the prevailing daytime wind direction is from the northwest blowing in from the Pacific Ocean. This brings cool, moist air into the region, developing a pattern referred to as the “marine layer,” which produces fog and low clouds over the Monterey Peninsula. Wildfire hazard is greatly reduced when fog is present due to an increase in relative humidity and higher fuel moistures. The presence of the Pacific Ocean causes a diurnal wind pattern known as the land/sea breeze system. During the day, onshore winds are from the northwest and at night, gentler offshore winds, derived from cooler air masses moving downslope, are from the east and travel from higher elevations to the coast. During the summer season, the diurnal winds can be slightly stronger than the winds during the winter season due to greater pressure gradient forces. These stronger onshore winds can contribute to fire hazard when appropriate conditions exist for wildfire ignition and spread, as observed during the 1987 Morse Fire, when strong onshore winds in combination with prolonged drought contributed to extreme wildfire behavior. Surface winds can also be influenced locally by topography and slope variations. The varied topography of the Monterey Peninsula affects wind velocity and patterns.

The region also experiences occasional offshore wind events from the east generally referred to as Santa Lucia winds. Santa Lucia winds are caused by high-pressure systems that form over the Great Basin area of Nevada and Exhibit 3. Fire Behavior Triangle.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 24, Packet Page 119

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 11 NOVEMBER 2023
Utah. These high-pressure systems create a gradient between the inland and coastal areas of California, leading to a rush of air from the high-pressure areas to the east to the lower-pressure area along the California coast. As the wind moves across the Santa Lucia mountains and descends to lower elevations, it becomes compressed and heated, pushing the marine layer far out to sea, leading to an increase in temperature and a decrease in relative humidity. This dry, warm wind can pick up speed as it moves through narrow canyons and passes, further contributing to its destructive potential. While stronger offshore wind events are more likely to occur to the south in the Big Sur region, the Monterey Peninsula is subject to infrequent periods of extreme fire weather. Santa Lucia winds are most likely to occur in the late fall and early winter, clearing out marine fog and creating dangerous fire weather conditions.

From a regional perspective, the Plan Area often experiences unique weather conditions compared to surrounding areas. This climate pattern is commonly referred to as a microclimate, meaning weather of neighboring inland or higher elevation areas often differs drastically from the Plan Area, largely dependent of the extent of the marine layer. Therefore, wildfire hazard is highly dynamic throughout the greater region and is highly dependent on localized weather conditions.

Vegetation
Monterey Pine Forests
Vegetation in the Plan Area is dominated by Monterey pine forest, one of three remaining native stands in California.

Monterey pines (Pinus radiata) often grow tall and straight and can reach heights of 100 feet at maturity (60–80 years). Associated understory vegetation with this forest type includes young Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), coastal scrub, and native and non-native grasses. Broadly, Monterey pine forests in the Plan Area can be classified into three types:
▪ Monterey Pine Forest with Grassy Understory: These forests generally possess an open canopy, allowing substantial light to reach the forest floor. The understory is dominated by grasses and forbs including brome (Bromus), rattlesnake grass (Briza maxima), wild oats (Ava fatua), rushes (Juncaceae), and sedges (Carex).

Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), California huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), and manzanita (Arctostaphylos) are often interspersed throughout this forest type. ▪ Monterey Pine with Mesic Understory: This forest type often exists where the forest floor retains moisture.

This may occur in drainages, shaded areas, or when forest canopies are closed and prevent light from reaching the understory. The understory in this forest type is lush and often consists of shrubs including poison oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum), salal (Gaultheria shallon), bush monkeyflower (Diplacus aurantiacus), California blackberry (Rubus ursinus), and woodrose (Rosa gymnocarpa). Herbaceous plants are also observed in this forest type including nettles (Urtica dioica), yerba buena (Clinopodium douglasii), toothwort (Cardamine californica), and grasses.
▪ Monterey Pine with Hard Shrub Understory: This forest type is predominantly found near Huckleberry Hill and is dominated by understory shrubs with hard leaves including California huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), shaggy-barked manzanita (Arctostaphylos rudis ‘Vandenberg’), and hooker’s manzanita (Arctostaphylos hookeri). Herbaceous plants are common around shrubs and in openings.

Wildfire hazard in Monterey pine forests is influenced by the structural and compositional characteristics of vegetation or “fuels.” High hazard forest stands generally include substantial ladder fuels, which are defined as understory fuels that can create vertical continuity between surface fuels (grasses and needle litter) and the tree ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 25, Packet Page 120

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 12 NOVEMBER 2023
canopy. Ladder fuels can create a pathway for low severity surface fires into the upper tree canopy, resulting in extreme fire behavior known as crown fire. Crown fires pose significant threats due to greater wildfire intensity and rapid spread rates. Extreme wildfire behavior such as fast-moving crown fires is also more likely in dense forest stands where the distance between tree canopies is minimal, allowing fire to easily transition through the tree canopy. The composition of forest fuels also impacts wildfire severity in this forest type. Wildfire hazard in Monterey pine forests is influenced by the species present (many plants in the Plan Area possess volatile compounds that increase combustibility), forest health, age of fuels, and the abundance of invasive species.

Surface and ladder fuels should have the highest priority for management to reduce fire intensity, rate of spread, and crown fire potential. Active crown fires are initiated with torching but are ultimately sustained by the density of the overstory crowns. Reduction in potential surface fire behavior plus an increase in canopy base height minimizes torching potential (Agee and Skinner 2005).

Canopy thinning via selective removal of trees within a stand can achieve desired horizontal spacing between retained tree canopies to minimize potential crown fire spread. Thinning from below, a technique in which trees are removed from the lower forest/stand canopy, can reduce the severity and intensity of wildfires by reducing crown bulk density and increasing crown base height (Graham et al. 1999). Thinning or removal of overstory trees can result in higher mid-flame wind speeds and decreased fine fuel moisture, which can increase surface flame lengths, resulting in crown fires and increased fire intensities. However, sufficient treatment of surface fuels (understory, slash, and ladder fuels) results in a reduction in fire behavior sufficient to outweigh these effects (Graham et al. 1999; Agee and Skinner 2005). A major goal of these treatments is to create stand conditions that function as a shaded fuel break. Table 5 summarizes the effects and advantages associated with fuel management in treedominated vegetation types.

Table 5. Principles of Fire Resistance to Tree-Dominated Vegetation Types Principle Effect Advantage Concerns
Reduce surface
fuels
Reduces potential flame
length
Control easier; less torching Surface disturbance is less with prescribed fire compared
to other techniques
Increase height to
live crown
Requires longer flame
length to begin torching
Less torching Opens understory; may allow
surface wind to increase
Decrease crown
density
Makes tree-to-tree crown
fire less probable
Reduces crown fire potential Surface wind may increase
and surface fuels may be
drier
Keep big trees of
resistant species
Less mortality for same
fire intensity
Generally restores historic
structure
Less economical; may keep
trees at risk of insect attack
The state of Monterey pine forests within the Plan Area and adjacent areas varies depending on attributes, including terrain and soils, fire history, and varying degrees of forest management. Monterey pines are highly dependent on disturbance for seedling establishment and regeneration. Historically, wildfires (natural or human caused) were the main form of disturbance in this ecosystem. Fires naturally remove surface vegetation and litter, exposing bare mineral soil, which is highly beneficial for germination and seedling establishment. Historical low- to moderateseverity wildfires would also remove hazardous dead and dying vegetation, improving the overall forest heath and wildfire resilience. However, wildfire exclusion has resulted in overstocked forests with many trees reaching the end of their lifespan. In many areas, ladder fuels are abundant, and Monterey pine regeneration is limited. These ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 26, Packet Page 121

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 13 NOVEMBER 2023
conditions reduce plant vigor and susceptibility to pest attacks and infestations increases. Infestations of pitch canker (Fusarium circinatum) are known to occur within the Plan Area and adjacent areas. This disease can contribute to wildfire hazards by increasing dead surface fuel loads and hindering firefighting efforts.

Non-native and Invasive Species
Non-native and invasive species can increase the frequency of fires by providing more continuous fuels that are more easily ignited (Brooks et al. 2004). Eucalyptus (Eucalyptus globulus), French broom (Genista monspessulana), and invasive grasses are of primary concern in the Plan Area.

Of the non-native trees present in the planning area, eucalyptus present the greatest hazard. Eucalyptus stands are composed of fuel structures ranging from fine to heavy and may include an understory of grass; brush; eucalyptus seedlings, saplings, and small trees; and eucalyptus leaf, twig, branch, and bark litter. Fuel buildup in eucalyptus stands is very rapid, exceeding that of other tree species, and its litter (dead leaves and debris) is especially flammable (Agee et al. 1973; NPS 2006; Wolf and DiTomaso 2016). Like other hazardous species, eucalyptus also has a higher content of volatile organic compounds. Eucalyptus leaves produce a volatile (Gabbert 2014), highly combustible oil, and flammable gasses may be released from trees at very high temperatures, further increasing fire hazard (Gross 2013).

French broom is highly invasive and is observed in forested and disturbed areas throughout the Plan Area. French broom infestations produce large amounts of dry matter, which can create a serious fire hazard (DiTomaso 1998).

This species also produces prolific seed banks, which contributes to its widespread abundance. Broom burns readily and carries fire to the tree canopy layer, increasing both the frequency and intensity of fires in invaded areas.

Invasive grasses in the Plan Area are widespread and include species such as rattlesnake grass (Briza maxima), annual brome species (Bromus), pampas grass (Cortaderia selloana), and Jubata grass (Cortaderia jubata).

Invasive grasses resemble flashy fuels, which can ignite easily and increase wildfire rate of spread.

Urban Vegetation
Urban vegetation greatly contributes to the unique aesthetic within the Plan Area. Many residents take pride in the Plan Area’s extensive urban forest. However, the characteristics and presence of urban vegetation significantly impact the potential for wildfires and their spread within urban environments. The type, density, and condition of vegetation in urban areas influence the availability of fuel for fires. When urban areas contain dense and highly flammable vegetation like dry grasses, shrubs with volatile oils, or trees with combustible foliage, the risk of fires igniting and spreading rapidly increases. Additionally, the accumulation of dead leaves, branches, and plant debris contributes to fuel loads and elevates fire hazard. Urban vegetation also influences the ignition and spotting potential of wildfires. Wind-carried embers and burning debris can ignite new fires in urban areas, especially when highly flammable vegetation is near structures. This raises the risk of embers landing on or near buildings, leading to fire spread within urban areas and an increased likelihood of structure ignitions.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 27, Packet Page 122

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 14 NOVEMBER 2023
Strategic management of urban vegetation can serve as a protective buffer, limiting the extent of wildfire spread. By ensuring well-maintained green spaces, properly spaced and pruned trees, and the intentional use of fire-resistant plants, defensible space can be created. This defensible space acts as a barrier, safeguarding structures from nearby flammable vegetation. The choice of plants also significantly influences the wildfire hazard associated with urban vegetation. Different plant species and their maintenance levels determine their fire resistance. While no plant is entirely fireproof, certain characteristics, such as the following, greatly diminish the risk of wildfire hazard:
▪ Leaves have a high moisture content.
▪ Little dead material is present, and the plant does not accumulate dry and dead material within the plant. ▪ Sap and resin content is low.
▪ The plant does not produce a significant amount of leaf litter.

In contrast, certain urban species possess features that increase their ignitability. These include the accumulation of fine, dry, or dead material within the plant and the presence of volatile organic compounds, which can increase fire intensity.

Terrain
Terrain affects wildfire movement and spread. Flat areas typically result in slower fire spread, absent windy conditions. Topographic features such as saddles, canyons, and chimneys may form unique circulation conditions that concentrate winds and funnel or accelerate fire spread (i.e., land formations that collect and funnel heated air upward along a slope). Steep terrain typically results in faster upslope fire spread due to the preheating of uphill vegetation. Terrain may also buffer, shelter, or redirect winds away from some areas based on canyons or formations on the landscape. Saddles occurring at the top of drainages or ridgelines may facilitate the migration of wildfire from one canyon to the next. Various terrain features can also influence fire behavior, as summarized in Table 6.

Table 6. Effects of Topographic Features on Fire Behavior Topographic
Feature Effect
Narrow Canyon Surface winds follow canyon direction, which may differ from the prevailing wind; wind eddies/strong upslope air movement expected, which may cause erratic fire behavior; radiant heat transfer between slopes facilitates spotting/ignition on opposite canyon side.

Wide Canyon Prevailing wind direction not significantly altered; aspect significant contributor to fire behavior. Wide canyons are not as susceptible to cross-canyon spotting except in high winds.

Box Canyon/
Chute
Air is drawn in from canyon bottom; strong upslope drafts. No gaps or prominent saddles to let heated air escape. Fires starting at the canyon bottom can move upslope very rapidly due to a chimney-like preheating of the higher-level fuels and upslope winds.

Ridge Fires may change direction when reaching ridge/canyon edge; strong air flows likely at ridge point; possibility for different wind directions on different sides of the ridge. Ridges experience more wind. Fires gain speed and intensity moving toward a ridge. Fires burning at a ridge can exhibit erratic fire behavior. Strong air flows can cause a whirling motion by the fire. As the wind crosses a ridge it usually has a leeward eddy where the wind rolls around and comes up the leeward side.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 28, Packet Page 123

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 15 NOVEMBER 2023
Table 6. Effects of Topographic Features on Fire Behavior Topographic
Feature Effect
Saddle Potential for rapid rates of fire spread; fires pushed through saddles faster during upslope runs. Winds can increase when blowing through saddles due to the funneling effect of the constricted pass. On the other side, winds will slow, but erratic winds potentially occur at the saddle due to eddies.

2.4 Key Findings

2.4.1 Hazard/Risk Analysis
The wildfire hazard assessment conducted in support of this CWPP involved an evaluating field conditions, processing and analyzing spatial datasets in a geographic information system (GIS), conducting GIS-based modeling of wildfire behavior and wildfire hazard, and analyzing existing plans and data sets related to wildfire hazard.

Following field evaluations and concurrent with GIS data analysis, fire hazard and fire behavior modeling was conducted to evaluate wildfire hazard and risk to communities. These analyses modeled potential wildfire behavior under average (50th percentile) and extreme weather conditions (97th percentile). Modeling efforts as further described in Appendix A, Wildfire Hazard and Risk Assessment Methodology for Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove Community Wildfire Protection Plan, considered the terrain, vegetation, and weather unique to the Plan Area. For a visual representation of this assessment, please refer to the Wildfire Hazard and Risk Assessment and Community Relative Wildfire Risk Ranking sections in the StoryMap.

Wildfire hazard is variable throughout the Plan Area depending on fuels, terrain, weather, and community characteristics.

Under average weather conditions (50th percentile), wildfire behavior was modeled to mostly low-moderate severity as a result of higher fuel moisture and lower wind speeds. Crown fires under this scenario are infrequently observed in select areas. However, extreme wildfire (flame lengths greater than 11 feet) was observed throughout the Plan Area and adjacent areas during extreme weather conditions with high winds and low fuel moistures (97th percentile). The occurrence of crown fire under extreme conditions is widespread throughout the Plan Area, resulting in rapid rates of spread and substantial hazard from flying embers with spotting distances of up to 0.5 miles from torching trees. The results of this analysis highlight a clear potential for destructive wildfires in the Plan Area.

Wildfire Risk to Communities
Fire Hazard Severity Zones
CAL FIRE’s Fire and Resources Assessment Program database includes map data documenting areas of significant fire hazards in the state. These maps categorize geographic areas of the state into different FHSZs. The classifications include Moderate, High, and Very High FHSZs. CAL FIRE uses FHSZs to classify anticipated firerelated hazards for the entire state and includes classifications for SRAs, Local Responsibility Areas, and Federal Responsibility Areas. Fire hazard severity classifications consider vegetation, topography, weather, crown fire production, and ember production and movement.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 29, Packet Page 124

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 16 NOVEMBER 2023
CAL FIRE is currently in the process of updating the FHSZ map for SRA lands, with an updated LRA mapping effort to follow. The upcoming LRA mapping effort will include Moderate, High, and Very High wildfire hazard designations.

The FHSZs utilizing the updated SRA data and existing LRA data for the Plan Area are shown in Figure 2.

Wildland–Urban Interface
The Cities of Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove all include areas classified as the WUI (see Figure 3).

The WUI includes areas of urban and suburban development within the vicinity of wildland vegetation. The wildland fire risk associated with WUI areas includes propagation of fire via house-to-house fire spread, landscaping-to-house fire spread, or ember intrusion. Refer to the StoryMap to view the distribution of the WUI in the Plan Area. WUI communities within the Plan Area are provided in Table 7.

Table 7. Wildland–Urban Interface Communities in the Plan Area by City City Community Name
Monterey Presidio West
Skyline
Monterey Vista South
Monterey Vista North
Old Town South
Alta Mesa
Glenwood
La Mesa Village
Aguajito Oaks
Deer Flats North
Deer Flats South
Fisherman Flats
Casanova Oak Knoll
Ryan Ranch West
Ryan Ranch East
Carmel-by-the-Sea Southeast
Northeast
Northwest
Pacific Grove Del Monte Park
Sunset Drive
Pacific Grove Acres East
Pacific Grove Acres West
Forest Grove
Seaview
Glen
Second Addition
Third Addition
Fifth Addition West
Asilomar Dunes
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 30, Packet Page 125

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 17 NOVEMBER 2023
Many of the WUI communities at risk contain relatively old homes that reflect the building materials and/or codes in effect at the time of construction. As such, large numbers of homes are at increased risk of ignition due to structure vulnerabilities (e.g., wood shake roofs and siding, open eaves, unscreened crawlspace, and attic vents), which research has shown to be important in most home losses during wildfires. Most WUI neighborhoods feature high building density, with the highest building density WUI communities located in Carmel-by-the-Sea and Pacific Grove. House-to-house fire spread is more likely in areas with high building density due to the proximity of structures.

In these dense areas, flames, radiant heat, and embers facilitate fire moving from one structure to the next. This can lead to a more extensive fire incident referred to as an urban conflagration. The potential for house-to-house fire spread in densely developed communities is strongly influenced by the materials and techniques used in building construction. For example, houses constructed with wooden materials that have large vents and single pane windows are more easily ignited compared to those constructed with ignition-resistant materials (as identified in Chapter 7A of the California Building Code). Many WUI communities in the Plan Area also feature narrow, steep, and windy streets accessing multiple homes. These conditions can result in congested evacuations and increase the difficulty for emergency responders and fire apparatus to quickly reach impacted areas.

Parcels within the Plan Area have varying degrees of defensible space, or the buffer between structures and grasses, trees, shrubs, or any wildland area adjacent to the home. Defensible space has been proven to reduce structural ignitability from direct flames, radiant heat, and flying embers, while also providing safer conditions for firefighters to conduct structural protection during wildfires. Many homeowners face challenges when attempting to create adequate defensible space on their properties, including the 100-foot zone extending into another person’s property, the cost of implementing some of these upgrades being prohibitive, limited availability of contractors to complete this work, lack of knowledge of how to properly create defensible space, and what vegetation should and should not be used in each zone.

Community Relative Risk Ranking
A community relative risk ranking was conducted for the Plan Area to identify high risk communities where wildfire risk mitigation should be prioritized. This assessment also aims to enhance resident awareness of the relative risks associated with their community. The evaluation of community wildfire risk involved quantifying key variables within the designated community areas, including community proximity to high hazard vegetation, dominant vegetation type, potential ember exposure, terrain, urban vegetation, emergency response time, and emergency access and evacuation capacity. Communities within the Plan Area and their relative risk ranking are provided below in Table

8. The distribution of communities facing very high and high risks varies across the three cities. Monterey possesses the greatest proportion of communities ranked as very high or high risk (48%), followed by Carmel-by-the-Sea (43%), and Pacific Grove (21%) (see Figure 4).

Table 8. Relative Risk Ranking of Plan Area Communities City Community Risk Ranking Score
Monterey Skyline 32 (Very High)
Aguajito Oaks 32 (Very High)
Monterey Vista North 27.5 (Very High)
La Mesa Village 27 (Very High)
Glenwood 26.5 (Very High)
Monterey Vista South 26.5 (Very High)
Deer Flats South 26.5 (Very High)
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 31, Packet Page 126

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 18 NOVEMBER 2023
Table 8. Relative Risk Ranking of Plan Area Communities City Community Risk Ranking Score
Fisherman Flats 26.5 (Very High)
Presidio West 25.5 (Very High)
Ryan Ranch East 23.5 (High)
Casanova Oak Knoll South 22.5 (High)
Alta Mesa 21.5 (High)
Old Town South 21.5 (High)
Ryan Ranch West 18 (Moderate)
Deer Flats North 17.5 (Moderate)
Old Town North 14 (Moderate)
Casanova Oak Knoll North 10 (Low)
Navy 7 (Low)
Presidio East 6 (Low)
New Monterey South 5.5 (Low)
New Monterey East 4 (Very Low)
Del Monte Beach 4 (Very Low)
Downtown 3 (Very Low)
Oak Grove 3 (Very Low)
Naval Postgraduate School 2.5 (Very Low)
Del Monte Grove Laguna Grande 1 (Very Low)
Villa Del Monte 0 (Very Low)
Carmel-by-theSea Southeast 27 (Very High)
Northwest 27 (Very High)
Northeast 11 (High)
Old Mission Tract 8 (Low)
Central 6 (Low)
Beach Tract 6 (Low)
Scenic 6 (Low)
Pacific Grove Del Monte Park 28.5 (Very High)
Glen 24.5 (High)
Forest Grove 24.5 (High)
Pacific Grove Acres East 21.5 (High)
Seaview 15.5 (Moderate)
Sunset Drive 18.5 (Moderate)
Hillcrest 16.5 (Moderate)
Pacific Grove Acres West 16.5 (Moderate)
Second Addition 15.5 (Moderate)
Fifth Addition West 15.5 (Moderate)
Country Club Heights 8.5 (Moderate)
Third Addition East 7 (Low)
Asilomar Dunes 6.5 (Low)
Beach Tract 6 (Low)
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 32, Packet Page 127

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 19 NOVEMBER 2023
Table 8. Relative Risk Ranking of Plan Area Communities City Community Risk Ranking Score
Pacific Grove Retreat 5 (Low)
Downtown 5 (Low)
First Addition 5 (Low)
Fourth Addition 5 (Low)
Fifth Addition East 4 (Very Low)

2.4.2 Community Engagement
The project involved a three-prong community engagement approach. Public input is a crucial component in CWPPs to ensure that the findings and recommendations presented fit the concerns, needs, and desires of the Plan Area and communities therein to help make them safer and more wildfire resilient. To ensure that the project reached the most community members, the public outreach for this project involved a Working Group, public survey, and an in-person community workshop for each city. A complete analysis of community engagement results can be found in Appendix B.

Working Group
The CWPP Working Group was formed to bring together a diverse representation of MFD staff and city staff to help advise the CWPP’s developmental process (Table 9). Six Working Group meetings were held between January and July 2023, with each meeting facilitated by the consultant team. During the series of Working Group meetings, members were introduced to the project and presented with preliminary hazard and risk assessment findings, discussed desired project outcomes, worked collaboratively to develop the CWPP guiding principles and goals, and reviewed the administrative draft of the CWPP and Action Plan. Each Working Group member brought a unique perspective to the group, providing the context for local policy and regulatory perspectives, community challenges, and safety considerations. Key insight gathered from the Working Group meetings are summarized in Table 10.

Table 9. Working Group Members
Name Title Jurisdiction/Department
Gaudenz Panholzer Fire Chief Monterey Fire Department
Jeff Field Division Fire Chief Monterey Fire Department Cheryl Kouretas Fire Department Senior Admin Analyst Monterey Fire Department Carmyn Priewe Deputy Fire Marshal Monterey Fire Department Laurie Huelga Public Information Officer City of Monterey JD Sheldon Fire Engineer Monterey Fire Department
Christy Sabdo Associate Planner City of Monterey Planning Louie Marcuzzo Park Operations Manager City of Monterey Sam Mazza Retired Fire Chief Monterey Fire Department
Thys Norton Assistant Urban Forester City of Monterey – Urban Forestry Cathy Madalone Police Chief Pacific Grove Police Department Dan Gho Public Works Director City of Pacific Grove – Public Works ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 33, Packet Page 128

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 20 NOVEMBER 2023
Table 9. Working Group Members
Name Title Jurisdiction/Department
Anastacia Wyatt Community Development Director City of Pacific Grove Brandon Swanson Director of Community Planning and Building City of Carmel-by-the-Sea – Planning Aaron Campbell Code Compliance Officer City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Jeff Watkins Acting Police Chief City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Tom Ford Administrative Analyst City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Table 10. Working Group Key Insights
Topics Working Group Insight
Community Wildfire
Protection Plan Applicability
Findings from this plan can help inform safety and housing elements with new goals and policies.

Regulatory Barriers Current tree ordinances make it difficult for hazardous trees to be removed with often vague language. Balance between removing hazardous vegetation and balancing environmental priorities is crucial for this community.

Community members need more education on what is considered a hazardous tree and what the removal process entails.

Community Partnerships Coalition/relationship building between neighborhood associations, community groups, government agencies, cultural groups, and more is necessary ongoing work to have project success.

Outreach Communication and education are very important for these communities.

Education and the methods of communication need to match the needs and demographics on the communities being served by this plan.

Fuel Treatment Areas The Working Group discussed and compiled list of priority treatment areas based on modeling and community expertise.

Public Survey
For a broad understanding of how community members feel and are impacted by wildfire, an online survey using the SurveyMonkey platform was disseminated. The survey had 25 questions that focused on four main categories of topics.

1. Community members’ perception of wildfire

2. How community members would or have prepared for wildfire in the past

3. Barriers that have or would prevent them from preparing for a wildfire effectively

4. Community members’ opinions on specific wildfire mitigation activities and methods The survey garnered 507 responses, with 468 of them being usable for analysis. The distribution of survey response from each Plan Area city are as follows:
▪ Monterey: 42%
▪ Pacific Grove: 25%
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 34, Packet Page 129

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 21 NOVEMBER 2023
▪ Carmel-by-the-Sea: 24%
▪ Other: 9%
Key Results
When asked how concerned residents were about wildfire on a scale from 1 to 10, the average response from all residents was 7. However, when breaking it down by city, Carmel-by-the-Sea had the highest average worry of 7.4, Pacific Grove had the lowest average worry of 5.5, and Monterey was in the middle at 6.8.

When looking at the main concerns faced by residents, the top responses were fuels/vegetation on neighboring properties, limited evacuation routes, and fuels/vegetation on their own properties. When asked about barriers that would prevent community members from evacuating, the top barriers were not knowing when to leave, where to get proper evacuation information, and not having anywhere to stay when they did evacuate. Additionally, when asked if folks felt prepared to evacuate, most (86%) of respondents felt completely or partially prepared, and 14% indicated they were not prepared to evacuate.

When asked what desired actions community members would want to see to make the Plan Area safer from wildfire, the top responses were fuel management projects on public lands, fuel management projects on private lands, and defensible space creation and maintenance.

Additionally, when asked what techniques were most favorable, the fuel risk reduction techniques that had an approval rating of 90% or higher were roadside vegetation clearance, defensible space, and vegetation clearance on public property. When looking at vegetation management techniques, the majority of them also had a high approval rating, including grazing, hand treatment, and mechanical treatments all having an approval rating of 65% or higher. However, using herbicide as a vegetation management technique had majority disapproval, with only 23% of respondents in support of this activity. These results help identify the most approved methods for action in each community to help MFD match up a technique with a given community.

Community Workshops
In addition to the quantitative data received from the public survey, community workshops were conducted to get more in-depth information on how wildfire impacts community members’ lives and how actions can be taken to make them feel safer. A total of three in-person public workshops were held, one in each Plan Area city, to capture the opinions and perspectives of the greatest number of residents and community members throughout the Plan Area. These workshops covered a brief overview of the project and included activities aimed at garnering discussion and gaining input from community members through passive and active activities.

Passive Activities
One passive activity included a map activity where community members could identify areas of concern, including limited evacuation routes and hazardous vegetation. Results of the map activity have been incorporated into the project StoryMap. Many of the identified hazard areas reflected areas that participants lived in or were familiar with.

An additional passive activity allowed residents to identify their top concerns related to wildfire by placing beads representing their concerns in corresponding jars. The responses received during these activities gave great insight into the perspective of attendees at the workshops; however, data gaps exist as community members representing ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 35, Packet Page 130

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 22 NOVEMBER 2023
all portions of the Plan Area were not present. This is especially true for the eastern half of Monterey, including Deer Flats and Fisherman Flats.

As shown in Exhibit 4, the bead activity helped reveal that the top concerns for many of the community members were evacuation and hazardous vegetation. The graph on the left side shows the actual number of beads placed into each jar, and the right graph shows the distribution of the beads placed throughout the three cities. The right graph helps further demonstrate the concerns that resonate more within each city.

Small Group Discussions
Small group discussions were a key feature of the community workshops to learn more about the community members’ experience with wildfire and build upon the insights received from the public survey. The discussion groups were divided amongst five topics:

1. Home Hardening

2. Fire Experience

3. Wildfire Planning

4. Defensible Space/Vegetation Management

5. Evacuation/Community Response
Exhibit 4. Bead activity results
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 36, Packet Page 131

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 23 NOVEMBER 2023
Small group discussions were set up with a facilitator and notetaker who rotated to the various groups of participants and encouraged discussion of each topic in terms of challenges and opportunities that could either help or harm a community in preparing for wildfire. Table 11 highlights key insights from each workshop. Many overlapping themes from each workshop were revealed, specifically around the need for better outreach, education, and desire for action. However, there were also some nuances unique to each workshop, as presented in this table and in the word clouds found in Appendix B.

Table 11. Community Group Discussion Takeaways
City Main Takeaways
Carmel-by-the-Sea Communication was a key priority for Carmel-by-the-Sea residents. This involves many facets, including knowing where to get proper evacuation information, how to harden their homes and create defensible space, and how community members can get involved in helping make their community safer. Some key actions that resonated with community members include the following:
▪ Utilizing more avenues for education and outreach like Nextdoor, door to door, real estate agents, radio, Pinecone Weekly, mail, social media, texts/reverse 9-1-1, schools, and religious organizations
▪ Having more workshops to help build consensus on opposing perspectives within wildfire preparation, including helping residents have a better understanding of what they can do to prepare
▪ Revising city ordinances to allow for removal of hazardous vegetation Monterey Responsibility and coordination were themes that resonated with Monterey residents, from knowing who you can trust as a source for wildfire information, to wanting a deeper understanding of a community’s risks, to a better picture of how different organizations coordinate around wildfire. Some of the key actions that resonated with community members include the following:
▪ Utilizing academic institutions like the University of California or the California State University Systems for more research on modeling defensible space ▪ Having more education to clearly define the desired role of different parties before/during a wildfire, including residents, community groups, and utilities; this includes residents having a clear understanding of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s “Ready, Set, and Go!” steps, wider community buy in, engagement with community groups, and the creation of Firewise Communities ▪ Coordinating with neighbors, specifically neighbors with mobility challenges, to ensure that communities are working together in the event of an evacuation ▪ Focusing on outreach and engagement through multiple avenues from door tags, reverse 9-1-1, social media, inspections, community fire drills, community chipper programs, and more
Pacific Grove Having a holistic approach to wildfire preparation and management was stressed amongst Pacific Grove residents. In addition to the themes listed for the other cities, this group wanted to ensure that actions taken would be in accordance with the community’s environmental values. Some key actions and tools include the following:
▪ Having better education of how homeowners can balance hardening their home and creating defensible space in an environmentally friendly way, including permeable hardscape
▪ Providing access to tools to help residents during a wildfire, such as air purifiers ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 37, Packet Page 132

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 24 NOVEMBER 2023

2.5 Key Strategies for Wildfire Resilience
The following describes priority project types and active community programs that should be pursued in the Plan Area to mitigate wildfire risk to communities.

Community Programs
▪ Community Emergency Response Team – The Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) educates people about disaster preparedness for hazards that may impact their area and trains people in basic disaster response skills, such as fire safety, light search and rescue, team organization, and disaster medical operations. Using the training learned in the classroom and during exercises, CERT members can assist others in their neighborhood or workplace following an event when professional responders are not immediately available to help. CERT members also are encouraged to support emergency response agencies by taking a more active role in emergency preparedness projects in their community. More information on the CERT program managed by MFD can be found at https://www.monterey.org/ city_hall/fire/preparedness/cert_program.php.
▪ Firewise Communities – The Firewise Community program is a national community wildfire risk mitigation program administered by the National Fire Protection Association’s Firewise USA program. This program provides a collaborative framework to help neighbors in a geographic area get organized, find direction, and take action to increase the ignition resistance of their homes. A Firewise Community is one that has taken appropriate measures to become more resistant to wildfire structural damage. Firewise techniques include minimizing the risk of home ignition by carefully landscaping around residential structures, such as thinning trees and brush and choosing fire-resistant plants, selecting ignition-resistant building materials, and positioning structures away from slopes.
▪ AlertMontereyCounty – AlertMontereyCounty is an emergency notification system that allows the County of Monterey to alert individuals of existing or potential emergencies. Through Aware and Prepare, the County of Monterey can alert individuals by landline, cell phone, and email. Individuals can register for emergency alerts at https://member.everbridge.net/453003085611217/new. ▪ Monterey County Fire Safe Council – The Monterey County Fire Safe Council provides education, supports community emergency planning, and helps create fire-adaptive communities through mitigation actions.

Some of the education programs the Monterey Fire Safe Council offers are Ready! Set! Go! developed by CAL FIRE, Firewise USA, and One Less Spark–One Less Wildfire. The Monterey County Fire Safe Council also provides “Wildfire and You” workshops covering topics including evacuation, vegetation management, and home hardening. Interested residents can register for this workshop at https://workshops.firesafemonterey.org/courses/wild-fire-and-you.

Vegetation Management
Vegetation management plays a major role in reducing the potential for damaging and destructive wildfires through removing, rearranging, and maintaining the spatial distribution of fuels. The following lists the objectives of vegetation management in the Plan Area.
▪ Reduce wildfire hazard to mitigate risks to communities ▪ Reduce the likelihood of ignitions and extreme fire behavior to enhance public and firefighter safety ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 38, Packet Page 133

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 25 NOVEMBER 2023
▪ Implement practices to avoid or minimize impacts to natural resources ▪ Maintain an active role in regional efforts to reduce wildfire on the Monterey Peninsula Vegetation management may be conducted through a variety of general treatment types depending on the specific management goals, environmental constraints, and community acceptance. Treatment techniques include manual, mechanical, grazing, prescribed fire, and chemical treatments. For a detailed description of these treatment techniques and best management practices, see Appendix C. Vegetation management projects can be performed at the landscape, community, or parcel level and include the following:
▪ Ladder Fuels Reduction: Removal or reduction of fuels that provide vertical continuity allowing fire to carry from surface fuels into the crowns of trees or shrubs with relative ease ▪ Community Fuel Breaks: Strategic areas of fuels reduction near communities to reduce fire intensity near communities and provide conditions favorable for effective fire suppression ▪ Roadside Fuels Reduction: Reduction of flashy and small diameter vegetation within 30 feet of roadways to decrease the likelihood of fires igniting along roadways and reduce fire behavior to increase the capacity for safe evacuation
▪ Forest Thinning: Strategic removal of trees to create conditions non-conducive to rapid wildfire spread; trees removed often include trees that are small diameter or dead and dying ▪ Defensible Space: Fuels reduction within 100 feet of structures intended to reduce structural ignitability and increase the capacity for structure protection; vegetation management actions to create defensible space can be found at https://www.firesafemonterey.org/defensible-space.html ▪ Invasive Species Management: Removal or control of invasive species through grazing, mechanical, or chemical removal in addition to management practices designed to minimize further spread of invasives Monterey Fire Department Defensible Space Inspections
MFD conducts wildland fire safety inspections for all properties within the Cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, Carmelby-the-Sea, and Sand City. These defensible space inspections are performed annually to help minimize fire spread and growth and reduce potential loss in the event a wildland fire occurs. All properties are inspected, including residential, commercial, and vacant lots. Once the inspection has been completed, a notice is left if any corrective actions should be taken by the owner/occupant. The notices are in the form of an adhesive notice left on or near the front door. Vacant lot notices are mailed to the property owner. Follow-up re-inspections occur in 30 days to ensure that owners are properly preparing their properties and following state and local regulations. The status of a property can be determined by visiting monterey.org/city_hall/departments/fire and clicking the button to check the fire defensible space status map.

City of Monterey Greenbelt Fuels Reduction Plan
The City of Monterey has identified eight specific areas in the city greenbelt system with high fire hazard due substantial fuel loads. These areas include the Skyline Forest, Veterans Park, Monte Vista, Carmelo Street, Don Dahvee, Josselyn Canyon, Fisherman Flats, and Old Capitol Site greenbelts. If a wildfire were to occur in these greenbelts, it could have severe impacts to WUI communities and natural resources.

To address this issue, the city's urban forestry division has implemented a fuels reduction program, which operates on a 5-year rotating maintenance cycle and aims to remove undergrowth, promote the growth of native plants, and ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 39, Packet Page 134

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 26 NOVEMBER 2023
decrease the amount of fuel available for wildfires. The management of fire fuel hazards involves various measures, including but not limited to thinning out vegetation; removing trees, with a focus on dead and dying ones; trimming or pruning trees or large shrubs in defensible spaces to reduce fuel continuity both vertically and horizontally; removing exotic or invasive plants; and employing prescribed grazing techniques, using goats and sheep, to reduce and eliminate vegetation in areas with high fire risk due to dry conditions.

George Washington Park Perimeter Fuels Reduction
Fuels reduction activities are conducted annually within 100 feet of the homes surrounding the park. The management area is “U”-shaped and generally forms a 30- to 40-foot-wide strip around the perimeter of the park, beginning on the east side of the park at Gibson Avenue, wrapping around the north end of the park, and ending on the west side of the park near the intersections of 17 Mile Drive and Melrose Drive. The width of the strip widens to 100 feet at the northwest corner of the park where there is a strip of homes that back up to the park boundary. Within this strip, vegetation management actions are performed to adhere to CAL FIRE’s defensible space requirements.

CAL FIRE San Benito Monterey Unit Fuels Reduction Projects CAL FIRE San Benito Monterey Unit conducts a variety of fuels reduction projects in state responsibility area lands adjacent to the Plan Area. The Pebble Beach Fuels Reduction Project includes strategic fuel reduction treatments across 176 acres in Pebble Beach. Activities performed include the following: chipping, grazing, mastication, thinning (manual), thinning (mechanical), and removal of small diameter trees (less than 6 inches diameter at breast height).

Other ongoing CAL FIRE fuels reduction programs in adjacent ownerships include the Pescadero Canyon Fuel Reduction Grazing Project, High Meadows Fuel Reduction Program, Outlook Fire Road Maintenance Program, and Jack’s Peak Goat Grazing and Mastication Program.

Take Action
Terrain, vegetation, and climatic conditions in the Plan Area combine to create a unique situation capable of supporting high-intensity, and sometimes damaging wildfires. There are two main components to reducing structural ignitability: vegetation management through defensible space and structural hardening. Plan Area residents are encouraged to implement these practices proven effective in mitigating losses from wildfires.

Defensible Space: Defensible space is an effective means of reducing the risk of loss of life and property due to wildfire in the WUI. Defensible space works to achieve four objectives: reduce the risk of direct flame contact with a structure, reduce the overall fire intensity and rate of spread near a structure, remove ember sources and provide a space for embers to fall to the ground before reaching the structure, and provide an area for firefighters to safely engage with the fire and provide access to structures. A defensible space zone that is around the entire structure has been proven to be effective for achieving these objectives (Syphard et al. 2014). Conversely, the lack of defensible space within 30 feet of a structure has been shown to be a key factor in structure ignition during wildfires (Troy 2020). The following three zones are identified for defensible space areas. ▪ Zone 0 (0–5 feet): Zone 0, sometimes referred to as the “Immediate Zone,” is the area nearest the house and includes the surfaces of the structure itself, plants, decks, and outdoor furniture. Ideally, there should ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 40, Packet Page 135

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 27 NOVEMBER 2023
be zero combustibles in this zone. This area is the most vulnerable and should be more aggressively maintained to be fire resistant.
▪ Zone 1 (5–30 feet): Zone 1, sometimes referred to as the “Intermediate Zone,” extends from the house’s exterior walls to a distance of 30 feet. Management actions include a combination of landscaping and hardscaping, with the goal of moderating fire behavior. ▪ Zone 2 (30–100 feet): Zone 2, sometimes referred to as the “Extended Zone,” extends from 30 feet to at least 100 feet. More defensible space may be required depending on site-specific characteristics, such as topography, building construction, and vegetation types, or based on local regulations.

Structural Hardening: Vegetation management and defensible space are key components to an overall fire protection strategy; however, structural hardening also plays an important role in minimizing the potential for structure ignitions.

Structural hardening refers to steps a property owner may take to enhance the survivability of an existing structure that may not be up to the current building or residential code standards for wildland areas. Homes survive wildfires through a combination of vegetation management and maintenance, management of combustible materials on the property, and installation and maintenance of fire- and ember-resistant construction materials. Hardening of the homes and other structures to enhance survivability during a wildfire would include retrofitting the most vulnerable home features, including the following:
▪ Roofs
▪ Vents
▪ Eaves and soffits
▪ Windows
▪ Walls
▪ Decks
▪ Rain gutters
▪ Patio covers
▪ Chimneys
▪ Garages
▪ Fences
▪ Driveway and access roads
▪ Address signage
▪ Water supply
Although fire-resistant construction standards are mandatory for new buildings in Very High FHSZs within the Plan Area, hardening of existing structures is voluntary. Adopting mandatory home hardening provisions of building and fire codes is problematic because existing, nonconforming structures were typically approved and built to the codes in effect at the time of construction. The problem persists, however, that a burning structure in a wildfire contributes to the fire and presents a danger to nearby structures through radiant heat exposure and other structures downwind by way of embers. Retrofits to existing structures can reduce fire risk, and some cost-sharing and grant programs are available to offset costs. Resources for hardening structures can be found on the project story map.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 41, Packet Page 136

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 28 NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 42, Packet Page 137 14887 29 NOVEMBER 2023
3 Action Plan
This section identifies recommended actions and projects to be implemented in the Plan Area that would minimize wildfire impacts to the community. Appendix D identifies priority projects that were identified during the CWPP development projects. Projects and actions identified in this section and Appendix A would need to be funded and approved by the appropriate regulatory authority prior to implementation. In some cases, completion of environmental review would be necessary prior to project implementation (see Appendix E).

MFD, along with Plan Area interested parties and community members, intend to assess project progress annually and invite agencies, landowners, and involved community members to submit projects that would minimize wildfire risk and promote community wildfire protection. Project identification and implementation is an ongoing process, and additional projects will be evaluated by MFD. Where applicable, the projects or recommended actions presented in this section will be updated to reflect additions or changes.

This CWPP is a living document and has been created to allow for ongoing management, updates, and community input intended to reduce the impact of wildfires in the Plan Area.

3.1 Plan Monitoring and Management
Long-term monitoring and management of the CWPP is necessary to ensure successful implementation of the plan, as well as to identify new or additional projects for reducing overall community wildfire risk. Consistent review and monitoring of projects and project areas (e.g., vegetation management areas) is also important for identifying areas that need follow-up maintenance. The following actions by MFD are intended to ensure consistent monitoring of the CWPP:
▪ Maintain the CWPP. Long-term maintenance of this CWPP is essential. Maintaining the CWPP document is critical to track completed projects and ongoing vegetation management efforts, and, most importantly, to address and define new priority projects. The CWPP should be reviewed annually with an edit cycle every 3 to 5 years.
▪ Review and expand on the vegetation management projects identified in this CWPP. The prioritized list/map of vegetation management projects included in Appendix D of this CWPP should be reviewed at least annually and updated accordingly. Requests from project proponents to update the priority projects list should be considered in a timely manner.
▪ Collaborate with interested parties to maintain the CWPP. Set up a standing committee to address the longterm management and maintenance of this CWPP.

3.2 Action Plan
The following guiding principles, goals, and action items constitute the Action Plan for implementing the CWPP. The Action Plan should be implemented to serve and protect lives, property, critical infrastructure, and Plan Area resources threatened by wildland fire. MFD and partner cities recognize the catastrophic impacts of wildfire in the Plan Area community. This CWPP is intended to reduce wildfire hazards and risk through implementation of the action items outlined in this section.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 43, Packet Page 138

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 30 NOVEMBER 2023
Table 12. Action Plan
Guiding Principle 1: An informed community
Goal: Community members will be informed about wildfire risks through educational outreach efforts and will work together to create fire-adapted neighborhoods and communities.

Action
Responsible
Party/Partnerships
Priority
(Low-MedHigh)
Cost
($–$$$)
Conduct biannual educational seminars to educate
residents on wildfire preparedness and mitigation;
educational topics may include, but are not limited to the following:
▪ Defensible Space
▪ Structural Hardening and Retrofits
▪ Evacuation
▪ Invasive Species Removal
MFD High $
Create educational materials depicting proper defensible space guidelines specific to homes within a Monterey
pine/oak woodland forest
MFD High $
Maintain the project StoryMap as a hub for information
sharing amongst community members and interested
parties
MFD/consultant High $
Provide information and resources to community groups,
neighborhood associations, homeowners’ associations,
etc. to pursue National Fire Protection Association
Firewise USA Program Community Certifications to reduce wildfire risk at a local level
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
High $
Conduct outreach specific to vulnerable communities
(frontline populations and communities) to provide
education regarding wildfire hazards, emergency
communications, and evacuation procedures in the Plan
Area (outreach should address emergency notifications,
materials, training and communications for non-English
speakers, social networks, and community advisory
councils and should engage local leaders where possible) MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS, Monterey
County Fire Safe
Council
Low/Med $
Collaborate with Monterey County Fire Safe Council to
leverage existing constituents to disseminate educational information
MFD Med $
Leverage existing resources and groups, such as the
cities’ Community Emergency Response Team (CERT), to
disseminate information on wildfire risk, mitigation
strategies, and evacuation procedures
MFD, Monterey, CBTS Med $
Host practice evacuation events throughout the Plan Area on an annual basis
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Low $$$
Conduct public outreach/education in communities where
vegetation management projects are proposed prior to
initiation of work
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
High $
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 44, Packet Page 139

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 31 NOVEMBER 2023
Table 12. Action Plan
Coordinate with the landowners near the Deer Flats
community to develop strategies for conducting fuels
reduction projects across multiple land ownerships
MFD, Monterey,
County, City of
Forester
Med $$
Guiding Principle 2: Cohesive fire adaptation built on partnerships Goal: Adjacent jurisdictions and affiliated organizations will be included in fire adaptation and management efforts to create a network of fire-safe communities.

Action
Responsible
Party/Partnerships
Priority
(Low-MedHigh)
Cost
($ -
$$$)
Support collaborative vegetation management projects
across ownership boundaries that reduce fire hazard and protect natural and agricultural resources
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS, Pebble Beach
Community Services
District, Presidio, La
Mesa, NSAM
Med $
Collaborate with Pebble Beach Community Services
District and CAL FIRE to create cohesive wildfire mitigation strategies that foster a holistic approach to wildfire risk reduction
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS, Pebble Beach
Community Services
District
High $
Collaborate with the U.S. Army Garrison Presidio of
Monterey and the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School to
create cohesive wildfire mitigation strategies
MFD, Monterey,
NSAM, La Mesa,
Presidio
High $
Consult with local tribes during wildfire mitigation planning MFD, Monterey, PG, CBTS, local tribal
council
Med $
Collaborate with the Monterey County Fire Safe Council to prioritize community wildfire mitigation projects
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS, Monterey
County Fire Safe
Council
Med $
Work with recreational facilities, campgrounds, and other guest-oriented businesses to develop evacuation preplans and preparedness for wildfire
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Low $
Coordinate with interested parties (U.S. Forest Service, CAL FIRE, County of Monterey, Presidio, land trusts, and others) to facilitate information and data sharing, resource sharing, coordination of management activities, property access, grant funding, and cost-sharing opportunities
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS, regional
partners as indicated
Med $$
Update the City of Monterey General Plan Safety Element to address wildfire risk and identify goals and policies to implement risk reduction strategies, such as vegetation treatment targets (e.g., acres treated per year), defensible space requirements, and development requirements
beyond Chapter 7A; and discuss requirements for areas
within the City’s High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones as identified in Figure 14 of the General Plan
MFD, Monterey High $$
Update the City of Monterey General Plan Public Facilities Element to provide recent information regarding Monterey Fire Department’s role and communities served
MFD, Monterey Med $
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 45, Packet Page 140

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 32 NOVEMBER 2023
Table 12. Action Plan
Partner with universities and research institutions to
support or conduct wildfire-related projects or research that would benefit the Plan Area
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Low $
Develop an evacuation plan for the Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula
MFD, Community
Hospital of the
Monterey Peninsula,
Monterey County
Office of Emergency
Services
Low $$
Guiding Principle 3: Hardened infrastructure
Goal: Infrastructure will be hardened against wildfire to allow for safe access and the ability of structures and landscapes to withstand wildfire.

Action
Responsible
Party/Partnerships
Priority
(Low-MedHigh)
Cost
($ -
$$$)
Identify critical infrastructure and facilities in need of structural hardening
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Med $
Conduct roadside fuels reduction along major roadways
and roads identified as evacuation routes by each city
(see Appendix D for recommended roadside fuel
treatment projects)
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
High $$
Identify and remove hazardous trees along major
evacuation corridors
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Med $$
Revaluate City Tree Ordinances to expedite maintenance
or the removal of trees that pose wildfire hazards (e.g., allow for Monterey Fire Department tree inspection to
determine wildfire hazard)
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Med $
Develop a coordinated evacuation plan for the Plan Area MFD, Monterey, PG, CBTS, Monterey
County Department
of Emergency
Management
Med $
Evaluate opportunities for engaging Plan Area residents and landowners in structural retrofit programs
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Med $$
Encourage structural retrofits for Plan Area structures through assessments, community education, and grant
funding opportunities
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Low $$$
Install evacuation signage/lighting along designated
evacuation routes
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Low $$$
Facilitate emergency vehicle access and evaluate the
need for road maintenance on private and public roads
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Med $$
Coordinate with those with jurisdiction over roadways
(e.g., the California Department of Transportation, cities, landowners) to establish road maintenance agreements
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Med $$
Establish staging areas and shelter-in-place sites
throughout the Plan Area where the potential exists for MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Low $$$
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 46, Packet Page 141

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 33 NOVEMBER 2023
Table 12. Action Plan
road blockage due to wildfire, flood, downed trees, and other emergencies
Conduct structural hardening retrofits at the Westland
House of the Community Hospital of the Monterey
Peninsula
MFD, Monterey,
Montage Health
Low $
Guiding Principle 4: Healthy, fire-adapted ecosystems
Goal: Landscapes and open space areas will be maintained with ecosystem health, environmental protection, and respect for cultural significance as a priority.

Action
Responsible
Party/Partnerships
Priority
(Low-MedHigh)
Cost
($ -
$$$)
Implement vegetation treatment activities identified in Appendix C
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
High $$$
Ensure appropriate environmental review is conducted
prior to implementing fuels reduction projects
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
High $$
Consult with a qualified biologist and/or Registered
Professional Forester when designing fuels treatment
prescriptions
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
High $$
Promote Monterey pine regeneration through fuels
reduction projects in Monterey pine forests (projects may include raking and removing/reducing the pine needle
and leaf litter layer to expose mineral soil to promote seedling establishment in treated areas)
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Med $$
Develop a French broom removal program to increase the
scale of invasive species management and reduce
hazardous ladder fuels across the Plan Area
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Med $$$
Remove dead and down woody debris annually following
winter storms and prior to June 1 of each year
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Med $$$
Conduct annual monitoring of vegetation management
project areas and implement treatment maintenance as
needed (monitoring efforts can identify areas in need of additional vegetation management treatments)
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
High $$
Consider the use of cultural burning MFD, Monterey, PG, CBTS
Low $$$
Develop post-fire rehabilitation guidelines in cooperation with appropriate federal, state, and local agencies; and ensure that post-fire rehabilitation guidelines focus on reducing the importation or spread of invasive species
and focus on restoring native habitats where applicable MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Low $$$
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 47, Packet Page 142

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 34 NOVEMBER 2023
Table 12. Action Plan
Guiding Principle 5: Coordinated response to wildfires
Goal: The Monterey Fire Department and mutual aid partners will have the capacity to respond to wildfire emergencies while maintaining firefighter and community safety.

Action
Responsible
Party/Partnerships
Priority
(Low-MedHigh)
Cost
($ -
$$$)
Hold annual meetings with mutual aid partners to discuss emergency response goals and ensure targets are being
met
MFD, various partner
agencies, Monterey
County Department
of Emergency
Management
High $
Prepare annual reports of incidents and responding
mutual aid partners
MFD Med $
Identify additional resources needed to adequately
respond to wildfires and achieve response target goals
MFD Med $
Guiding Principle 6: Sufficient funding and resources
Goal: Wildfire management efforts will be supported through sufficient financial investment and staffing.

Action
Responsible
Party/Partnerships
Priority
(Low-MedHigh)
Cost
($ -
$$$)
Evaluate staffing capacity annually and identify staffing needs to ensure an adequate capacity for widespread
community wildfire mitigation projects
MFD High $
Identify and pursue grant funding opportunities for wildfire projects and apply for appropriate grants or cost-share programs (wildfire projects may include those associated with vegetation management, structural retrofits
[structural hardening], planning, and community
education or engagement; see Appendix F for potential
funding opportunities)
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Med $$
Pursue efforts to get Plan Area communities on
California’s Fire Risk Reduction Communities List to be prioritized for California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Fire Prevention Grant Funding
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Low $$
Pursue the development of a Home Hardening Grant
Program
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Low $$
Collaborate with the Monterey County Fire Safe Council to obtain grant funding for community wildfire mitigation
projects
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS, Monterey
County Fire Safe
Council
Med $
Increase the number of properties inspected in the Plan Area annually and set inspection targets for the Monterey Fire Department
MFD High $
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 48, Packet Page 143

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 35 NOVEMBER 2023
Table 12. Action Plan
Empower neighborhood councils, community groups,
homeowners’ associations, etc. to pursue grant funding
for community-scale retrofits
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Med $
Evaluate opportunities for subsidies or incentive programs for property owners to complete and maintain defensible space vegetation management work
MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Low $
Notes: MFD = Monterey Fire Department; Monterey = City of Monterey; PG = City of Pacific Grove; CBTS = City of Carmel-by-the-Sea; County = County of Monterey; HOA = homeowners’ association; CAL FIRE = California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; NSAM = Naval Support Activity Monterey.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 49, Packet Page 144

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 36 NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 50, Packet Page 145 4 Community Wildfire Protection
Plan Authorization
The Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove CWPP was collaboratively developed. Interested parties and local, state, and federal agencies managing land within or adjacent to the Plan Area were consulted. This document identifies and prioritizes areas for hazardous fuel reduction treatments, provides recommendations for the types and methods of treatment that will protect the at-risk communities in the Plan Area, and recommends measures to reduce the ignitability of structures and private property within the Plan Area. This CWPP is intended to better protect the community from the threat of wildfires by promoting community-level risk reduction projects.

The following entities mutually agree with the contents of the Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove CWPP:

Name: Monterey Fire Department Title: Fire Chief
Name: _________ Title: ________ _
City of Monterey
Name: _________ Title: ________ _
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Name: _________ Title: ________ _
City of Pacific Grove
Name: George Nu , Jr. Title: -=-U'-'n=it-'-'-�
CAL FIRE San Benito-Monterey Unit
DUDEK 14887
NOVEMBER 2023 37
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 51, Packet Page 146

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 38 NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 52, Packet Page 147 14887 39 NOVEMBER 2023
5 References
Agee, J.K., and C.N. Skinner. 2005. “Basic Principles of Forest Fuel Reduction Treatments.” Forest Ecology and Management 211:83–96.

Agee J., R. Wakimoto, E. Darley, and H. Biswell. 1973. “Eucalyptus Fuel Dynamics and Fire Hazard in the Oakland Hills.” California Agriculture 27(9): 13–15.

Brooks, M.L., C.M. D'Antonio, D.M. Richardson, J.B. Grace, J.E. Keeley, J.M. DiTomaso, R.J. Hobbs, M. Pellant, and D. Pyke. 2004. “Effects of Invasive Alien Plants on Fire Regimes.” BioScience 54(7):677–688.

CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2020. Unit Strategic Fire Plan San BenitoMonterey. Last updated June 1, 2020. https://www.osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/j0jcdtfz/ 2020_beu_fireplan.pdf.

CAL FIRE. 2022. “Fire Resource Assessment Program.” https://www.fire.ca.gov/Home/What-We-Do/ Fire-Resource-Assessment-Program/GIS-Mapping-and-Data-Analytics.

County of Monterey. 2023. “Wildfires.” Department of Emergency Management. https://www.co.monterey.ca.us/ government/departments-a-h/administrative-office/office-of-emergency-services/ready-montereycounty/hazard-ready/wildfire.

DiTomaso, J.M. 1998. “The Biology and Ecology of Brooms and Gorse.” Proceedings, California Weed Science Society 50:142–148.

Gabbert, B. 2014. “Eucalyptus and Fire.” Wildfire Today: Wildlife News and Opinion. March 3, 2014. Accessed July 13, 2022. http://wildfiretoday.com/2014/03/03/eucalyptus-and-fire/.

Graham, R.T., A.E. Harvey, T.B. Jain, and J.R. Tonn. 1999. The Effects of Thinning and Similar Stand Treatments on Fire behavior in Western Forests. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-463. Portland, Oregon: USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.

Gross, L. 2013. “Eucalyptus: California Icon, Fire Hazard and Invasive Species.” KQED Science. Accessed July 13, 2022. https://www.kqed.org/science/4209/eucalyptus-california-icon-fire-hazard-and-invasive-species.

Monterey County Fire Safe Council. 2023. https://www.firesafemonterey.org/history-of-wildfire-in-montereycounty.html.

Monterey County Regional Fire District. 2023. “Monterey County Regional Fire District Homepage.” https://www.mcrfd.org/.

MFD (Monterey Fire Department). 2023. “About.” https://monterey.org/city_hall/fire/about/index.php.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 53, Packet Page 148

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887 40 NOVEMBER 2023
NPS (National Park Service). 2006. “Eucalyptus: A Complex Challenge. Fire Management Resource Protection, and the Legacy of the Tasmanian Blue Gum.” Point Reyes Station, California: San Francisco Bay Area National Parks, Fire Education Office. https://www.nps.gov/pore/learn/management/upload/ firemanagement_fireeducation_newsletter_eucalyptus.pdf.

Syphard, A.D., T. Brennan, and J. Keeley. 2014. “The Role Of Defensible Space for Residential Structure Protection During Wildfires.” 2014 International Journal of Wildland Fire. 23(8) 1,165–1,175.

Troy A. 2020. “A Spatial Analysis of Structure Loss and Survival Resulting from the 2018 Camp Fire in Paradise, California.” Southwest Fire Science Consortium. Accessed December 2021. https://www.frames.gov/ event/560360.

U.S. Army Garrison Presidio of Monterey. 2023. “Presidio of Monterey Fire Department.” https://home.army.mil/ monterey/about/garrison-directorates/emergency-services/presidio-monterey-fire-department.

U.S. Census 2022. U.S. Census Bureau Quick Facts. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/ table/pacificgrovecitycalifornia,montereycitycalifornia,US U.S. Climate Data. 2023. U.S. Climate Data Monthly Averages. https://www.usclimatedata.com/.

USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2022. Fire Management. https://www.fs.usda.gov/main/lpnf/fire.

Wolf, K., and J. DiTomaso. 2016. “Management of Blue Gum Eucalyptus in California Requires Region-Specific Consideration.” California Agriculture 70(1): 39–47. http://calag.ucanr.edu/archive/?article= ca.v070n01p39.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 54, Packet Page 149 Date: 1/6/2023 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path: Z:\Projects\j1488701\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\CWPP\Figure1_PlanArea.mxd Pebble Beach
Del Monte
Forest

CITY OF MONTEREY

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
CARMEL

BY-THE-SEA
Pacific Ocean
Carmel Bay
Monterey Bay
City of
Del Rey
Oaks
Sand City
City of
Seaside
218
68 1
Plan Area
Community Wildfire Protection Plan - Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea SOURCE: Esri Clarity Basemap 2022, OpenStreetMap
0 2,000 4,000Feet
City Boundary
CWPP Plan Area
FIGURE 1
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 55, Packet Page 150

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887
42 NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 56, Packet Page 151 Fire Hazard Severity Zones
Community Wildfire Protection Plan - Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea FIGURE 2
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 57, Packet Page 152

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887
44 NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 58, Packet Page 153 Wildland-Urban
Interface
Community Areas
0 0.5 1
Miles
Wildland-Urban Interface
Community Wildfire Protection Plan - Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea FIGURE 3
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 59, Packet Page 154

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887
46 NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 60, Packet Page 155 Community Relative Risk Ranking
Community Wildfire Protection Plan - Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea FIGURE 4
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 61, Packet Page 156

MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE / COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN 14887
48 NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 62, Packet Page 157 Appendix A
Wildfire Hazard and Risk Assessment Methodology for
Monterey, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Pacific Grove
Community Wildfire Protection Plan
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 63, Packet Page 158 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 64, Packet Page 159 14887 i
NOVEMBER 2023
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.
1 Wildfire Risk Assessment ................................................................................................................................ A-1

1.1 Wildfire Hazard Assessment.............................................................................................................. A-1

1.1.1 Burn Probability..................................................................................................................... A-3

1.1.2 Conditional Flame Length .................................................................................................... A-4

1.1.3 Spotting Potential ................................................................................................................. A-5

1.1.4 Integrated Hazard................................................................................................................. A-5

1.1.5 Landscape Fire Behavior...................................................................................................... A-6

1.1.6 Ember Hazard Assessment.................................................................................................. A-6

1.2 Wildfire Risk Assessment................................................................................................................... A-7

1.2.1 Highly Valued Resources or Assets...................................................................................... A-8

1.2.2 Quantitative Wildfire Risk Assessment................................................................................ A-9 2 Community Relative Risk Ranking Assessment........................................................................................... A-12 3 References ..................................................................................................................................................... A-14 TABLES
1 Wildfire Behavior Modeling Inputs .................................................................................................................. A-2 2 Primary HVRAs and Sub-HVRAs....................................................................................................................... A-8 3 Community Relative Risk Ranking Input Variables...................................................................................... A-13 4 Community Relative Risk Ranking Classification Values............................................................................. A-13

EXHIBITS
1 Burn probability and conditional flame length classes for determining Integrated Hazard........................ A-6 2 Spotting diagram.............................................................................................................................................. A-7 3 Quantitative wildfire risk assessment diagram............................................................................................... A-8 4 Quantitative wildfire risk assessment flowchart ............................................................................................ A-9 5 Conditional weighted net value change........................................................................................................ A-10 6 Expected weighted net value change. .......................................................................................................... A-11 7 Conceptual framework for calculating wildfire hazard. ............................................................................... A-12 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 65, Packet Page 160 APPENDIX A / WILDFIRE HAZARD AND RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY FOR MONTEREY, CARMEL-BYTHE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE 14887 ii NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 66, Packet Page 161 14887 A-1
NOVEMBER 2023
1 Wildfire Risk Assessment
A Wildfire Risk Assessment (WRA) was conducted for the Plan Area (Cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmelby-the-Sea) and surrounding regions (Pebble Beach and other unincorporated areas) using the Interagency Fuel Treatment Decision Support System (IFTDSS) program (USDOI and USDA 2022). The assessment was conducted in two basic stages: the initial stage modeled wildfire hazards, and the second stage modeled wildfire risk. Wildfire hazard represents the existing wildfire environment and potential wildfire behavior occurring in that environment.

Wildfire risk is the intersection of wildfire hazard and identified highly valued resources and assets and represents the potential impact of wildfire on these assets and resources. This memorandum summarizes the WRA and includes a discussion of datasets, assumptions, model inputs, and model results. The model results can be utilized to identify and prioritize vegetation management project locations intended to reduce wildfire risk.

1.1 Wildfire Hazard Assessment
A Landscape Burn Probability (LBP) analysis was performed in the IFTDSS software to evaluate Integrated Hazard.

Integrated Hazard is an analysis process that combines two important measures—burn probability and conditional flame length—into a single geographic information system (GIS) output layer. The LBP model is identical to the Minimum Travel Time Burn Probability model in FlamMap. The LBP analysis has fixed input variables (see Table 1) and simulates head, backing, and flanking fire front (see Section 1.1.2, Conditional Flame Length). Conditional flame length is the mean flame length value (in feet) for all the randomly simulated fires that burn a given point of the analysis area during a model run. The Integrated Hazard modeling analysis generates seven relative hazard classes based on the intersection between burn probability and conditional flame length (see Section 1.1.4, Integrated Hazard).

To initiate the modeling effort, a Landscape Base file was selected and analyzed. The Landscape Base file consisted of eight distinct data layers representing terrain (elevation, slope, and aspect) and vegetation/fuels (fuel model designation, canopy cover, stand height, canopy base height, and canopy bulk density). The Landscape Base file was sourced from the 2016 LANDFIRE dataset embedded in the IFTDSS application. LANDFIRE base data is provided in raster format, with a ground resolution of 30 meters. 1 The 2016 Landscape Base file was evaluated to
confirm fuel model accuracy.

The 2016 LANDFIRE data is the most current publicly available data in IFTDSS and includes a remap of vegetation/fuels in disturbance areas. LANDFIRE remapped disturbance areas between 2009 and 2016 (including wildfires) such that the data represents pre-disturbance conditions. The 2016 LANDFIRE dataset was evaluated for the Plan Area and compared with available fire history datasets. The 2016 LANDFIRE dataset represents fuel conditions present prior to major fires that occurred in the Plan Area from 2017 through 2021 (e.g., 2018 Woolsey Fire). The pre-burn conditions represented in this dataset include mature, sometimes decadent vegetation communities that can support higher-severity wildfires. No modifications to the 2016 LANDFIRE dataset were made.

Future LANDFIRE datasets are anticipated to include the results of remapping efforts, as described, allowing for this WRA to be repeated in the future.

From a wildfire modeling perspective, the Plan Area exhibits characteristics that result in inaccuracies in the LANDFIRE Landscape file and most specifically the fuel model. LANDFIRE fuel models are determined through 1 Individual mapping unit in the Landscape Base file representing an area measuring 30 meters by 30 meters on the ground.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 67, Packet Page 162

APPENDIX A / MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE, FOR WILDFIRE HAZARD AND RISK

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
14887 A-2
NOVEMBER 2023
satellite imagery and are generally most accurate when representing large continuous tracts of natural vegetation.

The Plan Area includes patches of natural vegetation intermixed with communities and urbanized areas. When analyzing the default landscape data, it was clear that many areas of natural vegetation were not recognized due to their proximity to urbanized areas. The converse was also evident, as many urban areas (for example, Downtown Carmel) were assigned vegetative fuel models even though the ground surface is non-burnable. This is due to the considerable amount of street trees in the Plan Area, which misguide the designated surface fuel model selection.

The 2019 National Land Cover Database (NLCD) was used to modify the fuel model in the assessment area to accurately represent fuel models in urbanized areas. The NLCD is created in cooperation with the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium, a partnership of federal agencies that produce nationally consistent land cover datasets for the United States. The NLCD includes an impervious surfaces layer, which allows for the identification of urban ground cover, including paved areas and structures. Impervious surfaces were overlayed for the assessment area and assigned to Fuel Model NB1 (Urban/Suburban) using the Landscape edit feature in IFTDSS.

Irrigated and maintained golf course holes were also set to Fuel Model NB1. This resulted in an overall increase in non-burnable areas in the assessment area and a more accurate picture of surface fuel models. The fuel model was then re-examined to identify errors in the NLCD impervious surfaces layer. Areas of natural vegetation improperly classified as urban areas were assigned fuel models based on vegetation conditions observed during the field visit. The LANDFIRE fuel model dataset was further edited to reflect the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) state responsibility area fuel model designations for Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) forests. This data was obtained from CAL FIRE’s 2022 State Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zone intermediary datasets (CAL FIRE 2022). The edited fuel model allows for better accuracy when modeling wildfire hazard and risk in the assessment area, especially within the wildland-urban interface.

To run LBP in IFTDSS, model inputs are required for wind, weather, ignition, and model duration. Inputs used during this assessment are provided below in Table 1.

Table 1. Wildfire Behavior Modeling Inputs
Model Input 97th Percentile 50th Percentile
Wind Speed 26 mph 6 mph
Wind Direction 40 degrees N/A
Wind Type Gridded Uphill
1-Hour Fuel Moisture 5% 12%
10-Hour Fuel Moisture 7% 15%
100-Hour Fuel Moisture 11% 18%
Herbaceous Fuel Moisture 40% 60%
Live Woody Fuel Moisture 60% 80%
Crown Fire Calculation Method Scott/Reinhart Scott/Reinhart Spotting Probability 40% 15%
Note: N/A = not available.

Wind speed, wind direction, and fuel moisture values were determined through local Remote Automated Weather Stations, historic wildfire reports, the National Fuel Moisture Database for the CAL FIRE San Benito-Monterey Unit using the Pebble Beach sampling site, and guidance from local fire officials. National Fuel Moisture Database data was processed to determine 97th and 50th percentile fuel moisture values (1-hour, 10-hour, and 100-hour fuel ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 68, Packet Page 163

APPENDIX A / MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE, FOR WILDFIRE HAZARD AND RISK

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
14887 A-3
NOVEMBER 2023
moistures, live herbaceous moisture, and live woody moisture), wind speeds, and wind directions. The 97th percentile values, reflecting extremely low fuel moisture and very high wind speeds, were used for peak weather (August–October) scenarios. Wind data for 50th and 97th percentile weather was obtained from the Ford Ord #1 Remote Automated Weather Station using the FireFamily Plus software.

For 97th percentile weather conditions, gridded winds were used to model fire behavior, which utilize the WindNinja program embedded in IFTDSS. Gridded winds alter wind flows across the landscape based on topographic effect (e.g., drag effect vegetation has on wind flow). Gridded winds more accurately model the effects of complex terrain (e.g., funneling through narrow canyons) during directional wind events. Uphill winds were utilized to model fire behavior during 50th percentile weather conditions.

Fuel moisture values were set to “do not condition” for all three scenarios. This approach is typically used when fuel moistures are known, as was the case with this analysis (fuel moisture values were instead input directly, as identified in Table 1). The Scott/Reinhardt (2001) crown fire model method was selected for all three scenarios as it better predicts the likelihood of crown fire transition with subsequent crown fire behavior. The spotting probability feature in IFDTSS controls how many pixels launch embers where a crown fire is initiated. Spotting probability was set to 40% and 15% for 97th and 50th percentile weather conditions, respectively. In a wind-driven fire, spotting is a major factor and significantly contributes to fire growth and can cause spot fires miles away from the flaming front (see Section 1.1.3, Spotting Potential).

Ignitions were set to random. IFTDSS models a minimum of 1,000 fires for an LBP run and keeps adding ignitions until at least 98% of the burnable portions of the analysis area burn. Burn period length describes the duration of worst-case fire growth. The burn period was set to 12 hours, the maximum value in IFTDSS.

1.1.1 Burn Probability
Burn probability represents the likelihood that a given location in the analysis area would burn, considering the model inputs used. Burn probability is related to the size of fires that occur on a given landscape, where larger fires produce higher burn probabilities than smaller fires. As fire size is a function of wildfire spread rate and wildfire duration, weather conditions that reduce spread rates will lower burn probability. Burn probability is calculated as follows:
▪ Burn Probability = number of times burned / total number of ignitions As noted, random ignitions were utilized for all model runs. A total of 14,107 modeled fires were run for the LBP analysis. In this example, if a pixel burned 850 times over the model run period (with 14,107 fire simulations), it would have a burn probability of 0.06, (850 / 14,107 = 0.06). If a pixel burned 14,107 times in 14,107 fire simulations, it would have a burn probability of 1.0, (14,107 / 14,107 = 1.0). If a pixel never burned during the 14,107 fire simulations, it would have a burn probability of 0 (0/14,107 = 0).

The modeling results for burn probability are displayed with seven distinct classes. The first two classes represent pixels that did not burn:
▪ Non-burnable – pixels have a non-burnable fuel model and cannot burn. ▪ Burnable but did not burn – pixels have burnable fuels but did not burn (e.g., a fire never reached the pixel, or a fire started within the pixel, but it was unable to burn out of the pixel because the fire spread rate was too slow).

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 69, Packet Page 164

APPENDIX A / MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE, FOR WILDFIRE HAZARD AND RISK

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
14887 A-4
NOVEMBER 2023
The other five classes are based on the maximum value of burn probability for the model run. ▪ Lowest (0%–20% of maximum)
▪ Lower (20%–40% of maximum)
▪ Middle (40%–60% of maximum)
▪ Higher (60%–80% of maximum)
▪ Highest (80%–100% of maximum)

1.1.2 Conditional Flame Length
Conditional flame length is an estimate of the mean flame length for all the fires that burn at a given point on the landscape during a model run. This value is typically lower than flame length values generated from a Landscape Fire Behavior analysis in IFTDSS as it accounts for heading, flanking, and backing fires. Heading fires typically have higher flame lengths than flanking or backing fires; thus, the conditional flame length value is lower as it represents the mean of these three fire types. Conditional flame length is also the mean of all fires encountered by a pixel over the model period as compared with a single fire. Conditional flame length values have a maximum of 25 feet.

Conditional flame length is calculated as follows (where FLPi is the probability of fire at a given intensity and FLi is the mid-point of the given intensity level):
▪ Conditional Flame Length =
The model results for conditional flame length are displayed with eight distinct classes. The first two classes represent pixels that did not burn:
▪ Non-burnable – pixels have a non-burnable fuel model and cannot burn. ▪ Burnable but did not burn – pixels have burnable fuels but did not burn (e.g., a fire never reached the pixel, or a fire started within the pixel, but it was unable to burn out of the pixel because the fire spread rate was too slow).

The remaining six classes match those of the fire intensity levels:
▪ Greater than 0–2 feet
▪ Greater than 2–4 feet
▪ Greater than 4–6 feet
▪ Greater than 6–8 feet
▪ Greater than 8–12 feet
▪ Greater than 12 feet
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 70, Packet Page 165 14887 A-5
NOVEMBER 2023

1.1.3 Spotting Potential
Spotting is the launching of embers that result in spot fires increasing the spread of a fire and is included in LBP models (it does not produce a separate model output). Spotting occurs in trees and taller vegetation where an active or passive crown fire is initiated. Spotting occurs in short range (proximate to the flaming front) and long range (a long distance from the flaming front). Past fire behavior has documented long-range spotting at distances over 1 mile from the fire’s flaming front. Spotting probability in IFTDSS ranges from 0% to 100% and controls how many pixels where a crown fire is initiated will result in embers being launched. A spotting value of 0% effectively turns off the spotting function, and a spotting value of 100% means that all points where a crown fire is initiated will launch embers.

Spotting probability also determines if a landed ember will result in a spot fire. For embers do that land, a random number, between 0 and 100, is generated. If the random number is lower than the spotting probability, then the landed ember will result in a spot fire. If the random number is higher than the spotting probability, the ember is discarded by the model, and no spotting occurs from that cell. For example, if the spotting probability is 25% and the random number generator chooses 16 then the ember lands and creates a spot fire.

The direction of ember travel is the same as the maximum spotting direction. The distance the ember travels before landing is determined using the random number generated for the cell and the maximum spotting distance. Spotting distance is calculated as follows:
▪ Spotting Distance = -log (random number) × Maximum Spot Distance / 5 If an ember lands within the fire perimeter (already burned) or non-burnable fuels, the ember is discarded, and spotting does not occur.

1.1.4 Integrated Hazard
Integrated hazard is quantified and categorized in IFTDSS using the LBP model. This model evaluates burn probability (probability of a fire occurring at a specific point under a specified set of conditions) and conditional flame length (intensity at a specific point given a fire occurs) results. A diagram of the integrated hazard analysis process is included below (Exhibit 1). Integrated hazard is categorized into seven distinct classes: the first two are for pixels that did not burn, and the remaining five classes are based on the integrated hazard matrix presented below. The seven classes include the following:
▪ Non-burnable
▪ Burnable but not burned
▪ Lowest hazard
▪ Lower hazard
▪ Middle hazard
▪ Higher hazard
▪ Highest hazard
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 71, Packet Page 166

APPENDIX A / MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE, FOR WILDFIRE HAZARD AND RISK

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
14887 A-6
NOVEMBER 2023

1.1.5 Landscape Fire Behavior
A Landscape fire behavior assessment was conducted in IFTDSS to map basic fire behavior outputs, including flame length and rate of spread. The assessment was performed under both 97th and 50th percentile weather conditions using the inputs provided in Table 1.

1.1.6 Ember Hazard Assessment
FlamMap was used to model spot fire potential for an area encompassing the Plan Area plus a buffer of approximately 2 miles. “Spotting” is the launching of embers that result in spot fires increasing the spread of a fire.

In FlamMap, spotting is only simulated from torching trees when a passive or active crown fire is modeled. Spotting only occurs in trees where an active or passive crown fire is initiated. FlamMap does not model independent crown fires. The spotting component of FlamMap is intended to compute the maximum spotting distance from a given point on a fire front if torching occurs. The maximum spotting distance is determined by particle size, burnout rate, time, or distance traveled, as identified in Exhibit 2. Smaller particles are lofted higher and transported farther but will burnout sooner than larger particles. FlamMap does not simulate the number of embers, exact location of embers, or location of resulting spot fires.

Potential ember impacts at the project site were modeled using the MAXSPOT output from FlamMap. This output provides the maximum distance a fire brand should travel corresponding to weather and fuel moisture inputs provided in (Appendix).

To create the ember exposure map, the FlamMap MAXSPOT output was buffered to each fire brand pixel’s maximum spread distance. This process was conducted for each pixel resulting in many overlapping circles of different sizes.

Exhibit 1. Burn probability and conditional flame length classes for determining Integrated Hazard ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 72, Packet Page 167

APPENDIX A / MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE, FOR WILDFIRE HAZARD AND RISK

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
14887 A-7
NOVEMBER 2023
The number of overlapping circles was then counted for each pixel using the Count Overlapping Features Tool in ArcGIS Pro. The number of overlaps for each pixel is compared to other pixels to create the ember exposure map (see StoryMap: Ember Exposure). Areas with more overlap identify locations where embers are more likely to land during a wildfire. However, since the maximum spotting distance buffer for each fire brand pixel was applied in all directions instead of only the downwind direction (embers are likely to spot predominantly downwind), the exposure map should not be utilized as a quantitative assessment, but rather a means to generally compare ember impacts throughout the assessment area.

1.2 Wildfire Risk Assessment
Following the Wildfire Hazard Assessment, a Quantitative Wildfire Risk Assessment (QWRA) was conducted to evaluate wildfire risk for the Plan Area. A QWRA aids in land management by characterizing the predicted benefits and threats from a wildfire on Highly Valued Resources or Assets (HVRAs) across a landscape. Results from a QWRA can be used to identify and prioritize potential fuel treatment areas.

Exhibit 2. Spotting diagram
Source: Finney and McHugh 2019.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 73, Packet Page 168

APPENDIX A / MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE, FOR WILDFIRE HAZARD AND RISK

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
14887 A-8
NOVEMBER 2023
The QWRA considers both the threats and benefits of
wildfire. Some resources may benefit from fire (e.g., firedependent plant species and landscapes that have departed from the historical fire regime), and others may be
threatened by fire (e.g., communities). The QWRA first looks at the level of exposure of HVRAs to wildfire by comparing burn probability, conditional flame length, and integrated hazard outputs with the location of HVRAs across the
analysis area. It then calculates the likelihood of a wildfire occurring and the susceptibility of HVRAs to potential wildfire intensity to determine risk (Exhibit 3). The following sections describe the QWRA process.

1.2.1 Highly Valued Resources
or Assets
HVRAs include natural resources or human-made assets. They can be positively or negatively affected by fire. HVRAs are categorized as either Primary HVRAs or Sub-HVRAs. Primary HVRAs are the overall categories in which the SubHVRAs are sorted. Sub-HVRAs are the geospatial component of Primary HVRAs. For example, if a Primary HVRA is Communities, a Sub-HVRA would be Low-Density Communities, a subset of Communities found in the Plan Area.

Communities was selected as the Primary HVRA for the QWRA. Sub-HVRAs include low- density, moderate density, and high-density communities. These communities may experience varying degrees of risk from wildfire due to differences in their composition and proximity to high hazard areas. Table 2 summarizes the HVRAs used in the QWRA.

Table 2. Primary HVRAs and Sub-HVRAs
Primary HVRA Sub-HVRA
Communities Low Density (>0–28 people per square mile)
Medium Density (>28–250 people per square mile)
High Density (>250 people per square mile)
Note: HVRA = Highly Valued Resources or Assets.

The QWRA process is initiated by completing an exposure analysis (EA). EA is an assessment of wildfire hazard (likelihood and intensity) where HRVAs are located. The EA quantifies the LBP model outputs where they overlap with HVRAs. It compares burn probability, conditional flame length, and integrated hazard with the HVRAs across the analysis area. The EA was run for the Communities HVRA. The EA calculates the following for each HVRA:
▪ Mean burn probability
▪ Mean conditional flame length
▪ Mean integrated hazard
▪ Mean of product of burn probability and conditional flame length ▪ Relative extent
▪ Expected burn area
Exhibit 3. Quantitative wildfire risk assessment diagram. .

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 74, Packet Page 169

APPENDIX A / MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE, FOR WILDFIRE HAZARD AND RISK

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
14887 A-9
NOVEMBER 2023
Model outputs for the EA map the intersection of HVRAs and LBP model outputs to identity the mean integrated hazard class for both the Primary and Sub-HVRAs. For this analysis, EA outputs were not exported as distinct datasets, but, rather, the outputs were incorporated into the QWRA described in the following section. Exhibit 4 provides a gpahical representation of the QWRA process.

1.2.2 Quantitative Wildfire Risk Assessment
The QWRA was initiated by selecting the completed EA for Communities (which contained all the necessary inputs from the LBP analysis and the HVRA). The QWRA analysis then quantified and prioritized wildfire risk based on the susceptibility or response of the Sub-HVRA to wildfire (Response Function) and the quantitative weight to differentiate the importance of the HVRAs (Relative Importance).

Outputs for the QWRA focus on the overall change in value (Net Value Change [NVC]), whether positive or negative, on a given pixel in the analysis area. NVC has two outputs: Conditional Weighted NVC (CwNVC) (see Section 1.2.2.1, below) and Expected Weighted NVC (EwNVC) (see Section 1.2.2.2, below). NVC assesses the modeled impacts from wildfire on a given HVRA based on the HVRA’s proximity to different integrated hazard classifications. It highlights the likely effects of a fire on HVRAs.

Exhibit 4. Quantitative wildfire risk assessment flowchart ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 75, Packet Page 170

APPENDIX A / MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE, FOR WILDFIRE HAZARD AND RISK

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
14887 A-10 NOVEMBER 2023

1.2.2.1 Conditional Weighted Net Value Change
CwNVC is a product of fire intensity, susceptibility, and importance (Exhibit 5). It highlights the likely effects of fire on HVRAs with the assumption that a fire will or has occurred. The CwNVC aids in planning scenarios where the presence of fire is assumed, and the goal is to understand the anticipated threats or benefits from fire. For example, CwNVC outputs could be evaluated where it is desirable to assess the impact of a wildfire on HVRAs. CwNVC is calculated using the following:
▪ Proportion of flame lengths (LBP output)
▪ Sub-HVRAs
▪ Response functions
▪ Relative importance
▪ Relative extent
CwNVC is calculated for every pixel in the analysis area and considers any overlapping HVRAs. Positive values are
considered benefits, and negative values are considered threats. Values of zero are neither and can occur if no HVRAs are present, fire intensity is neutral, or the summation of the NVC is zero. CwNVC is used to calculate EwNVC.

1.2.2.2 Expected Weighted Net
Value Change
EwNVC analyzes the likelihood of a fire occurring and its effect on HVRAs. EwNVC is a product of CwNVC and burn probability (Exhibit 6). It determines the risk to HVRAs by intersecting wildfire hazard with the likelihood of occurrence and the potential impact on HVRAs. EwNVC is used for planning scenarios where the likelihood of a fire occurring needs to be considered (as opposed to CwNVC, which assumes a fire will occur). EwNVC is calculated based on the following:
▪ Burn probability (LBP output)
▪ Proportion of flame lengths (LBP output)
▪ Sub-HVRAs
▪ Response functions
▪ Relative importance
EwNVC is calculated for every pixel in the analysis area. Positive values indicate the HVRA is benefited by fire, and negative values indicate the HVRAs are threatened by fire (at-risk). As EwNVC is a product of CwNVC and burn probability, it is best used for planning scenarios where the likelihood of a fire occurring needs to be considered.

EwNVC can be used to determine where best to implement fuels treatment projects.

Exhibit 5. Conditional weighted net
value change.
.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 76, Packet Page 171

APPENDIX A / MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE, FOR WILDFIRE HAZARD AND RISK

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
14887 A-11 NOVEMBER 2023
Exhibit 6. Expected weighted net value change.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 77, Packet Page 172

APPENDIX A / MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE, FOR WILDFIRE HAZARD AND RISK

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
14887 A-12 NOVEMBER 2023
2 Community Relative Risk Ranking
Assessment
A community relative risk ranking was conducted for the Plan Area to identify high risk communities where wildfire risk mitigation should be prioritized. This assessment also aims to enhance resident awareness of the relative risks associated with their community. The evaluation of community wildfire risk involved quantifying key variables within the designated community areas. Each input value was then assigned a weighting value to account for the input’s relative influence on wildfire hazard, with some inputs (i.e., proximity to hazardous vegetation) influencing wildfire hazard more than others (i.e., slope). Overall community wildfire risk was calculated at a 5-meter raster environment Exhibit 7 depicts the conceptual framework for calculating wildfire hazard.

Input variables were weighted dependent on their significance and combined to determine the overall risk ranking for communities (Table 3).

Exhibit 7. Conceptual framework for calculating wildfire hazard.

Community Relative
Wildfire Risk Score
Proximity to Hazardous
Vegetation
(0-3 * 3
Ember Exposure
(0-3) * 2.5
Dominant Vegetation Type
(0-3) * 2
Emergency Response Time
(0 or 3) * 3
Slope
(0-3) * 1
Urban Canopy Cover
(0-3) * 1
Road Network Rank
(0-3) * 1
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 78, Packet Page 173

APPENDIX A / MONTEREY, CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, AND PACIFIC GROVE, FOR WILDFIRE HAZARD AND RISK

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
14887 A-13 NOVEMBER 2023
Table 3. Community Relative Risk Ranking Input Variables Model Input and Weighting Ranking Range
Proximity to Hazardous Vegetation (3) Hazardous vegetation posing threats to communities was obtained from the Conditional Net-Value Change model results, selecting for vegetation identified as High, Higher, or Highest threat. The area of hazardous vegetation within the community and the 1,000-foot adjacent areas was compared to the overall community area to develop the input score.

Ember Exposure (2.5) The Ember Hazard Zone layer was overlayed with community boundaries to determine the proportion of the community within the Ember Hazard Zone.

Dominant Vegetation Type (2) Dominant vegetation within a community’s vicinity was determined through the edited Fuel Model dataset. Dominant fuel models were binned as either urban, herbaceous, shrub, or timber fuels and ranked from 0 to 3, respectively.

Slope (1) Average slope was determined within urbanized areas using a 30- meter digital elevation model (DEM) from the 2020 LANDFIRE landscape file. Urbanized areas were identified using the edited Fuel Model dataset, selecting for areas mapped as non-burnable.

Urban Canopy Cover (1) Canopy cover data from the California Forest Observatory was overlayed with urbanized areas to determine average urban canopy cover. Communities with greater urban canopy cover were assigned higher ranking.

Emergency Response Time (3) Emergency response time data was obtained from the Community Risk Assessment and Standards of Cover Study (Citygate Associates 2022). Communities outside of a 4-minute emergency response time were assigned a value of 3. Communities within the 4-minute emergency response window were assigned a value of 0.

Road Network Rank (1) Street data obtained from the Monterey County geographic information system portal was utilized to determine community road network ranks. Road features including dead ends, road widths less than 20 feet, and whether the community includes a secondary access were considered. Communities with these features were assigned a relative ranking from 0 to 3 depending on the extent of these road network features.

The maximum community risk value observed within the Plan Area was 32, with a minimum value of 0. The total range of observed hazard values were binned into 5 classes including Very Low, Low, Moderate, High, and Very High using the natural breaks classification method in ArcGIS Pro. The wildfire hazard classification value breaks are provided below in Table 4.

Table 4. Community Relative Risk Ranking Classification Values Hazard Score Classification Hazard Score Classification 0–4 Very Low >19–25 High
>4–11 Low >25–32 Very High
>11–19 Moderate
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 79, Packet Page 174 14887 A-14 NOVEMBER 2023
3 References
CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2022. “State Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zone” [datasets]. https://osfmfhsz.blob.core.windows.net/public/index.html.

Citygate Associates. 2022. Community Risk Assessment and Standards of Cover Study. City of Monterey. April 29, 2022.

Finney, M., and C. McHugh. 2019. FlamMap: Fire Mapping and Analysis System. Version 6.0 [software]. http://www.firelab.org/document/flammap-software.

USDOI (US Department of the Interior) and USDA (US Department of Agriculture). 2022 (version 3.4.1.3).

Interagency Fuels Treatment Decision Support System (IFTDSS). https://iftdss.firenet.gov/.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 80, Packet Page 175 Appendix B
Community Outreach
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 81, Packet Page 176 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 82, Packet Page 177

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-2
NOVEMBER 2023
Community Outreach
To complement the hazard risk analysis completed for the Plan Area, the project involved a three-prong community engagement approach. Public input is a crucial component in community wildfire protection plans (CWPPs) to ensure that the findings and recommendations presented are specialized to fit the worries, needs, and desires of each Plan Area community to help make them safer and more wildfire resilient. To ensure that the project reached the most amount of community members, the public outreach for this project involved a Stakeholder Working Group, a public survey, and one in-person community workshop for each city. 1 Stakeholder Working Group
The CWPP Stakeholder Working Group was formed to bring together a diverse representation of Monterey Fire Department staff and City staff to help advise the CWPP’s developmental process (Table B-1). Six Working Group meetings were held between January and July 2023, with each meeting facilitated by the consultant team. During the series of Working Group meetings, members were introduced to the project, presented with preliminary hazard and risk assessment findings, discussed desired project outcomes, worked collaboratively to develop the CWPP guiding principles and goals, and reviewed the administrative draft of the CWPP and Action Plan. Each Working Group member brought a unique perspective to the group, providing the context for local policy and regulatory perspectives, community challenges, and safety considerations. Key insight gathered from the Working Group meetings are summarized in Table B-2.

Table B-1. Working Group Members
Name Title Jurisdiction/ Department
Gaudenz Panholzer Fire Chief Monterey Fire Department
Jeff Field Fire Division Chief Monterey Fire Department Cheryl Kouretas Fire Department Senior Admin Analyst Monterey Fire Department Carmyn Priewe Deputy Fire Marshal Monterey Fire Department Laurie Huelga Public Information Officer City of Monterey JD Sheldon Fire Engineer Monterey Fire Department
Christy Sabdo Associate Planner City of Monterey Planning Louie Marcuzzo Park Operations Manager City of Monterey Sam Mazza Retired Fire Chief Monterey Fire Department
Thys Norton Assistant Urban Forester City of Monterey – Urban Forestry Cathy Madalone Police Chief Pacific Grove Police Department Dan Gho Public Works Director City of Pacific Grove – Public Works Anastacia Wyatt Community Development Director City of Pacific Grove Brandon Swanson Director of Community Planning and Building City of Carmel-by-the-Sea – Planning Aaron Campbell Code Compliance Officer City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Jeff Watkins Acting Police Chief City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Tom Ford Administrative Analyst City of Carmel-by-the-Sea ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 83, Packet Page 178

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-3
NOVEMBER 2023
Table B-2. Working Group Key Insights
Topics Working Group Insight
Community Wildfire
Protection Plan Applicability
Findings from this plan can help inform safety and housing elements with new goals and policies.

Community members need more education on what is considered a hazardous tree and what the removal process entails.

Outreach Communication and education are very important for these communities.

Education and the methods of communication need to match the needs and demographics on the communities being served by this plan.

Fuel Treatment Areas The Working Group discussed and compiled list of priority treatment areas based on modeling and community expertise.
2 Public Survey
For a broad understanding of how community members feel and are impacted by wildfire, we sent out an online survey using the SurveyMonkey platform. The survey had 25 questions that focused on four main categories of topics.

1. Community members’ perception of wildfire

2. How community members would or have prepared for wildfire in the past

3. Barriers that have or would prevent them from preparing for a wildfire effectively

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 84, Packet Page 179

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-4
NOVEMBER 2023

2.1 Key Results
Although our survey covered a wide range of topics regarding wildfire, the key findings will focus on each city’s wildfire concerns, desired actions, and methods to complete the desired action. When asked how concerned residents were about wildfire on a scale from 1 to 10, the average response from all residents was 7. However, when breaking it down by city, Carmel-by-the-Sea had the highest average worry of 7.4, Pacific Grove had the lowest average worry of 5.5, and Monterey was in the middle at 6.8 (Exhibit B-2).

Exhibit B-1. Community wildfire survey responses distribution ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 85, Packet Page 180

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-5
NOVEMBER 2023
When looking at the main concerns faced by residents, the top responses were fuels/vegetation on neighboring properties, limited evacuation routes, and fuels/vegetation on their own properties. When we specifically asked about barriers that would prevent community members from evacuating, the top barriers were not knowing when to leave, where to get proper evacuation information, and not having anywhere to stay when they did evacuate.

Additionally, when asked if folks felt prepared to evacuate, most (86%) of our respondents felt completely or partially prepared, and 14% indicated they were not prepared to evacuate.

Additionally, when asked what techniques were most favorable, the fuel risk reduction techniques that had an approval rating of 90% or higher were roadside vegetation clearance, defensible space, and vegetation clearance on public property. When looking at vegetation management techniques, the majority of them also had a high approval rating, including grazing, hand treatment, and mechanical or equipment treatments all having an approval rating of 65% or higher. However, using herbicide as a vegetation management technique had majority disapproval, with only 23% of respondents in support of this activity. These results help identify the most approved methods for action in each community to help the Monterey Fire Department match up a technique with a given community.

In addition to the results or the entire Plan Area, data analysis was performed to identify concerns and desired actions from each city. These subsets were chosen to help identify action items based on the worries and desires from each city (Exhibits B-3 through B-8).

Exhibit B-2. Overall wildfire concern level
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 86, Packet Page 181

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-6
NOVEMBER 2023
Carmel-by-the-Sea
Exhibit B-3. Carmel-by-the-Sea top wildfire concerns
Exhibit B-4. Carmel-by-the-Sea top desired actions
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 87, Packet Page 182

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-7
NOVEMBER 2023
Monterey
Exhibit B-5. Monterey top wildfire concerns
Exhibit B-6. Monterey top desired actions
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 88, Packet Page 183

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-8
NOVEMBER 2023
Pacific Grove
Exhibit B-7. Pacific Grove top wildfire concerns.

Exhibit B-8. Pacific Grove top desired actions .

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 89, Packet Page 184

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-9
NOVEMBER 2023
3 Community Workshops
In addition to the quantitative data received from the public survey, community workshops were conducted to get more in-depth information on how wildfire impacts community members’ lives and how actions can be taken to make them feel safer. We hosted one workshop each in the Cities of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Monterey, and Pacific Grove to ensure that we could encapsulate the opinions and perspectives of the greatest number of residents and community members possible. These workshops covered a brief overview of the project and included activities aimed at garnering discussion and gaining input form community members through passive and active activities focused on getting input through passive and active activities.

3.1 Passive Activities

3.1.1 Map Activity
The passive activities included a map activity where community members could identify areas of concern, including limited evacuation routes, hazardous vegetation, and structures where structural hardening is needed. Areas pinned by community members are shown in Figure B-1. Many of the pins were in areas that participants lived in or were familiar with, which gave great insight into those areas; however, it left a gap for areas for which we did not have representation at the workshops. This is especially true for the eastern half of Monterey, including Deer Flats and Fisherman Flats.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 90, Packet Page 185

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-10 NOVEMBER 2023

3.1.2 Bead Activity
This activity allowed residents to identify their top concern. This involved community members identifying their top concern on a poster board with various wildfire concerns listed. They then took a bead that is the same color as the concern and put it in a corresponding jar. Results are shown in Exhibit B-9.

As shown in Exhibit 9, the bead activity helped reveal that the top concerns for many of the community members were evacuation and hazardous vegetation. The graph on the left side shows the actual number of beads placed into each jar, and the right graph shows the distribution of the beads placed throughout the three cities. The right graph helps further signify the concerns that resonate more within each city.

Figure B-1. Map Activity Points.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 91, Packet Page 186

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-11 NOVEMBER 2023
Exhibit B-9. Bead activity results. .

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 92, Packet Page 187

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-12 NOVEMBER 2023
4 Community Group Discussions
Group discussions were a key feature of the community workshops to learn more about the community members’ experience with wildfire and build upon the insights received from the public survey. The discussion groups were divided amongst five topics:

1. Home Hardening

2. Fire Experience

3. Wildfire Planning

4. Defensible Space/Vegetation Management

5. Evacuation/Community Response
These discussions were framed to have participants think about each topic in terms of challenges and opportunities that could either help or harm a community in preparing for wildfire, as shown in Exhibit B-10 for example. This framing really helped garner input that can directly feed into actions items from the CWPP. Table B-3 highlights some key insights from each workshop. There were a lot of overlapping themes from each workshop, specifically around the need for better outreach, education, and desire for action. However, there were also some nuisances presented in this table and in the word clouds below (Exhibit B-11).

Exhibit B-10. Community group discussion poster.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 93, Packet Page 188

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-13 NOVEMBER 2023
Table B-3 Community Group Discussion Takeaways
City Main Takeaways
Carmel-by-the-Sea Communication was a key priority for Carmel-by-the-Sea residents. This involves many facets, including knowing where to get proper evacuation information, how to harden their homes and create defensible space, and how community members can get involved in helping make their community safer. Some key actions that resonated with community members include the following:
▪ Utilizing more avenues for education and outreach like Nextdoor, door to door, real estate agents, radio, Pinecone Weekly, mail, social media, texts/reverse 9-1-1, schools, and religious organizations
▪ Having more workshops to help build consensus on opposing perspectives within wildfire preparation, including helping residents have a better understanding of what they can do to prepare
▪ Revising city ordinances to allow for removal of hazardous vegetation Monterey Responsibility and coordination were themes that resonated with Monterey residents, from knowing who you can trust as a source for wildfire information, to wanting a deeper understanding of a community’s risks, to a better picture of how different organizations coordinate around wildfire. Some of the key actions that resonated with community members include the following:
▪ Utilizing academic institutions like the University of California or the California State University Systems for more research on modeling defensible space ▪ Having more education to clearly define the desired role of different parties before/during a wildfire, including residents, community groups, and utilities; this includes residents having a clear understanding of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s “Ready, Set, and Go!” steps, wider community buy in, engagement with community groups, and the creation of Firewise Communities ▪ Coordinating with neighbors, specifically neighbors with mobility challenges, to ensure that communities are working together in the event of an evacuation ▪ Focusing on outreach and engagement through multiple avenues from door tags, reverse 9-1-1, social media, inspections, community fire drills, community chipper programs, and more
Pacific Grove Having a holistic approach to wildfire preparation and management was stressed amongst Pacific Grove residents. In addition to the themes listed for the other cities, this group wanted to ensure that actions taken would be in accordance with the community’s environmental values. Some key actions and tools include the following:
▪ Having better education of how homeowners can balance hardening their home and creating defensible space in an environmentally friendly way, including permeable hardscape
▪ Providing access to tools to help residents during a wildfire, such as air purifiers To help synthesize to the feedback presented in the table above into a more succinct format, we decided to take the insights from the community workshop discussions and try to simplify them into key themes. This was done by taking all the Post-it notes that were used during all the discussions from the workshops and then simplifying each Post-it note into a single-word response. Then a word cloud generator was used to compile all the words. A word cloud helps signify the most important themes or takeaways by making the size of the word correspond to how many times that word was used. Therefore, themes or words that were used more often appear bigger than words or themes that were not used as much. This visualization tool is particularly useful in this case because it helps ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 94, Packet Page 189

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-14 NOVEMBER 2023
quickly identify the similarities and differences between the cities when discussing the same topic. Below are the word clouds for each of the discussion topics for each city (Exhibit B-11). As you can see, many of the word clouds have similar keywords, like communication or education, but there are still nuances and slight differences between each of them.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 95, Packet Page 190

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-15 NOVEMBER 2023
Exhibit B-11. Community group discussion word clouds.

A. Home Hardening
Carmel-by-the-Sea Monterey Pacific Grove
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 96, Packet Page 191

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-16 NOVEMBER 2023
B. Fire Experience
Carmel-by-the-Sea Monterey Pacific Grove
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 97, Packet Page 192

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-17 NOVEMBER 2023
C. Wildfire Planning
Carmel-by-the-Sea Monterey Pacific Grove
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 98, Packet Page 193

APPENDIX B / COMMUNITY OUTREACH
14887 B-18 NOVEMBER 2023
D. Defensible Space
Carmel-by-the-Sea Monterey Pacific Grove
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 99, Packet Page 194 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 100, Packet Page 195 Appendix C
Vegetation Management Techniques and Best
Management Practices
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 101, Packet Page 196 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 102, Packet Page 197

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-2
NOVEMBER 2023
1 Vegetation Management Techniques
As identified in the community wildfire protection plan, vegetation management techniques can be classified into five categories:
▪ Biological
▪ Hand Labor
▪ Mechanical
▪ Prescribed Fire
▪ Chemical
The following sections present a discussion of each of the vegetation management techniques that may be implemented, including information regarding equipment, application, timing, limiting factors, special considerations, and best management practices (BMPs).

1.1 Biological Techniques

1.1.1 Grazing
Grazing is a method of using livestock to reduce the fine fuel loading of live herbaceous growth, shrubs, and new growth of trees. Livestock, such as cattle, goats, or sheep, browse on grasses, forbs, shrubs, and fresh growth of young trees, thereby removing vegetation from the overall fine fuel load of the site. Grazing is effective in managing fine fuels and preventing the expansion of brush into grasslands. Livestock each have different grazing habits, and not all livestock are ideally suited for grazing treatments in all areas. Most livestock, with the exception of goats, do not consume live or dead, tough, woody plant material in any significant quantity as this material is generally unpalatable. Additionally, livestock does not effectively create fuel breaks but is well suited to maintain new annual growth within them.

To achieve management goals, grazing typically begins in the late spring, when the growth of annual grasses has slowed, and continues through the summer in order to reduce fine fuels prior to the onset of peak fire season.

Development of site-specific grazing management plans should be completed for proposed grazing treatments and should include goals and implementation actions to ensure that the timing of grazing treatment meets identified goals but minimizes potential negative effects. Grazing management plans should also identify the optimal stocking rate and grazing duration, typically measured in pounds per acre of residual dry matter. Optimal residual dry matter levels should be determined by overall management objectives, such as suppression of weeds, fuel load reduction, or minimization of erosion potential. As a fuel reduction technique, grazing does not need to be conducted each year if the intent is to control shrubs or maintain understory fuels; however, if the intent is to reduce grass or other flashy fuels, grazing should be conducted at least annually.

Grazing can be a relatively inexpensive and effective treatment method and can even generate revenue when cattle grazing is contracted for large areas. Control of livestock movements and prevention of overgrazing is critical for successful implementation. Using professional herders or portable fences may be an alternative to fixed fencing where the treatment is ephemeral. Additional controls may also be needed for the protection of retained plants, riparian zones, and sensitive resources areas, and to minimize erosion potential.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 103, Packet Page 198

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-3
NOVEMBER 2023

1.1.1.1 Grazing Management
Although the concept of grazing is the same regardless of which type of animal is used, how each animal type conducts its grazing varies significantly. As a result, not all animals will be ideally suited for grazing treatments in all areas. Animal selection should be determined by the fuel management goal. As noted, the development of sitespecific grazing management plans should be completed considering site-specific conditions and identified management goals. The plan should specify management objectives and standards, animal stocking rates and use levels, grazing season (turn-out and turn-in dates), and monitoring requirements and performance criteria. Stocking rates are determined by a range analysis, which calculates the number of animals required for a given period to attain the desired use level, which generally ranges from 600 to 1,000 pounds per acre of residual dry matter, depending on site-specific conditions.

Timely movement of livestock to the next treatment area or other available pastures once identified goals have been met is important to minimize potential adverse effects, including soil compaction, overgrazing, and resource damage. Fencing is an important component of grazing management efforts to prohibit livestock from leaving the identified treatment area or gaining access to riparian zones, wetlands, or other sensitive resource areas. Finally, water sources are necessary for livestock and need to be provided if insufficient water is available at the treatment site. The following summarizes specific considerations for different grazing animals:
▪ Goats: Goats also have the ability to access steeper slopes in an efficient manner. Unlike other livestock, goats prefer to browse on woody vegetation (e.g., tree leaves, twigs, vines, and shrubs) and will consume materials up to 6 feet above the ground. This grazing pattern makes goats a desirable choice for fuel reduction treatments as they can effectively create and maintain vertical separation between surface vegetation and the lower limbs of overstory trees (NRCS 2005). Additionally, substantial amounts of invasive plant seed can effectively be removed from the landscape by the use of time-controlled, shortduration, high-intensity grazing in early spring (Menke 1992). However, since goats will indiscriminately damage most plants, their use in areas with desired shrub and tree retention should be minimized as goats can girdle shrubs and trees by browsing on bark. Alternatively, portable electric fences can be effectively used to control goat herds and more effectively guide the outcome of grazing efforts. ▪ Sheep: With proper management, sheep dramatically reduce the density of grasses and can be used to suppress annual grasses (Lerner 2007). Similar to goats, sheep have the ability to access steeper slopes in an efficient manner. Sheep have an intermediate diet, as they have no preference for grasses, forbs, or shrubs and commonly consume large amounts of green grass during rapid growth stages but avoid dry mature grass (Bush 2006). In addition to their diet making them versatile for grazing, sheep can also be utilized with other species such as cattle or goats for diversity fuel treatment (Bush 2006). Substantial amounts of invasive plant seed, such as yellow star-thistle (Centaurea solstitialis), can effectively be removed from the landscape by the use of time-controlled, short-duration, high-intensity grazing in early spring (Bush 2006). However, since predation of sheep by animals such as coyotes is common, consideration needs to be given to anti-predation techniques. Portable electric fences can be effectively used to control sheep flocks and help prevent predation of the animals. ▪ Cattle: Management of cattle herd population density is necessary to limit impacts, especially as they relate to soil compaction and erosion, plant cover retention, water quality, and animal waste concentrations.

However, the steepness of the terrain significantly influences the distribution of cattle, which tend to prefer level to gently rolling hills (Bush 2006). Cattle may be better suited to larger expanses for fuels treatment rather than small, confined areas to avoid unnecessary impacts. Cattle are considered grazers and have a ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 104, Packet Page 199

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-4
NOVEMBER 2023
diet dominated by grasses and grass-like plants such as forbs (Bush 2006). Invasive plant species, such as yellow star-thistle and medusahead (Elymus caput-medusae) can effectively be removed from the landscape by the use of time-controlled, short-duration, high-intensity grazing in early spring for yellow starthistle and in late spring for medusahead (Bush 2006). Water availability and water supply also need to be considered with cattle to ensure they do not cause environmental damage to watercourses or impact water quality. Utilizing grazing for invasive species management needs to be carefully monitored to ensure the timing is correct to prevent regrowth. Fencing or cattle guards should be used to ensure cattle do not escape and unintentionally graze not prescriptive areas or interfere with adjacent land uses.

1.1.1.2 Best Management Practices for Grazing
The following BMPs should be implemented, where feasible, when utilizing grazing as a vegetation management technique. Measures addressing the BMPs below should be incorporated into grazing plans. ▪ Identify and assess streams, watercourses, and sensitive biological and cultural resources in potential grazing areas prior to turn-out and install exclusionary fencing where necessary ▪ Routinely monitor grazing activities in riparian areas to minimize the potential for stream bank damage, soil compaction, and soil deposition into streams and watercourses ▪ Prior to grazing in Environmentally Sensitive Habitat areas or riparian areas, identify thresholds that would trigger a cessation of grazing activity
▪ Avoid grazing in unstable slope areas or implement measures to minimize impacts to slope stability (e.g., reducing herd size to retain vegetation, avoiding grazing where saturated soil conditions exist) ▪ Consider vegetation type, terrain, access fire history, and management goals when selecting grazing animals ▪ Consider the timing and level of grazing practices to promote plant recruitment (e.g., timing prior to seed set of annual grasses to promote perennial species establishment) ▪ Minimize the spread of invasive plants and pathogens through the use of quarantine periods; holding areas; clean stock water; and personnel, equipment, and vehicle sanitation

1.2 Hand Labor Techniques
Hand labor involves pruning, cutting, or removing trees or other vegetation by hand or using hand-held equipment.

Other hand labor treatments involve removing dead wood, piling material, and spreading chips/mulch. Hand labor is most effective in small treatment areas or areas with difficult access where the use of heavy equipment is infeasible. Hand labor also allows for selective management or removal of targeted vegetation and is typically used in conjunction with other techniques. Manual treatment may also include lop and scatter. Lop and scatter involves cutting vegetation (using hand tools, chainsaws, weed whips, and mowers), and cut vegetation is then reduced in size by cutting into lengths no longer than 6 inches. The cut vegetation is then left on the ground within the project area no greater than 12 inches in depth. Minimal ground disturbance results using this method since the root structure of vegetation is left intact and biomass generated from vegetation treatment is left on site.

Proper training and supervision of hand labor forces is necessary to reduce the dangers to workers using sharp tools on steep and/or unstable terrain, or where other environmental hazards exist. Hand tools include, but are not limited to, shovels, Pulaski hoes, McLeod fire tools, line trimmers, weed wrenches, chain saws, pruning shears, and loppers. Personal protection equipment typically includes long pants and long-sleeved shirts, gloves, safety goggles, hard hats, chaps, and sturdy boots.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 105, Packet Page 200

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-5
NOVEMBER 2023

1.2.1 Best Management Practices for Hand Labor
The following BMPs should be implemented, where feasible, when utilizing hand labor vegetation management techniques. In all circumstances, tools and equipment should be utilized only for their intended use. ▪ Ensure equipment operators and project personnel have appropriate personal protective equipment and are properly trained in equipment use
▪ Ensure that appropriate fire safety measures are implemented ▪ For safety purposes, provide necessary signage alerting the public to active operations ▪ Ensure that vehicles and equipment arrive at the treatment area clean and weed-free ▪ Prune trees according to International Society of Arboriculture and American National Standards Institute A300 standards
▪ Protect retained trees and vegetation from tool and equipment damage ▪ Sanitize tools between project areas to prevent the spread of pathogens ▪ Service and fuel tools only in areas that will not allow grease, oil, fuel, or other hazardous materials to pass into streams or retained vegetation
▪ Remove from the treatment area and properly dispose of all refuse, litter, trash, and non-vegetative debris resulting from vegetation treatment operations and other activity in connection with vegetation treatment operations
▪ When lopping and scattering, lay each piece flat and as close as feasibly possible to the ground surface (pieces that are left elevated have a much slower rate of decomposition and will contribute to the fuel loading)

1.3 Mechanical Techniques
Mechanical techniques include all methods that employ motorized heavy equipment to remove or alter vegetation.

Mechanical techniques rearrange vegetation structures; compact or chip material; and move material to landings, staging areas, or burn piles. Mechanical equipment is usually equipped with either rubber tires or tracks, although skids and cables are also used. In some instances, two or more pieces of heavy equipment will work in concert to achieve a management standard. Mechanical equipment includes, but is not limited to, masticators, tractors, and chippers. Chippers are moved around as work occurs, and placement is dependent on the ability to minimize the distance vegetation must be hauled to the chipper.

Constraints to mechanical equipment use include steep slopes; dense tree cover that prohibits travel; saturated soils; and dry, high fire hazard weather conditions where equipment use could result in ignition. Use of mechanical equipment may also result in damage to retained vegetation. Use of mechanical equipment should consider the terrain, access, vegetation type, and treatment recommendation to effectively treat vegetation and minimize impact potential. Supervision and specialized training are also necessary. The use of mechanical equipment is often done in conjunction with other treatment techniques, particularly hand labor (prior to mechanical treatment) and prescribed fire (following mechanical treatment.)
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 106, Packet Page 201

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-6
NOVEMBER 2023

1.3.1 Best Management Practices for Mechanical Techniques The following BMPs should be implemented, where feasible, when utilizing mechanical vegetation management techniques. In all circumstances, equipment should be utilized only for its intended use. ▪ Utilize low ground-pressure equipment, to the extent feasible ▪ Ensure equipment operators and project personnel are properly trained in equipment use ▪ Ensure that appropriate fire safety measures are implemented ▪ For safety purposes, provide necessary signage and patrol alerting the public to active operations and area closures
▪ Ensure that vehicles and equipment arrive at the treatment area free of soil, weeds, and seeds ▪ Control fugitive dust resulting from equipment use by watering disturbed areas ▪ Protect retained trees and vegetation from potential damage resulting from heavy equipment use by using tree protection devices, training equipment operators, and designing projects to reduce potential impacts, among other methods
▪ To minimize impacts on soil stability, leave stumps from removed trees and shrubs intact; where feasible, reuse existing roads, trails, skid trails, and predesignated routes for equipment travel ▪ Limit the size and quantity of equipment to that which is necessary to meet the identified vegetation management standard
▪ Regrade or recontour any areas subject to soil disturbance from heavy equipment, including dragging or skidding of trees or other material; install soil stabilization structures and devices as needed ▪ Avoid heavy equipment use on unstable slope areas, documented slope instability areas, and slopes with gradients exceeding 50%
▪ Service and fuel heavy equipment only in areas that will not allow grease, oil, fuel, or other hazardous materials to pass into streams or riparian vegetation
▪ Remove from the treatment area and properly dispose of all refuse, litter, trash, and non-vegetative debris resulting from vegetation treatment operations and other activity in connection with vegetation treatment operations
▪ Ensure that hazardous materials spill kits are available on all heavy equipment

1.4 Prescribed Fire Techniques
Prescribed fires reduce the volume of fuel through combustion and are conducted under specific regulations when conditions permit both adequate combustion and proper control. Prescribed fire is the use of fire in a planned setting with low to moderate intensity fire and defined goals. Application of prescribed fire occurs in conjunction with specific land management objectives such as reducing fuel loads, increasing overall forest or habitat health, and/or protecting communities from wildfire (USDA 2018). Other land management objectives prescribed fire can accomplish are controlling undesirable vegetation, preparing sites for harvesting/seeding, controlling plant pathogens and pests, improving wildlife habitat, improving plant production or quality, removing debris, restoring ecological sites, and maintaining native plants diversity and composition. Prescribed fire can occur in small, designated areas or over larger expanses. There are two types of prescribed fire: pile burning and broadcast burning. Both pile and broadcast burning are often implemented in conjunction with hand labor and mechanical ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 107, Packet Page 202

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-7
NOVEMBER 2023
treatment methods as a means of treating vegetative debris or in advance of an herbicide treatment to enhance the effectiveness of the application.

Prescribed burning can be a cost-effective way to quickly reduce a large volume of woody material remaining after other fuel treatment operations. A broadcast burn produces a more uniform treatment and minimizes areas of great burn intensity. Alternatively, tractors or hand crews can create piles of material on flat or gently sloping ground that can be burned during wet conditions (pile burn), although the volume of fuel in the piles can produce localized heat that may impact adjacent retained vegetation.

Prescribed burning requires proper planning and the development and approval of a prescription or burn plan, which is typically developed by the local fire protection district in consideration of fuel reduction requirements, local weather conditions, and available resources for fire management. Burning activities should consider and be managed in accordance with wildlife and habitat needs. Consideration also needs to be given to existing barriers, cultural resources, threatened or endangered species, smoke, and weather conditions. The following sections summarize the planning needs for implementing prescribed burns.

1.4.1 Pile Burning
Pile burning is fairly common and often applied in forest settings. Small pile burning is typically conducted at or near the treatment area. Pile burning involves stacking hand or machine-cut vegetation into piles and allowing the material time to dry out. Piles should be free of dirt, debris, and stumps. The material should be piled soon after cutting with the butt end of branches and limbs toward the outside of the pile so that branches are overlapping and forming a series of dense layers. The top of the pile should be covered with a small sheet of heavy paper (e.g., butcher paper) to keep the pile interior dry. One or two limbs should be placed atop the paper to keep it in place. The dry interior portion of the pile should be ignited at the appropriate time using a weed burner or other igniting tool. Alternatively, tractors or hand crews can create piles of material on the flat or gently sloping ground that can be burned during wet conditions (pile burn), although the volume of fuel in the piles can produce localized heat, which may impact adjacent retained vegetation. Pile burns should be lit when weather conditions allow, such as in winter and spring, and should be confined to the footprint of the pile. Burns should be divided over multiple days to allow for a halt of burning activities if conditions fall out of prescription (USDA 2018).

An alternative to pile burning is the utilization of an air curtain burner. Air curtain burners allow for more complete combustion of wood waste and were developed to reduce the particulate matter, or smoke, which results from burning. Using a technology called an “air curtain,” the smoke particles are trapped and reburned, resulting in a cleaner (less particulate matter) burn. Where feasible, the use of an air curtain burner is recommended to dispose of wood waste. Air curtain burners may be available as a shared resource between county and other nearby municipal or land management agencies and can be temporarily sited at work locations to facilitate wood waste treatment.

1.4.2 Broadcast Burning
Broadcast burns are usually done in larger areas where a maximum amount of fuel treatment can take place and can be used to control noxious weeds and treat cut material (slash) on the ground surface in areas treated by other techniques or to reduce surface and/or ladder fuels beneath tree canopies (understory burning). Broadcast burning can create a mosaic pattern of vegetation and allow for the regeneration of different plant species (USDA 2018).

Broadcast burning can also be used to break up the continuity of vegetation to promote diversity in ecosystems or ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 108, Packet Page 203

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-8
NOVEMBER 2023
reduce fuel loading. Treatment boundaries are often roads, trails, or other nonburnable features, reducing the number of firebreaks that need to be created. This approach reduces labor costs and preparation time and minimizes soil disturbance and the potential for soil erosion. Prescribed burns can be used in all vegetation types, where conditions allow for effective control (USDA 2018).

Broadcast burning may occur throughout the year; however, it is usually conducted during the late spring months when the ground is still wet or during fall or winter after plants have completed their yearly growth cycle and their moisture content has declined. Spring burns are sometimes preferred to ensure a greater measure of public safety; however, there may be impacts on animal and plant reproduction. Fall burns are more closely aligned with the natural fire cycle found in California. Piles of vegetation may be burned any time after the vegetation has dried. “Cool” burn prescriptions, using techniques such as backfiring, chevron burning, and flank firing, as well as timing the fires during periods of high humidity and high fuel moisture content, typically results in incomplete combustion; therefore, existing vegetation is partially retained.

Prescribed burns must be conducted by trained fire protection personnel. Utilizing personnel and equipment from neighboring fire districts provides the added benefit of joint training under prescribed rather than emergency conditions. Timing is critical to the use of this treatment technique due to variances in weather conditions and the necessity to time treatments to minimize impacts to plant and animal species. Fuel moisture content must be determined to assess if the treatment area is safe to burn. There are typically more appropriate burn days in the spring and early summer months when there is a greater chance of atmospheric conditions conducive to smoke dilution and dispersion.

1.4.3 Prescribed Fire Planning
Prescribed burning requires proper planning and the development and approval of a prescription or burn plan, which is typically developed by the local fire protection district in consideration of vegetation management requirements, local weather conditions, and available resources for fire management. Utilizing prescribed fire as a management tool should consider the following:
▪ Burn Plan/Prescription: A site-specific prescription and burn plan is developed that establishes goals and procedures for the prescribed burn and considers unique site characteristics. The prescription identifies geographic burn units, limits of the burn area, locations of control lines, acceptable fuel moisture ranges and weather conditions, and required personnel and equipment, and evaluates potential impacts to resources in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. This may be prepared in coordination with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. ▪ Smoke Management Plan: The California Air Resources Board and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) require preparation of a smoke management plan detailing the location of sensitive receptors and measures to be implemented to maximize smoke dilution and minimize smoke production.

Current air quality regulations within the jurisdiction of SCAQMD limit open burning for range management projects less than 10 acres and controlled burns less than 10 acres, or that produce less than 1 ton of particulate emission to require burn authorization on a burn day. Open burning for range management projects or controlled burns that exceed 10 acres or produce more than 1 ton of emissions are required to obtain approval prior to any burn activities and submit a smoke management plan. Additionally, approval must be obtained from a local fire protection agency. In addition to the preparation and approval of a smoke management plan, SCAQMD requires notification of the burn and that burning is conducted on a permissive burn day. SCAQMD selects burn days based on air quality, weather conditions, and wind patterns, provides ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 109, Packet Page 204

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-9
NOVEMBER 2023
the burn’s acreage allocation the morning of the burn, and provides the “all clear” designation prior to initiation of the burn. Regulations regarding burning can be found in SCAQMD Rule 444. ▪ Pre-broadcast Burn Site Preparation: Hand labor or mechanical treatment techniques are often conducted prior to initiation of a prescribed burn to remove and treat larger material (trees, shrubs, slash). Treatment of larger material is done to reduce its size and spatial arrangement and to remove ladder fuels that may allow for crown fire transition. Site preparation also includes the establishment of fire lines needed to control the fire if they do not already exist. These fire lines are typically constructed using bulldozers or by hand using scraping tools. Occasionally, they are “burned in” with a strip of fire under conditions that limit fire spread. ▪ Burn Notification: Notifying the local or surrounding communities, local fire departments, media, and SCAQMD is an essential component to avoid potential misinterpretation of the prescribed burn as a wildfire. Notification to interested and affected parties and the media is also repeated on the day of the prescribed burn. Printed materials or interpretive signs are made available at the site and distributed to neighboring communities explaining the reason for the prescribed burn, the type of burn being conducted, and the intended result of the prescribed burn. Prescribed fires generate high levels of public safety concerns over the chance of fire escape from control lines, and the rapid distribution rate of smoke, ash, and particulate matter may raise additional concerns from the public many miles downwind from the actual burn site. ▪ Post-Burn Follow-Up and Evaluation: Following completion of the prescribed burn, the results are evaluated to determine if the need exists for additional treatment based on established prescriptions and whether erosion control BMPs are necessary. The burn plots should also be monitored and evaluated for invasive species establishment and long-term effectiveness in achieving the goals for each individual burn plot.

1.4.4 Best Management Practices for Prescribed Fire
The following BMPs should be implemented, where feasible, when utilizing prescribed fire. In all circumstances, equipment should be utilized only for its intended use. ▪ Ensure equipment operators and project personnel are properly trained in equipment use ▪ Ensure that appropriate fire safety measures are implemented ▪ For safety purposes, provide necessary signage and patrol alerting the public to active operations and area closures
▪ Burn pile size should be no larger than necessary to avoid soil sterilization ▪ Minimize excess dragging of cut materials to piles to minimize soil disturbance ▪ Compact, to the extent possible, piles that cannot be burned before the commencement of fire season ▪ Protect retained trees and vegetation from potential damage by pretreating adjacent fuels

1.5 Chemical Techniques
Chemical techniques involve the use of herbicides to kill vegetation or prevent growth and are typically used in combination with other types of fuel reduction treatments. Herbicides do not remove any vegetation from a treatment area; therefore, dead plant material remains unless otherwise treated. Application of herbicides and other chemicals is typically performed by hand and can include sponging, spraying, or dusting chemicals onto undesirable vegetation. Hand application provides flexibility in application and is ideally suited for small treatment areas. Roadside application of herbicides may employ a boom affixed to or towed behind a vehicle.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 110, Packet Page 205

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-10 NOVEMBER 2023
Herbicide application requires specific storage, training, and licensing to ensure proper and safe use, handling, and storage. Only personnel with the appropriate license are allowed to use chemicals to treat vegetation. Herbicide application is also only applied per a prescription prepared by a licensed pest control advisor. Personal protection equipment is essential to limit personnel exposure to chemicals and includes long pants and long-sleeved shirts, gloves, safety goggles, hard hats, sturdy boots, face masks, and, in some instances, respirators.

1.5.1 Herbicides
The application of herbicides may be used on its own or as a secondary vegetation treatment technique following manual (hand labor) or mechanical removal for controlling sprout growth and regeneration. The advantage of herbicide treatments is that they typically result in high kill rates and can prevent treated plants from setting seed.

Thus, in the long run, targeted plants are eliminated as their “seed bank” is eventually eliminated. Some disadvantages include the necessity of applicators to be trained and then licensed by the State of California, the cost of application and safety equipment, the cost of the herbicide itself, the potential to affect nontarget vegetation and/or wildlife, and public concern regarding potential health impacts from herbicide use. In spite of these disadvantages, herbicides, or herbicides in combination with hand/mechanical removal, are the most widely used and effective techniques for controlling certain types of vegetation.

Herbicides are broadly classified into two basic types: pre-emergent and post-emergent. Pre-emergent herbicides are sprayed directly onto the ground and prevent plants from germinating and/or growing. As such, they have a larger potential to impact seeds of desired species remaining in the soil and often have longer persistence times in the environment. Post-emergent herbicides are applied directly onto the plants, often during the early phases of their growth, killing them before they have the chance to mature and set seed. With proper equipment and training, herbicides can be applied selectively, minimizing impacts on seeds of desired species residing in the soil. However, should the target vegetation be intermixed with growing desired vegetation, the chance of affecting desired vegetation would be increased.

Different plants vary in their response to any particular herbicide and can also vary in their response depending upon which stage of their life cycle the herbicide is applied. Herbicides applied during the “bolting” phase (when flowering stalks are being produced) may have greater kill rates than the same chemical applied during the rosette stage or the flowering stage. Some herbicides are specific to particular groups of plants (e.g., Fusilade affects only grasses), while others can kill nearly all kinds of plants. Still, others are permitted for use in California, while others are not. Systemic herbicides (as opposed to contact herbicides) are likely the most effective for control of highly flammable/rapidly spreading species due to their ability to spread via translocation into root tissue.

Herbicide application should be used following removal of all trees and other perennial species that have the ability to regenerate from root fragments when removal of all plant material is not feasible. Herbicide use should be limited to localized applications rather than foliar applications to eliminate the possibility of drift and impacts to neighboring desirable vegetation. A wide range of herbicides are available for such types of treatment. Herbicide labels and material safety data sheets list susceptible target plant species and provide proper direction in the use and handling of the products. Herbicides should be applied in accordance with state and federal law.

1.5.2 Cut and Daub
Cut and daub treatment is recommended for larger highly flammable/rapidly spreading plants, such as large trees and shrubs, to control regrowth and kill the portion of the plant remaining belowground. Cut and daub involves the ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 111, Packet Page 206

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-11 NOVEMBER 2023
cutting of plant stalks or trunks and then the direct application of an appropriate systemic herbicide directly to the cambium layer of the freshly cut stump or stem. Other related methods include drill and fill, where holes are drilled into the trunk of a tree and herbicide is injected, or the glove method, where an herbicide-soaked glove is used to apply directly to plant foliage or freshly cut stumps. It is critical that the herbicide treatment occur immediately after the plants are severed so that the herbicide is carried into the plant tissue. If enough time elapses to allow the cut surface of the severed plant to dry out, a fresh cut should be made prior to herbicide application.

1.5.3 Best Management Practices for Chemical Techniques The following BMPs should be implemented, where feasible, when applying herbicide. In all circumstances, equipment should be utilized only for its intended use. ▪ Consider herbicide use only when other treatment techniques are determined to be infeasible or ineffective in achieving desired management and maintenance standards ▪ Consult a state-licensed pest control advisor and/or the Los Angeles County Agricultural Commissioner to identify the appropriate site-specific herbicide application approach to meet vegetation management standards ▪ Consider the timing of herbicide applications to minimize impacts to adjacent retained vegetation and nearby resources, and for maximum effectiveness (typically between June 15 and November 15, with a potential extension through December 31 or until local rainfall greater than 0.5 inches is forecasted within a 24-hour period from planned application)
▪ For aquatic vegetation control work, use only herbicides and surfactants that have been approved for aquatic use by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and are registered for use by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation
▪ Apply herbicides consistent with Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act label instructions and use conditions issued by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and California Department of Pesticide Regulation
▪ To achieve desired control, utilize the lowest recommended rate to achieve vegetation management objectives of both herbicides and surfactants
▪ Add and indicator dye to the tank mix to help the applicator identify areas that have been treated and better monitor the overall application
▪ Avoid application to plants whose base is submerged in stream channels ▪ Follow safe procedures for transporting, mixing, loading, and properly disposing of herbicides ▪ Minimize the use of foliar (spray) applications, prioritizing localized or direct applications ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 112, Packet Page 207

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-12 NOVEMBER 2023
2 Best Management Practices for
Vegetation Management
The following BMPs are recommended to minimize potential adverse impacts from vegetation management activities. Additional requirements, standards, or conditions may be necessary based on project-specific analyses conducted during the environmental review process or as required by county, state, or federal regulatory agencies.

In general, projects should consider the following BMPs during design, layout, and prescription development.

2.1 Fire Protection
All operations conducted in the Plan Area associated with project implementation should adhere to the fire protection standards outlined in Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 4, Subchapters 4, 5, and 6, Article 8 (Fire Protection). Per state code, projects are required to take precautions to reduce the chance of ignitions, including checking fire forecast conditions, monitoring weather, maintaining spark arrestors, and having fire guards with appropriate suppression equipment on hand. Under particularly dangerous conditions, all activities with a risk of wildfire ignition are halted. The following fire protection BMPs are provided to augment current practices:
▪ During vegetation management project operations that require a vehicle, machine, tool, or equipment powered by an internal combustion engine operated on hydrocarbon fuels, suitable and serviceable tools for firefighting purposes shall be provided and maintained. Equipment should be located at a point accessible in the event of a fire and should include one backpack pump-type fire extinguisher filled with water, two axes, two McLeod fire tools, and a sufficient number of shovels so that each person at the operation can be equipped to fight fire.
▪ All equipment with an internal combustion engine using hydrocarbon fuels shall be equipped with a spark arrestor, as defined in California Public Resources Code Section 4442. ▪ Internal project communication procedures for reporting fires shall be established. 9-1-1 shall be called in emergencies.
▪ Applicable standards restricting spark-generating equipment usage and spark arrestor requirements shall be complied with. Additionally, on Red Flag Warnings, High to Extreme Fire Danger days, and in High Wildfire Risk Areas, the timing and type of activities should be limited to activities that would not exacerbate fire risk or cause unintentional ignitions.
▪ Staging areas shall be identified before initiating operations. Staging areas should be contained within already disturbed areas or non-vegetated areas (e.g., roads, parking lots) and should account for vehicle parking and tool/equipment storage.

2.2 Pests/Pathogens
Pest and pathogen BMPs should be incorporated into project planning and implementation efforts. These practices encompass protection of the residual vegetation from mechanical damage and quarantine and sanitation practices.

Outbreaks of known invasive pests, such as the invasive shothole borer (Scolytus rugulosus), and unknown pests and pathogens pose a threat to Plan Area forests. Sanitation of tools and equipment on project sites should be conducted to reduce the spread of pests and diseases following treatments in areas of a known infestation. If soil ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 113, Packet Page 208

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-13 NOVEMBER 2023
is collected on equipment, rinsing the equipment on site with a portable water tank or water truck, or at a designated rinsing station, can remove soil-borne pathogens and prevent transport to new sites. Additionally, certain pestspecific measures have been developed to deal with regional pests, such as invasive shothole borer. These measures should be implemented in the Plan Area, where applicable. Specific measures can be found at https://ucanr.edu/sites/pshb/management/.

2.3 Slope Stability, Erosion Control, and Water Quality Vegetation management activities have the potential to affect soil stability. Soil stability may be indirectly affected by the removal of overstory vegetative cover, which reduces rainfall interception and thereby increases its surface erosion potential. This may result in the detachment and transportation of soil particles across the soil surface. Soil stability may also be directly affected by the use of heavy equipment, tools, hand crews, or livestock, all of which can loosen, dislodge, or compact soils. This too can increase the potential for detachment and transportation of soil particles across the soil surface.

A procedure has been developed by the California State Board of Forestry (1990) to estimate a surface soil erosion hazard rating that considers soil characteristics (texture, depth to restrictive layer, percent of coarse surface fragments), slope, vegetative cover, and precipitation. The hazard rating is designed to evaluate the susceptibility of the soil within a given location to erosion. This rating should be determined and considered on a site-specific basis when determining the needs for erosion control BMPs in the Plan Area. In addition, areas where erosion has occurred in the past due to vegetation management activities should be avoided, or alternative methods should be implemented to minimize potential impacts to soil stability.

There are various erosion control practices and devices available for slowing the rate of erosion. Recent research indicates that mechanical rehabilitation treatments, including straw mulch, hay bales, and jute rolls, are more predictable for reducing soil erosion and post-fire hydrological problems than seeding or other treatments (Robichaud et al. 2010).

Mulching may introduce exotic/weed seeds (Kruse et al. 2004) if brought in from off site (as opposed to chipped on-site material), so erosion potential should be high before the decision to use this material is finalized.

Erosion and Sediment Control BMPs include the following:
▪ Hydraulic mulch velocity dissipation devices
▪ Silt fences
▪ Sandbag barriers
▪ Hydroseeding
▪ Slope drains
▪ Sediment basins
▪ Straw bale barriers
▪ Soil binders
▪ Streambank stabilization
▪ Sediment traps
▪ Storm drain inlet protection
▪ Straw mulch
▪ Compost blankets
▪ Check dams
▪ Active treatment systems
▪ Geotextiles and mats
▪ Soil roughening
▪ Fiber rolls
▪ Temporary silt dikes
▪ Wood mulching
▪ Non-vegetation stabilization
▪ Gravel bag berms
▪ Compost socks and berms
▪ Earth dikes and drainage swales
▪ Street sweeping and vacuuming biofilter bags
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 114, Packet Page 209

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-14 NOVEMBER 2023
In the event that a wildfire event occurs in the Plan Area, stabilization of soils in the burn area is a primary concern, especially in areas with steep slope gradients. Erosion control BMPs should be installed as soon as possible and prior to the onset of the winter period.

2.3.1 Access Roads
In areas where existing dirt access roads will be retained, waterbreaks1 and drainage structures should be constructed to minimize erosion potential. All waterbreaks and drainage structures should be installed no later than the beginning of the winter period (October 15 to April 1). Outside the winter period, waterbreaks and drainage structures should be installed before sunset if the National Weather Service forecast is a “chance” (30% or more) of rain within the next 24 hours. Waterbreaks should be constructed immediately upon conclusion of the use of access roads that do not have permanent and adequate drainage structures. Distances between waterbreaks should adhere to the standards outlined in Table C-1. Access roads should be closed to public vehicle travel following the completion of vegetation treatment operations.

Table C-1. Maximum Distance between Waterbreaks
Estimated Erosion Hazard Rating
Road Slope Gradient (percent)
≤10 11–25 26–50 >50
Extreme 100 ft 75 ft 50 ft 50 ft
High 150 ft 100 ft 75 ft 50 ft
Moderate 200 ft 150 ft 100 ft 75 ft
Low 300 ft 200 ft 150 ft 100 ft
Source: 2022 California Forest Practice Rules (14 CCR, Chapters 4, 4.5, and 10).

2.4 Watercourses
Considerations need to be taken when vegetation management projects take place in or near watercourses.

Vegetation management activities within a riparian zone may require additional permitting. The intent is to assure that work done will avoid or limit, to the extent feasible, negative impacts on creeks and watercourses. The primary measure to minimize impacts on creeks and watercourses in the Plan Area is avoidance, meaning all work should be conducted outside of riparian areas where feasible. Should it be necessary to conduct vegetation management activities within riparian areas, all necessary agency permits would need to be obtained. Additionally, the following BMPs should be implemented:
▪ Preserve creeks and riparian corridors in a natural state ▪ Preserve and enhance creek-side vegetation and wildlife ▪ Prevent activities that would contribute significantly to flooding, erosion, or sedimentation, or that would destroy riparian areas or inhibit their restoration
▪ Control erosion and sedimentation
▪ Protect drainage facilities
1 A waterbreak (or waterbar) is a shallow trench with a parallel berm or ridge on the downslope side, angled downward across a road and installed to control surface runoff.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 115, Packet Page 210

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-15 NOVEMBER 2023

2.5 Air Quality
The following BMPs should be implemented, where feasible, to minimize potential negative effects on air quality:
▪ Control fugitive dust resulting from equipment use by watering disturbed areas ▪ Limit the size and quantity of equipment to that which is necessary to meet the identified vegetation management standard
▪ Limit traffic speeds on dirt roads to 15 miles per hour ▪ Clean construction vehicles and equipment to prevent dust, silt, mud, and dirt from being tracked onto paved roadways
▪ Limit vehicle idling time to a maximum of 5 minutes for vehicles and equipment, except where idling is required for the equipment to perform its task
▪ Develop and implement a burn plan and associated smoke management plan for prescribed burning activities

2.6 Reforestation/Revegetation
Revegetation of areas subject to vegetation management can minimize the potential for erosion by stabilizing soils.

Revegetation is recommended only in areas where disturbed and/or bare soil exists following vegetation treatment operations as a measure to stabilize soils. The need for revegetation should be determined during project planning and design or subsequent monitoring efforts and should consider slope, soil type, access, irrigation and maintenance needs, and other BMPs being implemented on site. Qualified professionals (e.g., landscape architects, revegetation specialists) should be consulted to develop site-specific revegetation plans, as appropriate.

Revegetation may include hydroseeding, direct seeding, or container plant installation. Plant species selection should be consistent with revegetation goals and should consider erosion protection value (e.g., deep-rooted species). Undesirable species should not be used for revegetation purposes.

2.7 Special-Status Plant and Wildlife Species
Vegetation treatment activities have the potential to impact special-status plant or wildlife species via ground disturbance, vegetation removal or management, or the use of vegetation management tools and equipment. To minimize the potential for impacts on special-status species, measures should be implemented, depending on the species present in the identified treatment area. In general, these measures include conducting pre-operations biological surveys, identifying and marking avoidance or buffer areas, conducting biological monitoring during vegetation management operations, and establishing work windows to avoid and minimize adverse effects on nesting birds and special-status plants and animals. Additionally, where feasible, projects should avoid impacts to riparian areas, environmentally sensitive habitat areas, and critical habitat areas. Project proponents should engage qualified biologists during project design and implementation.

Special-Status Plants
▪ All vehicles and equipment should be inspected and cleaned of weed seed prior to entering a project site to reduce the spread of noxious weed seeds.
▪ Conduct pre-operations surveys for rare plants prior to vegetation management during the appropriate time of year when target species are evident and identifiable. If no rare plants are noted in the project area ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 116, Packet Page 211

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-16 NOVEMBER 2023
during the survey, no further rare plant avoidance or minimization measures would be necessary. If rare plant populations are observed during the survey, all populations should be documented and flagged for avoidance. Flagging may include high visibility pin flag or tape, or orange mesh construction fencing, will be temporary, and will include all individuals of the rare plant population observed. Crews should be educated on the purpose and need of avoidance of habitat areas within exclusion zones.

Special-Status Wildlife
▪ For the protection of nesting birds, including raptors, limit vegetation treatment to the non-nesting season.

If vegetation clearing must occur during the bird breeding season, a qualified biologist should conduct preoperations surveys for nesting birds no more than 1 week prior to vegetation treatment activities. If no nests are observed during the survey, no further measures would be necessary. If active nests are observed, avoidance buffers appropriate for the species of bird should be implemented. ▪ Buffers should remain in place until the activities are complete, the young have fledged, or if the qualified biologist determines that the proposed activities will not result in impacts to nesting, rearing, or breeding success. ▪ For the protection of other special-status species, pre-operations surveys should be conducted by a qualified biologist. Buffers or treatment exclusion areas identified by the biologist should be avoided during vegetation treatment activities. Other measures identified by the biologist (e.g., movement of nests, modifications to treat types or timeframes) should be implemented as necessary.

2.8 Cultural Resources
It is anticipated that cultural resources surveys will be conducted prior to implementation of vegetation management projects. Artifacts or features identified during surveys should be flagged and equipment excluded.

Should exclusion be infeasible, equipment limitations should be implemented (e.g., use of rubber-tired equipment to lift trees off the ground). Exclusion or limitation of equipment should be specified during the specific project planning and permitting stage. A qualified archaeologist should be consulted to approve work area boundaries and allowable work in the vicinity of cultural resources. At the completion of operations, any flagging used for cultural resource site identification should be promptly removed to minimize the potential for discovery and impact.

2.9 Recreation Resources
Temporary impacts to recreation resources in the Plan Area may result from vegetation treatment project implementation. Temporary closures or use restrictions may be necessary for the safe operation of equipment and to ensure public safety. To minimize potential negative effects of vegetation treatment projects on recreation resources, the following BMPs have been identified:
▪ Restore disturbed areas to pre-operation conditions (e.g., clear blocked trails, recontour damaged trails to minimize the potential for erosion or the creation of unauthorized trails) ▪ Repair, replace, or reinstall damaged, removed, or relocated infrastructure (e.g., signs, gates, picnic tables) ▪ Minimize the extent or duration of closures by phasing work and/or conducting work outside of peak visitation periods, where feasible
▪ Where feasible, conduct operations on weekdays during daytime hours (8 a.m. to 5 p.m.) ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 117, Packet Page 212

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-17 NOVEMBER 2023
▪ Control public access by posting detours, installing and maintaining appropriate and adequate signage, using flaggers/monitors where necessary, closing work areas via exclusionary fencing, and providing monitors to ensure access control measures are maintained and effective ▪ Disseminate information regarding planned project activities via websites, social media, in-park signage, and/or outreach to regular known user groups

2.10 Tree Protection
The general management standards outlined in the community wildfire protection plan are associated with oak woodlands and other hardwood stands where canopy retention is an overall goal. However, retained trees near vegetation management activities may be subject to impacts. The following protection measures are provided to minimize impacts to retained trees:
▪ Avoid disturbance to tree root zones. Root damage and soil compaction can occur through improper operation of equipment while maneuvering over the root zone. Avoid operation in the root zone under saturated soil conditions and avoid contacting aboveground roots. Use existing access roads or trails where available to reduce soil compaction.
▪ Avoid “skin-ups” on the boles of retained trees caused by contact with equipment, falling trees, or vegetative material being yarded for removal from the site. “Skin-ups” often expose the inner bark and cambium of the residual tree. Such wounds deplete the energy reserves of the tree in order to isolate the injury and create an easy entry point for pests and pathogens. ▪ Avoid disturbance to tree crowns during operations. If limb removal is necessary for equipment operation, limbs should be pruned according to American National Standards Institute A300 standards. ▪ Avoid piling chips, soil, or other materials against the trunk/bole of retained trees. ▪ For tree removal operations, directionally fell trees away from the retained trees or in a direction that would cause the least amount of damage to the surrounding tree crowns. Torn branches, like skin-ups, deplete the energy reserves of the tree in order isolate the injury, and create an easy entry point for pests and pathogens.
▪ For pile burning activities, site piles a sufficient distance from retained trees to minimize crown and trunk scorching and heat damage to roots.
▪ For broadcast burning activities, treat surface fuels and/or prune lower limbs of trees such that flame lengths and fire line intensities are low enough to minimize crown and trunk scorching.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 118, Packet Page 213

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-18 NOVEMBER 2023
3 References
Bush, L. 2006. Grazing Handbook: A Guide for Resource Managers in Coastal California. Santa Rosa, California:

Sotoyome Resource Conservation District. http://sonomarcd.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/ Grazing-Handbook.pdf.

California State Board of Forestry. 1990. Technical Rule Addendum 1. Procedure for Estimating Surface Soil Erosion Hazard Rating. http://calfire.ca.gov/resource_mgt/downloads/TRAnumber1.pdf.

Kruse, R., E. Bend, and P. Bierzychudek. 2004. “Native Plant Regeneration and Introduction of Non-Natives Following Post-Fire Rehabilitation with Strawmulch and Barley Seeding.” Forest Ecology and Management. 196: 299–310.

Lerner, D. 2007. “Targeted Grazing: A Natural Approach to Vegetation Management and Landscape Enhancement.” Karen Launchbaugh (Ed.). Rangelands, 29(6), 69.

Menke, J.W. 1992. “Grazing and Fire Management for Native Perennial Grass Restoration in California Grasslands.” Fremontia 20(2): 22–25.

NRCS (Natural Resource Conservation Service). 2005. “Prescribed Grazing with Goats.” Natural Resource Conservation Service. Conservation Practice Information Sheet: IS-MO528gg.

Robichaud, P.R., L.E. Ashmun, and B.D. Sims. 2010. Post-Fire Treatment Effectiveness for Hillslope Stabilization.

General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-240. Fort Collins, Colorado: U.S. Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture). 2018. “Prescribed Fire Good for Forest. Good For the Future.” ArcGIS Story Map. Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/ 310b30b2544e4bc797460e08ba37eb93.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 119, Packet Page 214

APPENDIX C / VEGETATION MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 14887 C-19 NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 120, Packet Page 215 Appendix D
Prioritized Vegetation Management Projects
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 121, Packet Page 216 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 122, Packet Page 217

APPENDIX D / PRIORITIZED VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECTS 14887 D-1
NOVEMBER 2023
A list of prioritized vegetation management projects is presented in Table D-1. The locations of existing fuel breaks and fuel treatment projects and the locations of some recommended projects are provided in Figures D-1 through D-3.

Table D-1. Priority Vegetation Management Projects
Project Description
Coordinating
Agencies/Entities
All Plan Area Cities
Vegetation Management and Defensible Space
Increase defensible space compliance in the Plan Area through engagement with property owners and through MFD inspection and enforcement efforts.

MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Create and maintain defensible space around historic and community structures in the Plan Area.

MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS
Encourage the use of prescribed herbivory across the Plan Area to reduce or maintain fuel loads.

MFD, Monterey, PG,
CBTS, County Parks,
State Parks
Roadside Fuels Reduction
Conduct roadside fuels reduction along major roadways and evaluate City-identified evacuation routes for hazardous vegetation and fuels reduction needs. See Figures D-1, D-2, and D-3 for high priority areas for roadside fuels reduction. Update this list and identified evacuation routes as local evacuation plans are developed. ▪ Highway 11, 2
▪ Highway 681, 3
▪ Viejo Road
▪ Barnet Segal Lane
▪ Aguajito Road (portion within Monterey)1
▪ Garden Road1
▪ Josselyn Canyon Road
▪ Camino Del Monte
▪ Junipero Avenue2
▪ Ocean Avenue2
▪ 8th Avenue2
▪ Olmsted Road
▪ Monhollan Road
▪ Congress Avenue
▪ Skyline Forest Drive
▪ Scenic Drive
▪ 17 Mile Drive3
▪ Forest Lodge Road3
▪ Lighthouse Ave3
▪ Central Avenue3
MFD, Caltrans, Monterey
County Parks, Monterey,

CBTS, PG
Routinely manage roadside vegetation on all public and private roads in the Plan Area to reduce ignition potential and create fire-safe evacuation and fire access corridors.

MFD, Caltrans, Monterey
County Parks, Monterey,
CBTS, PG, HOAs,
neighborhood
councils/associations
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 123, Packet Page 218

APPENDIX D / PRIORITIZED VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECTS 14887 D-2
NOVEMBER 2023
Table D-1. Priority Vegetation Management Projects
Project Description
Coordinating
Agencies/Entities
Prescribed Fire
Evaluate the potential use of prescribed fire in the Plan Area to restore appropriate fire return intervals in fire-adapted vegetation communities.

MFD
Evaluate the potential use of prescribed fire for cultural purposes. MFD, Native American tribal groups
City of Monterey
Forest Health/Resilience
Develop a Forest Management Plan for the La Mesa Village. MFD, Monterey, U.S.

Army Garrison Presidio
of Monterey
Roadside Fuels Reduction
Pursue the creation of shaded fuel breaks along Olmsted and Monhollan Road to protect the Deer Flats and Fish Flats communities from wildfires encroaching from the south.

MFD, Caltrans, County
Parks, CAL FIRE San
Benito Monterey Unit,
HOAs
Vegetation Management & Defensible Space
Conduct fuels reduction within the Huckleberry Hill Nature Preserve, including thinning, chipping, and fuel breaks (as identified in County CWPP).

MFD, Monterey, U.S
Army Garrison Presidio
of Monterey
Provide input and assist with coordinating roadside and defensible space fuels reduction in La Mesa Village and explore opportunities to expand and connect treatment sites with treatment areas outside of La Mesa Village.

MFD, Monterey, U.S
Army Garrison Presidio
of Monterey
Conduct fuels reduction objectives identified in City of Monterey Greenbelt Fuel Reduction Plan and explore opportunities to expand treatment areas.

MFD, Monterey
Conduct fuels reduction work within the Old Capitol Site in accordance with the Old Capitol Site Forest Management Plan.

MFD, Monterey
Create defensible space surrounding the Westland House of Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula.

MFD, Monterey,
Westland House of
Community Hospital of
the Monterey Peninsula
City of Pacific Grove
Forest Health/Resilience
Conduct forest restoration projects in George Washington Park, including pine restoration to encourage Monterey pine regeneration as described in the park’s Forest Management Plan.

MFD, PG
Vegetation Management and Defensible Space
Create a shaded fuel break along the perimeter of the Del Monte Park neighborhood to increase defensible space and reduce community wildfire risks.

MFD, PG, Pebble Beach
Community Services
District, CAL FIRE San
Benito Monterey Unit
Conduct fuels reduction within the Perimeter Management Zone within George Washington Park as described in the park’s Forest Management Plan.

MFD, PG
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 124, Packet Page 219

APPENDIX D / PRIORITIZED VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECTS 14887 D-3
NOVEMBER 2023
Table D-1. Priority Vegetation Management Projects
Project Description
Coordinating
Agencies/Entities
Conduct fuels reduction within Rip Van Winkle Open Space. MFD, PG City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Forest Health/Resilience
Develop a Forest Management Plan for the Mission Trails Preserve with a focus on forest health and ladder fuels reduction.

MFD, CBTS, Friends of
Mission Trails Nature
Preserve
Vegetation Management and Defensible Space
Collaborate with Pebble Beach to develop a fuels reduction plan for Pescadero Canyon near the boundary of CBTS.

MFD, CBTS, Pebble
Beach
Conduct fuels reduction within Forest Hill Park. MFD, CBTS Notes: MFD = Monterey Fire Department; Monterey = City of Monterey; PG = City of Pacific Grove; CBTS = City of Carmel-by-the-Sea; County = County of Monterey; State Parks = California Department of Parks and Recreation; Caltrans = California Department of Transportation; HOA = homeowners’ association; CAL Fire = California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; CWPP = community wildfire protection plan.
1 Monterey locally designated evacuation route.
2 Carmel-by-the-Sea locally designated evacuation route. 3 Pacific Grove locally designated evacuation route.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 125, Packet Page 220

APPENDIX D / PRIORITIZED VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECTS 14887 D-4
NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 126, Packet Page 221 Sinex Ave
Pine Ave
Mason Rd
Cedar
St
Junipero Ave
David Ave
Prescott Ave
Cabrillo Hwy
Haul Rd
Fremont Blvd
Del Monte Ave Del Monte Ave
M o n t e r e y
H a r b o r La Salle Ave
Ord Grove Ave
Sonoma Ave
Elm Ave
Waring St
Kimball Ave
Foam St
Noche Buena St
Hilby Ave
Del Monte
Blvd
General Jim Moore
Blvd
New Monterey
Monterey
Del Monte
Heights
Seaside
Fremont St
Pacific St
Cabrillo
Hwy
Monterey Salinas Hwy
Sylvan Rd
Castro Rd
Iris Canyon
Rd
Garden Rd
S Boundary Rd
Munras Ave
Monterey
Regional Airport
Del Rey Oaks
La Mesa Village Fuels
Reduction Projects
Huckleberry Hill Fuels
Reduction
City of Monterey
Greenbelt Extension
Westwind Community
Hospital Defensible
Space
Priority Roadside Fuels
Reduction
City of Monterey
Greenbelt Fuels
Reduction (Existing)
CAL FIRE Treatment
Polygons (Existing)
Evaluate Hazardous
Vegetation on City
Evacuation Routes
Barnet Segal Lane
Emergency Access
Improvements
Community Wildfire Protection Plan - Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea Monterey Existing and Priority Projects
FIGURE D-1
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 127, Packet Page 222

APPENDIX D / PRIORITIZED VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECTS 14887
D-6
NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 128, Packet Page 223 Cabrillo
Cabrillo H
wy
Midwood Ln
Crespi Ln
17 Mile Dr
17 Mile
Dr
Aguajito Rd
405 ft
Carmel River
Cabrillo Hwy
11th Ave
Camino
Real
13th Ave
Monte Verde St
15th Ave
Santa Lucia Ave
Santa Rita St
Hatton Rd
Casanova St
Dolores St
5th Ave
7th Ave
Junipero Ave
Guadalupe St
Santa Fe St
N Mesa
Dr
Mission St
San Antonio Ave
Carmelo St
Lincoln St
Carpenter St
San Carlos St
Rio Rd
Carmel-by-the-Sea
Mission Trails Park Fuels
Reduction
Priority Roadside Fuels
Reduction
Forest Hill Park Fuels
Reduction
Pescadero Canyon
Collaborative Fuels
Reduction
CAL FIRE Treatment
Polygons (Existing)
Evaluate Hazardous
Vegetation on City
Evacuation Routes
Community Wildfire Protection Plan - Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea Carmel-by-the-Sea Existing and Priority Projects
FIGURE D-2
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 129, Packet Page 224

APPENDIX D / PRIORITIZED VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECTS 14887 D-8
NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 130, Packet Page 225

P O I N T

P I N O S

L U C A S

P O I N T
Surf Ave
Ocean View Blvd
736 ft
Short St
18th
St
Sinex Ave
10th
St
Eardley Ave
Spruce Ave
Spruce Ave
Spencer St
Mason Rd
Funston Ave
Cedar St
Junipero Ave
Withers Ave
Hoffman Ave
Har rison St
Sloat Rd
Del Mon
te
Blvd
Forest Lodge Rd
Jewell Ave
Irving Ave
David Ave
Grov
e Acre Ave
Hillcres t Ave
Lincoln Ave
Central Ave
Taylor St
Oak St
Majella Rd
Co ngr ess
Ave
Cr
oc
ker Ave
Gibson Ave
Kit Ca rson Rd
Asilomar Ave
Sunset Dr
Lighthouse Ave
Lighthouse Ave
Prescott Ave
Pacific Grove
Acres
Asilomar
Pacific Grove
264 ft
736 ft
Bird Rock Rd
A r royo Dr
Laine St
Monroe St
Jefferson St
Infantry St
Larkin St
Foam St
New Monte
Rip Van Winkle Fuels
Reduction
George Washington
Park Forest Restoration
Del Monte Park Shaded
Fuel Break
George Washington
Park Perimeter Fuels
Reduction (Existing)
CAL FIRE Treatment
Polygons (Existing)
Highway 68 West
Roadside Fuels
Reduction
Evaluate Hazardous
Vegetation on City
Evacuation Routes
City of Monterey
Greenbelt Fuels
Reduction (Existing)
City of Monterey
Greenbelt Extension
Huckleberry Hill Fuels
Reduction
Community Wildfire Protection Plan - Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-the-Sea Pacific Grove Existing and Priority Projects
FIGURE D-3
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 131, Packet Page 226

APPENDIX D / PRIORITIZED VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECTS 14887 D-10 NOVEMBER 2023

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 132, Packet Page 227 Appendix E
Planning and Regulatory Environment
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 133, Packet Page 228 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 134, Packet Page 229

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-1
NOVEMBER 2023
1 Planning and Regulatory Environment
This section describes existing plans, codes, and standards relevant to wildfire protection and fuels management in the Plan Area.

1.1 Federal

1.1.1 Healthy Forests Restoration Act
The 2003 Healthy Forests Restoration Act (HFRA) is the legislative component of the Healthy Forest Initiative. The HFRA provides provisions for expediting the preparation and implementation of hazardous fuels reduction projects on federal land and assisting states, rural communities, and landowners with restoring healthy forest and watershed conditions. As a key component of the HFRA, a community wildfire protection plan (CWPP) serves as a mechanism for community input and identification of areas presenting high wildfire risk, as well as identification of potential projects intended to mitigate such risk. The HFRA places a priority on fuel treatments identified by communities in their CWPPs.

1.1.2 National Fire Plan
The National Fire Plan was a presidential directive in 2000 in response to severe wildland fires that had burned throughout the United States. The National Fire Plan focuses on reducing fire impacts on rural communities and providing assurance for sufficient firefighting capacity in the future. The National Fire Plan addresses five key points:
firefighting, rehabilitation, hazardous fuels reduction, community assistance, and accountability. The plan continues to provide technical, financial, and resource guidance and support for wildland fire management across the United States. The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Department of the Interior are working to implement the key points outlined in the National Fire Plan (U.S. Government 2000).

1.1.3 National Incident Management System
The National Incident Management System (NIMS) is a system that guides all levels of government, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector to work together to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from incidents. The National Incident Management System provides guidance regardless of the cause, size, location, or complexity of the incident, and provides shared vocabulary, systems, and processes as well as defines operational systems used during incidents.

1.1.4 Disaster Mitigation Act
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 created incentives for state and local entities to coordinate hazard mitigation planning and implementation. The act is an important source of funding for fuels reduction and fire hazard reduction efforts through federal hazard mitigation grants.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 135, Packet Page 230

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-2
NOVEMBER 2023

1.1.5 National Forest Management Act
The National Forest Management Act governs the administration of national forests and was an amendment to the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974. The act called for the management of renewable resources on national forest lands.

1.1.6 National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation Act protects and preserves historic and cultural sites. The act also created the National Register of Historic Places, the list of National Historic Landmarks, and the State Historic Preservation Offices.

1.1.7 Endangered Species Act
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 protects species that are listed as endangered or threatened throughout all or a significant portion of their range. The act also provides protection for critical habitats on which the listed species depend.

1.1.8 Los Padres National Forest Land Management Plan
In accordance with the National Forest Management Act, each national forest has a land and resource management plan. The Land Management Plan for the Los Padres National Forest describes the strategic direction for managing the forest’s land and resources over the next 10 to 15 years (USFS 2005).

1.1.9 Los Padres National Forest Fire Management Plan
The 2008 LPNF Fire Management Plan is a strategic document that addresses the fire management program and guides fire management activities based on the 2006 Los Padres National Forest Land Management Plan (LPNF Management Plan). The Monterey Ranger District is responsible for management of USFS lands in Monterey County.

Fire prevention planning and management focuses on maintaining defensible space around structures/improvements, and strategically treating hazardous fuels to interrupt fire spread and enhance suppression efforts.

1.1.10 Quadrennial Fire Review
The Quadrennial Fire Review is a strategic risk assessment that is conducted every 4 years, with the most recent assessment carried out in 2014. The purpose of the review is to forecast the conditions that may present the greatest challenge for wildland fire management over the next 10 to 20 years.

1.1.11 National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy The National Cohesive Wildland Fire Management Strategy is a push to work collaboratively among stakeholders across landscapes to create resilient landscapes, fire-adapted communities, and safe and effective wildfire response. Its vision is “To safely and effectively extinguish fire when needed; use fire where allowable; manage our ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 136, Packet Page 231

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-3
NOVEMBER 2023
natural resources; and as a nation, to live with wildland fire.” The Cohesive Strategy addresses the nation's wildfire problems by focusing on three key areas:
▪ Restore and Maintain Landscapes
▪ Fire Adapted Communities
▪ Response to Fire

1.1.12 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy
The Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy was developed in 1995, updated in 2001, and again in 2009 by the National Wildfire Coordinating Group, a federal multi-agency group that establishes consistent and coordinated fire management policy across multiple federal jurisdictions. An important component of the Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy is the acknowledgement of the essential role of fire in maintaining natural ecosystems. The Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and its implementation are founded on the following guiding principles, found in the Guidance for Implementation of Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy (NWCG 2009):
▪ Firefighter and public safety is the first priority in every fire management activity. ▪ The role of wildland fire as an essential ecological process and natural change agent will be incorporated into the planning process.
▪ Fire management plans, programs, and activities support land and resource management plans and their implementation.
▪ Sound risk management is a foundation for all fire management activities. ▪ Fire management programs and activities are economically viable, based upon values to be protected, costs, and land and resource management objectives.
▪ Fire management plans and activities are based upon the best available science. ▪ Fire management plans and activities incorporate public health and environmental quality considerations. ▪ Federal, state, tribal, local, interagency, and international coordination and cooperation are essential. ▪ Standardization of policies and procedures among federal agencies is an ongoing objective.

1.1.13 International Fire Code
Created by the International Code Council, the International Fire Code addresses a wide array of conditions hazardous to life and property, including fire, explosions, and hazardous materials handling or usage (although not a federal regulation, but rather the product of the International Code Council). The International Fire Code places an emphasis on prescriptive and performance-based approaches to fire prevention and fire protection systems.

Updated every 3 years, the International Fire Code uses a hazards classification system to determine the appropriate measures to be incorporated to protect life and property (often these measures include construction standards and specialized equipment). The International Fire Code uses a permit system (based on hazard classification) to ensure that required measures are instituted.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 137, Packet Page 232

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-4
NOVEMBER 2023

1.1.14 International Wildland-Urban Interface Code
The International Wildland-Urban Interface Code is published by the International Code Council and addresses wildfire issues in the wildland-urban interface (WUI). It is a model code that is intended to be adopted and used supplemental to the adopted building and fire codes of a jurisdiction. The International Wildland-Urban Interface Code establishes minimum special regulations for development in the WUI to safeguard life and property from wildfire hazards.

1.1.15 National Fire Protection Association Codes, Standards, Practices, and Guides
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) codes, standards, recommended practices, and guides are developed through a consensus development process approved by the American National Standards Institute. This process brings together professionals representing varied viewpoints and interests to achieve consensus on fire and other safety issues. NFPA standards are recommended guidelines and nationally accepted good practices in fire protection but are not laws or codes unless adopted or referenced as such by a state, county, city, or other fire code or local fire agency.
▪ NFPA 1140, Standard for Wildland Fire Protection (2022): This standard provides the minimum requirements for wildland fire management and the associated professional qualifications for wildland fire positions. It is intended to specify the minimum requirements for fire protection and emergency services infrastructure in wildland, rural, and suburban areas; wildland fire management practices and policies; methods of assessing wildland fire ignition hazards; and job performance requirements for wildland fire positions.
▪ NFPA 1141, Standard for Fire Protection Infrastructure for Land Development in Wildland, Rural, and Suburban Areas (2017): This standard addresses the requirements for fire protection infrastructure in wildland, rural, and suburban areas where there is an intended change of land use or intended land development. It is intended to develop fire protection and emergency services infrastructure to reduce the impact of land use changes in wildland, rural, and suburban areas. ▪ NFPA 1142, Standard on Water Supplies for Suburban and Rural Firefighting (2022): This standard addresses a method for determining the minimum requirements for alternative water supplies for structural firefighting purposes in areas where the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) determines that adequate and reliable water supply systems for firefighting purposes do not otherwise exits. It is intended to assist the AHJ in establishing the minimum water supply necessary for structural firefighting purposes in areas where it has been determined that there is no water or inadequate water for firefighting. ▪ NFPA 1143, Standard for Wildland Fire Management (2018): This standard provides minimum requirements to fire protection organizations on the management of wildland fire, including prevention, mitigation, preparation, and suppression. It is intended to specify management practices and policies necessary for a fire protection organization to develop a wildland fire management program. ▪ NFPA 1144, Standard for Reducing Structure Ignition Hazards from Wildland Fire (2018): This standard provides a methodology for assessing wildland fire ignition hazards around existing structures, residential developments, and subdivisions, and improved property or planned property improvement that will be located in a WUI area, and provides minimum requirements for new construction to reduce the potential of structure ignition from wildfires. It is intended to assess fuel sources in the structure ignition zone for their ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 138, Packet Page 233

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-5
NOVEMBER 2023
potential to ignite structures, and to identify possible mitigation measures to reduce the possibility of structure ignition.

1.2 State

1.2.1 California Strategic Fire Plan
The 2018 Strategic Fire Plan for California reflects the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s (CAL FIRE’s) focus on (1) fire prevention and suppression activities to protect lives, property, and ecosystem services, and (2) natural resource management to maintain the state’s forests as a resilient carbon sink to meet California’s climate change goals and to serve as important habitat for adaptation and mitigation. Strategic Fire Plan goals include the following (State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection and CAL FIRE 2018):

Identify and evaluate wildland fire hazards and recognize life, property, and natural resource assets at risk, including watershed, habitat, social and other values of functioning ecosystems. Facilitate the collaborative development and sharing of all analyses and data collection across all ownerships for consistency in type and kind.

Promote and support local land use planning processes as they relate to: (a) protection of life, property, and natural resources from risks associated with wildland fire, and (b) individual landowner objectives and responsibilities.

Support and participate in the collaborative development and implementation of local, county, and regional plans that address fire protection and landowner objectives.

Increase fire prevention awareness, knowledge, and actions implemented by individuals and communities to reduce human loss, property damage, and impacts to natural resources from wildland fires.

Integrate fire and fuels management practices with landowner/land manager priorities across jurisdictions.

Determine the level of resources necessary to effectively identify, plan and implement fire prevention using adaptive management strategies.

Determine the level of fire suppression resources necessary to protect the values and assets at risk identified during planning processes.

Implement post-fire assessments and programs for the protection of life, property, and natural resource recovery.

1.2.2 CAL FIRE Strategic Fire Plan
In 2019 CAL FIRE released its Strategic Plan. The plan is updated from the 2012 CAL FIRE Strategic Plan and focuses on the department’s mission, vision, and values. The Strategic Fire Plan is the state’s roadmap for reducing wildfire risk. By emphasizing what needs to be done before a fire occurs, the Strategic Fire Plan seeks to reduce firefighting costs and property losses, increase firefighter safety, and contribute to ecosystem health. Four goals were identified in the plan: (1) improve the core capabilities, (2) enhance internal operations, (3) ensure health and safety, (4) and build an engaged, motivated, and innovative workforce (CAL FIRE 2019a).

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 139, Packet Page 234

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-6
NOVEMBER 2023

1.2.2.1 Unit Strategic Fire Plan San Benito-Monterey
The San Benito-Monterey Unit serves the state lands in and surrounding the Plan Area. The Unit Strategic Fire Plan was developed with input from key stakeholders, and intends of meeting the goals set by both the stakeholders and the California Strategic Fire Plan. Pre-fire management projects are designed to reduce costs and losses, especially during periods of severe fire weather. With the use of fire resistant landscaping, mechanical fuels treatment, prescribed burns, building construction standards, infrastructure, land use planning, and escape plans, the Unit strives to keep what would otherwise be a large, catastrophic fire, to smaller fire with less intensity, reducing suppression costs and property loss.

1.2.3 California Fire Service and Rescue Emergency Mutual Aid Plan
The California Fire Service and Rescue Emergency Mutual Aid Plan is an extension of the California Emergency Plan.

The plan supports the Incident Command System, the Integrated Emergency Management System, and multihazard response planning. The plan provides more detailed operational plans that support fire and rescue resources at the state, regional, and local levels.

1.2.4 California State Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in September 2018 as an Enhanced State Mitigation Plan, the 2018 State Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan update continues to build upon California’s commitment to reduce or eliminate the impacts of disasters caused by natural, technological, accidental, and adversarial/human-caused hazards, and further identifies and documents progress made in hazard mitigation efforts, new or revised state and federal statutes and regulations, and emerging hazard conditions and risks that affect the State of California.

1.2.5 California Government Code
California Government Code Sections 51175 through 51189 provide guidance for classifying lands in California as fire hazard areas and provide requirements for management of property within those lands. CAL FIRE is responsible for classifying FHSZs based on statewide criteria and makes the information available for public review. Further, local agencies must designate, by ordinance, Very High FHSZs within their jurisdiction based on the recommendations of CAL FIRE.

Section 51182 sets forth requirements for maintaining property within fire hazard areas, such as defensible space, vegetative fuels management, and building materials and standards. Defensible space around structures in fire hazard areas must consist of 100 feet of fuel modification on each side of a structure, but not beyond the property line unless findings conclude that the clearing is necessary to significantly reduce the risk of structure ignition in the event of a wildfire. Clearance on adjacent property is only conducted following written consent by the adjacent owner. Further, trees must be trimmed from within 10 feet of the outlet of a chimney or stovepipe, vegetation near buildings must be maintained, and roofs of structures must be cleared of vegetative materials. Exemptions may apply for buildings with an exterior constructed entirely of nonflammable materials.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 140, Packet Page 235

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-7
NOVEMBER 2023

1.2.6 California Public Resources Code
PRC Section 4290 requires minimum fire safety standards related to defensible space that are applicable to residential, commercial, and industrial building construction in SRA lands and lands classified and designated as Very High FHSZs. These regulations include road standards for fire apparatus access, standards for signs identifying roads and buildings, fuel breaks and green belts, and minimum water supply requirements. These regulations do not supersede local regulations that equal or exceed minimum regulations required by the state.

PRC Section 4291 requires a reduction of fire hazards around buildings adjacent to a mountainous area, forestcovered lands, brush-covered lands, grass-covered lands, or land that is covered in flammable material. It is required to maintain 100 feet of defensible space around all sides of a structure, but not beyond the property line unless required by state law, local ordinance, rule, or regulations. Further, PRC Section 4291 requires the removal of dead or dying vegetative materials from the roof of a structure, and trees and shrubs must be trimmed from within 10 feet of the outlet of a chimney or stovepipe. Exemptions may apply for buildings with an exterior constructed entirely of nonflammable materials.

PRC Section 4741 states that CAL FIRE shall assist local governments in preventing future wildland fire and with vegetation management problems by making its wildland fire prevention and vegetation management expertise available to local governments.

PRC Sections 4292-4296 and 14 CCR 1246 address vegetation clearance standards for electrical utilities. They include standards for clearing around energy lines and conductors.

1.2.7 California Code of Regulations
Title 14, Natural Resources
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 3, Fire Hazard, sets forth requirements for defensible space and provides alternate options if the required distances cannot be achieved. For example, options that have similar practical effects include noncombustible block walls or fences; 5 feet of noncombustible material horizontally around a structure; installing hardscape landscaping or reducing exposed windows on the side of structures with less than 30-foot setbacks; or additional structure hardening, such as those required in the California Building Code, CCR Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 7A.

Title 19, Public Safety
CCR Title 19 addresses public safety and includes State Fire Marshal requirements (CCR, Title 19, Division 1), which incorporate general fire and safety standards regarding fire department access and egress, fire alarms, emergency planning, and evacuation procedures.

Title 19, Division 2, Chapter 1, Standardized Emergency Management System Regulations The Standardized Emergency Management System (Emergency System) regulations are described in CCR Title 19, Division 2, Chapter 1. The Emergency System is required by the California Emergency Services Act to manage multiagency and multi-jurisdictional responses to emergencies in California, and to coordinate among all levels of ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 141, Packet Page 236

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-8
NOVEMBER 2023
government and affected agencies. The Emergency System unifies all elements of California’s emergency management community into a single, integrated system, and standardizes key elements.

Title 24, California Building Standards Code
The California Building Standards Code (CCR Title 24) contains provisions for building and safety standards, including fire safety standards for new buildings that are provided in the California Building Code (CCR Title 24, Part 2) and the California Fire Code (CFC) (CCR Title 24, Part 9). These standards apply to all occupancies in California, except where state agencies and local governing bodies adopt more stringent standards.

Title 24, Part 2, California Building Code
The California Building Code includes several chapters relevant to fire safety and protection that address types of construction, fire and smoke protection features, construction materials and methods, and rooftop construction.

Typical CFC safety requirements include fire sprinklers in all high-rise buildings; fire-resistance standards for fire doors, building materials, and particular types of construction; debris and vegetation clearance within a prescribed distance from occupied structures within wildfire hazard areas; and fire-flow requirements, fire hydrant spacing, and access road specifications.

Chapter 7A of the California Building Code regulates building materials, systems, and/or assemblies used in the exterior design and construction of new buildings within a fire hazard area. Fire hazard areas as defined by the California Building Code include areas identified as an FHSZ within an SRA or a WUI fire area. The purpose of Chapter 7A is to establish minimum standards for the protection of life and property by increasing the ability of structures in a fire hazard area to resist the intrusion of flames or embers projected by a wildfire, and to contribute to a systematic reduction in structural losses from a wildfire. New buildings in such areas must comply with the ignition-resistant construction standards outlined in Chapter 7A.

Title 24, Part 9, California Fire Code
Part 9 of Title 24 contains the California Fire Code (CFC), which incorporates by adoption the International Fire Code with necessary California amendments. The purpose of the CFC is to establish the minimum requirements to safeguard the public health, safety, and general welfare from the hazards of fire, explosion, and dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures, and premises, and to provide safety and assistance to firefighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. CFC Chapter 49 contains minimum standards for development in the WUI and fire hazard areas.

The CFC and Office of the State Fire Marshal provide regulations and guidance for local agencies in the development and enforcement of fire safety standards. The CFC is updated and published every 3 years by the California Building Standards Commission.

1.2.8 2019 California Fire Code with July 2021 Supplement The 2019 CFC (CCR Title 24, Part 9) establishes regulations to safeguard against the hazards of fire, explosion, or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures, and premises. The CFC also establishes requirements intended to provide safety for and assistance to firefighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. The provisions of the CFC apply to the construction, alteration, movement, enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, removal, and demolition of every ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 142, Packet Page 237

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-9
NOVEMBER 2023
building and structure throughout California. The CFC includes regulations regarding fire-resistance-rated construction, fire protection systems such as alarm and sprinkler systems, fire services features such as fire apparatus access roads, means of egress, fire safety during construction and demolition, and WUI areas.

1.2.9 Assembly Bill 3074
Assembly Bill 3074 was passed into law in 2020 and requires a third zone of defensible space. The law requires the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection to develop regulations for the ember-resistant zone (Zone 0) within 0 to 5 feet of a structure by January 1, 2023. Within this zone, fuels reduction would be more intense and be designed to keep fire and embers from ignition material that could spread fire to a structure.

1.2.10 Assembly Bill 38
Assembly Bill 38 established that, as of July 1, 2021, sellers of property located in a High or Very High FHSZ are required to provide the buyer with documentation that the property is in compliance with defensible space requirements.

1.2.11 1968 California FAIR Plan Act
The California FAIR Plan Act is composed of all insurer’s licenses to write property insurance in California. The insurance pool was established to ensure the availability of property insurance to people who, beyond their control, have been unable to obtain insurance in the voluntary insurance market.

1.3 Local

1.3.1 Monterey County CWPP
The Monterey County CWPP was developed in 2010 and updated in 2016 by the Monterey Fire Safe Council, in collaboration with a Working Group, CAL FIRE, USFS, the Bureau of Land Management, and other stakeholders. The Monterey County CWPP serves as an advisory document to guide wildfire prevention and preparedness throughout the County. The Monterey County CWPP includes wildfire planning recommendations at a county-wide scale, including hazardous fuel mitigation activities and methods for reducing structural ignitability.

1.3.2 County of Monterey Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard
Mitigation Plan
The Monterey County Office of Emergency Services developed the updated Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2022. Developing the plan included partnerships with incorporated cities and unincorporated county areas, as well as Special Purpose Districts. Each participating planning partner has prepared a jurisdiction-specific annex to this plan, which identifies localized hazards and mitigation strategies. Wildfire is identified as a high risk throughout the County.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 143, Packet Page 238

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-10 NOVEMBER 2023

1.3.3 City of Monterey General Plan
The City of Monterey General Plan serves as the City’s main policy document and governs the City’s physical shape and character. Monterey’s General Plan was adopted in 2005 and is reviewed on an annual basis. In addition, the City has adopted specific area plans for various commercial and residential neighborhoods. The following goals and policies of the General Plan relate to wildfire and fire safety.

Safety Element
▪ Goal d. Minimize the loss of life and property from fire. - Policy d.1. Achieve the greatest practical level of built-in fire protection to confine fires. - Policy d.2. Achieve effective emergency access to all developments, installations, and fire protection equipment for emergency apparatus and for evacuation.
- Program d.2.1. Discourage all dead end roads and cul-de-sacs longer than 700 feet. - Program d.2.2. Encourage alternative second access roads as emergency access for roads greater than 700 feet in length.
- Program d.2.3. Locate all installations or processes considered hazardous in the safest possible areas or on individual parcels.
- Program d.2.4. In hazardous fire areas, require fire retardant roofing and access to steep lots, and consider brush clearance and planting of non-flammable vegetation. - Policy d.3. Maintain a cost-effective, high level of fire protection service. - Policy d.4. Continue to work with fire protection agencies that provide fire service to unincorporated areas through mutual aid. Encourage those areas that desire fire protection services which are beyond “outside legitimate mutual aid” to annex to the City of Monterey for fire protection services instead of using contractual or automatic aid agreements.
- Policy d.5. Cooperate with fire protection agencies to obtain and maintain mutual aid agreements that will augment the City’s fire protection services. Continue mutual aid with the California Department of Forestry that obtain adequate aid for larger, open-range type fires involving brush, trees and grass that require specialized tactics and equipment.
- Policy d.6. Work with Cal-Am to ensure adequate water pressure for fire fighting. ▪ Figure 14, Showing Fire Hazard Severity Zones
▪ Figure 15, Showing Evacuation Routes
▪ Policy e.2. Continue to work with the airport district through a fire mutual aid agreement ▪ Goal h. Ensure prompt and effective services to cope with local emergencies. - Policy h.1. Continue to provide high quality fire, police, and emergency medical services. - Policy h.2. Continue to develop emergency plans to respond to large-scale natural or man-made disasters, such as fires, earthquakes, floods, nuclear attack, terrorist attack, or releases of hazardous materials.

Public Facilities Element
▪ Goal c. Maintain facilities to provide a cost-effective, high level of fire protection service.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 144, Packet Page 239

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-11 NOVEMBER 2023
- Policy c.1. Require built-in fire protection for new and existing structures to minimize the need for additional fire facilities.
- Policy c.2. Identify cost-effective fire station locations using contractual or automatic aid agreements. - Policy c.3. Continue to monitor and evaluate the need for a new fire station to serve the MontereySalinas Highway (68) and Ryan Ranch areas. Explore opportunities to co-locate at the airport’s fire station to provide this additional service.
- Policy c.4. Provide for adequate fire facilities through capital funding. - Policy c.5. Develop a plan to upgrade or replace the fire administration building - Policy m.2. Encourage continued development of the City’s water supply system to meet established fire flow standards (including reservoirs, mains, and hydrants).

1.3.4 City of Monterey Greenbelt Fuel Reduction Plan
This Greenbelt Fuel Reduction Plan identifies fuel reduction recommendations for eight areas within the City’s greenbelt system—the Skyline Forest, Veterans Park, Monte Vista, Carmelo Street, Don Dahvee, Josselyn Canyon, Fisherman Flats, and Old Capitol Site greenbelts. The plan identifies these as areas where fire hazard is high due to high fuel loads. Wildfire in these greenbelts could result in substantial impacts to natural resources, as well as substantial health, safety, and welfare impacts to the built/human environment adjacent to these areas.

1.3.5 City of Monterey Community Risk Assessment and
Standards of Cover Study
The City of Monterey Community Risk Assessment and Standards of Cover Study is a comprehensive assessment of current services and desired service levels for emergency response. The assessment was conducted to assist the City and Fire Department in ensuring a safe, effective, and appropriately sized response force for fires, medical emergencies, and other events requiring a specialized emergency response throughout the Cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Sand City, as well as at THE Monterey Regional Airport, Naval Support Activity Monterey, and La Mesa Village military housing.

1.3.6 City of Carmel-by-the-Sea General Plan
The Carmel-by-the-Sea General Plan, adopted June 2003, is a comprehensive statement of the planning goals and policies for the city and its surrounding Sphere of Influence. Carmel's General Plan has been combined with its Local Coastal Land Use Plan to ensure coordination of these two policy documents. The LCP sets forth goals, objectives, and policies that govern the use of land and water in Carmel-by-the-Sea consistent with the California Coastal Act of 1976. The Environmental Safety Element identifies fire as an issue of local significance and discusses the fire hazards in the city, factors that contribute to fire susceptibility, state and local regulations, and proactive fire safety measures being taken by the city to minimize wildfire concerns, such as tree inspections, pruning, and removal; sprinkler requirements; and roof requirements. The General Plan identifies narrow roads and limited water supply as potential challenges to emergency response in the city. The following goals (G), objectives (O), and policies (P) in the General Plan relate to wildfire and fire safety.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 145, Packet Page 240

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-12 NOVEMBER 2023
Environmental Safety Element
▪ O8-3 Provide public education about what to do in case of emergencies and means available to avoid or minimize their effects.
▪ P8-14 Educate the public regarding seismic, geologic, flood, fire, tsunami, and other potential disasters, by preparing periodic news articles for local media outlets, such as Carmel Pine Cone. ▪ P8-15 Publicize the system of emergency and evacuation routes serving the City. ▪ P8-16 Encourage property owners to retrofit older structures with fire detection and/or warning systems. ▪ G8-2 Provide protection from natural hazards.
▪ O8-4 Prevent or reduce the potential for life loss, injury, and property damage from fire hazards. ▪ P8-17 Avoid and discourage locating public structures and utilities in high severity fire hazard zone. ▪ P8-18 Ensure adequate water supply for fire emergencies. ▪ P8-19 Encourage new development located in or adjacent to fire hazard areas to incorporate fire preventative site design, access, landscaping and building materials, and other fire suppression techniques. ▪ P8-20 Control excessive buildup of flammable vegetative material on vacant lots and within and adjacent to high severity fire hazard zones (such as Mission Trails and Pescadero Canyon – refer to Figure 8.4), especially following wet springs.
▪ P8-21 Develop and provide funding and/or incentives for removal of flammable vegetative material particularly in high fire severity areas around Mission Trails and Pescadero Canyon (e.g., free chipping day, free collection day for tree limbs).
▪ Figure 8.6 Evacuation Routes

1.3.7 City of Pacific Grove General Plan
The Pacific Grove General Plan, adopted in 1994, is a comprehensive, integrated, and internally consistent statement of Pacific Grove’s development policies for the city and its Sphere of Influence. It is the principal policy document for guiding future conservation and development of the city. The Health and Safety Element identifies the Del Monte Forest and Lynn “Rip” Van Winkle Open Space as areas that pose wildland fire hazard to Pacific Grove communities. The following goals, programs, and policies in the General Plan relate to wildfire and fire safety.

Health and Safety Element
▪ GOAL 2 Provide aid to the community as needed in the event of natural or man-made disasters. - Program I Identify alternative water sources for firefighting purposes for use during a disaster. ▪ GOAL 4 Prevent loss of life, injury, and property damage from fires, release of hazardous materials, natural disasters, and exposure to other hazardous conditions.
▪ GOAL 5 Ensure an adequate level of fire and medical emergency service to the community. - POLICY 13 Require new development to provide all necessary water service, fire hydrants, and roads consistent with Fire Department standards and City requirements which relate to the project. - POLICY 14 Require new development to comply with the minimum fire-flow rates contained in Appendix III-A in the most recent and locally-adopted edition of the Uniform Fire Code. - POLICY 15 Require all construction to meet the applicable current City codes for fire and life safety.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 146, Packet Page 241

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-13 NOVEMBER 2023
- Program O Review the application of the City’s requirements for on-site fire suppression systems, including sprinklers and pumps, in all new construction. - POLICY 16 Ensure adequate fire equipment access through the development review process. - POLICY 17 Ensure adequate water fire-flow throughout the city. - Program P Regularly monitor fire-flow to ensure adequacy. - Program Q Schedule the improvement of water mains in the City’s Capital Improvements Program (CIP). - POLICY 18 Maintain an ongoing fire and life safety inspection program for all occupancies, except oneand two-family dwellings. - Program R Continue to inspect all occupancies annually, except one- and two-family dwellings. - POLICY 19 Maintain an ongoing comprehensive hazard abatement program that requires property owners to remove fire hazards, including vegetation, hazardous structures and materials, and debris, as directed by the Fire Department. Special conditions may apply in natural areas or where endangered species occur.
- Program S Continue the current annual weed abatement program. - Program T Continue and improve current fire prevention practices, including the current annual city fuel reduction program, in close cooperation with the City Forester. - Program U Incorporate a fire safety component in the forestry management plan which takes into consideration the preservation of natural forest characteristics. - Program V Require businesses that manufacture, store, use, or transport significant quantities of hazardous and toxic materials to annually identify such materials and their quantities and to notify the Fire Department of any changes in such materials or activities. - Program W Maintain a current inventory of hazardous and toxic materials by location, for use by the Fire Department and the Community Development Department. - Program X Continue all existing health, safety, and education programs. - POLICY 20 Endeavor to achieve and maintain an overall fire insurance (ISO) rating of 3 or better. - Program Y Monitor fire and emergency response times, staffing levels, facilities, and equipment. - POLICY 21 Maintain an average response time of three minutes for Priority 1 (emergency) calls. - Program Z Work with the 911 reporting system to shorten response time. - POLICY 22 Maintain a high level of fire apparatus performance. - Program AA Include replacement of aging fire apparatus in the City’s Capital Improvements Program (CIP)
- Program BB Remove fire hydrants from Mermaid Avenue. The street is too narrow, and there is inadequate flow from the hydrants.
- POLICY 23 Maintain and enhance the current level of emergency medical service to the community. - Program CC Maintain all line, full-time fire personnel as certified Emergency Medical/ Defibrillator Technicians (EMT-D).
- Program DD Conduct a service level/cost-analysis study to determine if an increase in Fire Department personnel’s current level of training would improve current emergency medical services. Implement findings as appropriate.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 147, Packet Page 242

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-14 NOVEMBER 2023
- POLICY 24 Ensure that training programs sensitize emergency personnel to the special needs of persons with disabilities
▪ Figure 10-2 Evacuation Routes

1.3.8 Pebble Beach Community Services District Fire
Defense Plan
The 2009 Fire Defense Plan for the Pebble Beach Community Services District is included in the CAL FIRE San Benito-Monterey Unit Fire Plan. The 2009 Fire Defense Plan addresses fire and life safety related to wildland fires within the Del Monte Forest area of Pebble Beach. The plan addresses emergency access and hazardous fuel treatment standards for open space areas and undeveloped vacant parcels. The plan outlines roadside fuel treatment methods, firebreak maintenance criteria, road and access gate identification standards, and environmental protection and targets fuel break areas.

1.3.9 Cypress Fire Protection District Fire Defense Plan The Cypress Fire Protection District, in collaboration with CAL FIRE, developed a landscape hazardous fuel reduction project in the form of a Fire Defense Plan. The plan addresses the threat of wildland fire within and around the Cypress Fire Protection District by identifying and prioritizing those actions determined by CAL FIRE to provide the greatest fire protection within the WUI. The goal of the Cypress Fire Defense Plan is to reduce the threat to life, property, and resources resulting from wildland fire within the district. This will be accomplished by reducing surface fuels, ladder fuels, and canopy density and will create conditions that improve fire suppression effectiveness. 2 Environmental Review

2.1 National Environmental Policy Act
Any proposed fuel treatment project on federal land, funded by a federal agency, or requiring a discretionary action by a federal agency requires compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires federal agencies to evaluate the potential environmental effects of proposed actions prior to making decisions on permit applications, adopting federal land management actions, and constructing highways and other publicly owned facilities. Projects implementing a community wildfire protection plan recommendation on federal land within the wildland–urban interface defined in a community wildfire protection plan are afforded expedited NEPA review. The federal agency carrying out the proposed action or that owns the land (e.g., U.S. Forest Service) typically conducts the NEPA review and decides the appropriate level of NEPA analysis to be conducted. Lead agencies typically prepare a Record of Decision, Finding of No Significant Impact, Categorical Exclusion, Environmental Assessment, and/or Environmental Impact Statement to assess the likelihood of impacts from a proposed action and alternative courses of action.

2.2 California Environmental Quality Act
Proposed fuel treatment projects on non-federal lands may require compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Private landowners conducting defensible space projects under Public Resources Code 4291 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 148, Packet Page 243

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-15 NOVEMBER 2023
guidelines are not subject to CEQA review requirements. Non-defensible space fuel treatment projects on nonfederal lands that are discretionary and are to be carried out or approved by public agencies are subject to CEQA review and documentation (California Public Resources Code, Section 21080[a]). CEQA review for non-defensible space fuel reduction projects should be instituted during the project planning process. Typically, the lead agency under CEQA is the public agency with discretionary authority over a project—that is, the public agency that has principal responsibility for carrying out or approving the project. The appropriate level of CEQA analysis is decided by the lead agency, which could be a Categorical Exemption, Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Environmental Impact Report (EIR), or a document tiered from an EIR.

2.2.1 California Vegetation Treatment Program
The California Vegetation Treatment Program (CalVTP) was developed by the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection to address California’s ongoing wildfire issues. The CalVTP includes the use of prescribed burning, mechanical treatments, manual treatments, herbicides, and prescribed herbivory activities to reduce hazardous vegetation, construct fuel breaks, and restore healthy ecological fire regimes. The CalVTP Program EIR was prepared in accordance with CEQA and was approved by the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection in December 2019. The Program EIR provides a programmatic analysis of potential impacts related to vegetation treatment activities within the “Treatable Landscape,” which is defined by the CalVTP. Project proponents may tier from the CalVTP Program EIR to analyze project-related impacts for future projects within the Treatable Landscape. Fuel management projects occurring in the Treatable Landscape can complete a streamlined CEQA review via the project-specific analysis process outlined in the CalVTP Program EIR.

Initial planning efforts for fuel management projects conducted under this community wildfire protection plan should examine the project’s location relative to the CalVTP Treatable Landscape to determine suitability for analysis under the CalVTP Program EIR.

2.3 California Coastal Act
The California Coastal Act defines the Coastal Zone, which is under the jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission. The Coastal Zone covers both land and water, and the California Coastal Commission has the authority to regulate construction, buildings, housing, roads, fire, and erosion abatement, and to issue fines within the Coastal Zone. Local governments are required to prepare Local Coastal Programs under the California Coastal Act, which guide development within the Coastal Zone. Projects proposed within the Coastal Zone generally must obtain a Coastal Development Permit.

2.4 Agency Consultation/Permitting
Regulatory permits may also be required for fuel treatment actions that would adversely impact riparian areas under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. It is anticipated that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers may require a fill permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife may require a Streambed Alteration Agreement under Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code. The Regional Water Quality Control Board may require a Water Quality Certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Additionally, it is anticipated that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers would consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service pursuant to Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act during the Section 404 permitting process for potential impacts ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 149, Packet Page 244

APPENDIX E/ PLANNING AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
14887 E-16 NOVEMBER 2023
to special-status plants/wildlife and their habitats. Applications for each of these regulatory permits can be processed concurrently; however, some may take longer than others to process and obtain. Consultation with a qualified biologist, initiating any necessary seasonal surveys, and early coordination with the regulatory agencies are recommended.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 150, Packet Page 245 Appendix F
Funding Opportunities
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 151, Packet Page 246 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 152, Packet Page 247

APPENIDX F / FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES
14887 F-1
NOVEMBER 2023
Funding
Funding is critical to implementing projects identified in this CWPP. MFD, in coordination with partner cities and Plan Area landowners, should consider pursuing grant funding opportunities to facilitate implementation of CWPP projects. Development of funding sources and incentive programs for landowners, land managers, and residents of the Plan Area can encourage reduction of wildfire hazards and risks. The following provides information on potential project funding opportunities:
▪ Monterey County Fire Relief Fund Grants: The Monterey County Fire Relief Fund was created to help individuals and families impacted by current and future wildfires throughout Monterey County. At this time, grants are focused on relief and recovery efforts. Grants from this special purpose fund will support nonprofit organizations assisting with relief, recovery and rebuilding efforts. More information can be found at https://www.cfmco.org/monterey-county-fire-relief-fund-grants/. ▪ California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE): CAL FIRE provides grant funding for various project types, including Forest Health, Wildfire Prevention, and Wildfire Resilience projects. Eligible project types under these grant programs include fuels management, fire reintroduction, treatment of degraded areas, conservation of forests, hazardous fuels reduction, wildfire prevention planning, and wildfire prevention education. More information regarding CAL FIRE grants can be found at https://www.fire.ca.gov/grants/. ▪ Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP): A cost-share program for working landscapes that can address wildfire preparation or damage, including fuel reduction, reforestation, soil erosion control, and water quality protection, often on parcels 1 acre or more or smaller parcels with natural resource concerns.

Neighbors can collaborate to meet acreage requirements. Information regarding EQIP can be found at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/financial/eqip/. ▪ Catastrophic Fire Recovery EQIP Fund Pool: A cost-share program for working landscapes that can addresses fire recovery. Fire recovery may be cost-shared up to 90%, often on parcels 1 acre or more or smaller parcels with natural resource concerns. Neighbors can collaborate to meet acreage requirements.

More information can be found at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/ca/programs/ financial/eqip/?cid=stelprdb1247015.
▪ California Healthy Soils Program: The Healthy Soils Program stems from the California Healthy Soils Initiative, a collaboration of state agencies and departments to promote the development of healthy soils on California's farmlands and ranchlands. Covered management practices include but are not limited to cover cropping, no-till, reduced-till, mulching, compost application, and conservation plantings. More information can be found at: https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/oefi/healthysoils/. ▪ State Fire Assistance Grants: Program to support fire risk reduction activities by landowners and residents in at-risk communities to restore and maintain resilient landscapes and create fire-adapted communities.

Projects may include fuel hazard mitigation (chipping, thinning, burning, or grazing), community hazard mitigation planning (CWPPs, Firewise assessments, hazard assessments, and similar types of planning activities), prevention, mitigation, and education (outreach, mailings, workshops, events, project-specific analysis, and other educational programs). More information regarding State Fire Assistance Grants can be found at https://cafiresafecouncil.org/grants-and-funding/2022-sfa-grant-opportunity/. ▪ California Wildfire Mitigation Program: This program, developed by the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and CAL FIRE, institutes a home hardening initiative to retrofit, harden, and create defensible space for homes at high risk to wildfires, focusing on high socially vulnerability communities and ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 153, Packet Page 248

APPENIDX F / FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES
14887 F-2
NOVEMBER 2023
providing financial assistance for low- and moderate-income households. This project is in its pilot phase and currently operating only in San Diego, Shasta, and Lake Counties. More information can be found at https://www.caloes.ca.gov/cal-oes-divisions/recovery/disaster-mitigation-technical-support/californiawildfire-mitigation-program. ▪ Coastal Conservancy Wildfire Resilience Program: This program funds on-the-ground activities to restore the health and increase resilience of California forests, grasslands, and natural lands to wildfire, and for planning and capacity building to increase wildfire resilience. More information regarding Coastal Conservancy grants can be found at https://scc.ca.gov/2021/12/03/rfp-for-wildfire-resilience-projects-announced/. ▪ County Coordinators Grant: The objective of the County Coordinators Grant is to educate, encourage, and develop countywide collaboration and coordination among various wildfire mitigation groups operating within counties containing State Responsibility Area (SRA) lands. Grants to be used to cover administrative costs relevant to countywide coordination efforts (salary, support, and administrative costs) for a designated County Coordinator. More information regarding County Coordinator Grants can be found at https://cafiresafecouncil.org/grants-and-funding/2021-county-coordinators-grant-opportunity/. ▪ County Evacuation Route Grant: For completing wildfire evacuation route projects, including evacuation route planning, implementation, public education, construction, signage, maintenance, and related activities. More information regarding County Evacuation Route Grants can be found at https://cafiresafecouncil.org/ 2021-county-evacuation-route-grant-opportunity/.
▪ United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Community Wildfire Defense Grants: Community Wildfire Defense Grants are intended to help at-risk local communities and Tribes plan and reduce the risk against wildfire. The program prioritizes at-risk communities in an area identified as having high or very high wildfire hazard potential, are low-income, and/or have been impacted by a severe disaster. Grants assist WUI communities restore and maintain landscapes, create fire adapted communities, and improve wildfire response. More information regarding Community Wildfire Defense Grants can be found at:
https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/fire/grants.
▪ Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants: FEMA’s hazard mitigation assistance provides funding for eligible mitigation measures that reduce disaster losses. The following programs are applicable to wildfire:
- Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP): Provides funding to state, local, tribal, and territorial governments to implement hazard mitigation projects. Eligible projects include creation of defensible space, application of ignition-resistant and/or non-combustible materials on new and existing homes, and treatment of hazardous fuels proximate to at-risk structures. More information regarding FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program can be found at https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation/hazard-mitigation. - Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Post-Fire Grant: Post-fire assistance to help communities implement hazard mitigation measures after wildfire disasters. Eligible projects include wildfire mitigation (e.g., removal of burned trees), infrastructure retrofits (e.g., water system repairs), soil/slope stabilization, and post-fire flood prevention/sediment reduction. More information regarding FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Post-Fire Grants can be found at https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation/post-fire. - Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Grants: Support states, local communities, tribes, and territories in hazard mitigation projects to reduce the risks faced from disasters and natural hazards. A wide variety of projects are eligible for Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Grant funding. More information regarding these grants can be found at https://www.fema.gov/ grants/mitigation/building-resilient-infrastructure-communities.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 13., Item Page 154, Packet Page 249 Council
Agenda Report
№08/22
FROM: Hans Uslar, City Manager
Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
Christine Davi, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Provide Direction on Draft Charter Amendments for the November 2024 Election (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council review draft Charter amendments and provide direction on any desired amendments to propose to the voters for adoption at the November 2024 election. Based on the direction received, Staff will propose ballot measure questions and a final version of Charter amendments for approval by the City Council at its meeting on June 18, 2024 or as soon thereafter as is practical.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

California Constitution, article XI, section 3(b) provides that a city may sponsor a ballot measure proposing charter amendments. The California Constitution does not impose a single subject rule on charter amendments sponsored by a governing body, as opposed to initiative measures. (Hernandez v. County of Los Angeles (2008) 167 Cal. App. 4th 12.) As the court in Hernandez noted, “[s]ince every ballot question carries significant administrative costs, substantial efficiencies can be achieved by a city council’s authority to group technical changes of disparate but reasonably related provisions and statutory amendments into one measure to achieve a common theme or purpose.” (Id. at p. 23.) Therefore, it is recommended to group measures in which the content is reasonably related to the same subject. This will also ensure that there is no voter confusion on the substance of a measure.

It is a good practice to periodically review the city’s charter for potential amendments and to ensure the charter regulates municipal affairs in a manner consistent with policy objectives. The last regular meeting in which the City Council may vote to place proposed charter amendments on the ballot is August 6. 2024.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no fiscal implications with this proposed action. Pursuant to the California Elections Code, the City will reimburse the Monterey County Elections Department in full for its Date: 6/4/2024
Item No.: 14.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 1, Packet Page 250 proportionate share of election services performed. The cost to conduct the election is estimated to be in the range of $109,718 to $157,640 based on the current number of registered voters and is included in the proposed FY 24-25 budget.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose not to consider placing one or more charter amendments on the ballot for the November 2024 election.

There are several additional areas of local control that could be enacted through charter amendments that are not described in this report. This report is not intended to be a comprehensive or complete review of the charter. The City Council could create a charter review commission for the purpose of reviewing and proposing amendments or direct staff to complete a comprehensive and complete review.

While there was some discussion and support regarding amendments to Charter section 8.1 to allow hotel conversions to housing, more time is needed for Staff to study this issue and to understand the impact of state laws on such a change in use.

DISCUSSION:

Cities in California are defined under the Government Code as either “charter cities” or “general law cities.” A charter has the full force and effect of state law and it acts as an instrument of limitation on the broad power of charter cities over matters of municipal affairs. A charter city is subject only to conflicting provisions in the state or federal constitutions and preemptive state law on matters of statewide concern. (City Attorneys’ Dep’t, League of Cal. Cities, The Municipal Law Handbook (Cont.Ed.Bar 2023 ed.) §1.13, p. 12-13.) The City of Monterey became incorporated as a city in 1850, and first adopted its charter in 1925.

On February 10, 2024, the City Council reviewed potential charter amendments and provided feedback. A summary of these draft amendments is as follows:

Charter Amendment No. 1 – Clerical and Technical Updates (Attachment 1) This proposed amendment would update:

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 2, Packet Page 251

1. Charter section 2.8 – Eligibility of Elective Officers – to reflect gender-neutral terminology and correct capitalizations.

2. Charter section 5.1 – City Manager – to reflect that the Library Board of Trustees appoints the Library Director. It also eliminates a superfluous sentence about appointing an interim City Manager in the absence of the City Manager and Assistant City Manager and deletes a paragraph about the City Manager appointing a secretary who serves in the position at will as this does not reflect current practice or staffing.

3. Charter section 7.1 – Public Library and Board of Library Trustees to reflect that the Library Board of Trustees does not appoint or remove library personnel other than the Library Director. The City Manager appoints and removes library personnel.

Charter Amendment No. 2 – Terms of Office and Legislation (Attachment 2) This proposed amendment would update:

1. Charter section 2.8 – Term of Office of Councilmember Filing as Candidate for Mayor.

The draft reflects that the term of office ends when their successor is appointed.

Under existing law, which has been in place in its current form since 1989, the term of office of a councilmember who files for the office of Mayor automatically expires on the date the next municipal election is held after filing.

The rationale for this seems to be to: (i) maintain the charter’s commitment to appointments to fill vacancies; (ii) discourage mid-term councilmembers from running for Mayor; and (iii) make sure that only one candidate for Mayor serves after the election – the winning mayoral candidate. The councilmembers who lose in the election cannot continue to serve on council, as their terms either will expire automatically (they are running at the end of a council term) or under Section 2.8 (they run mid-term, but the charter shortens their term).

In 2022, this charter provision resulted in a vacancy for a mid-term seat from November 9, 2022 until December 12, 2022 when the City Council appointed a representative to the vacant seat. This left only three members of the City Council to conduct City business. The proposed change will allow the mayoral candidates to continue to serve until their replacement is appointed.

The revision also includes term limits of four successive full terms [8 years], unless by the 88th day before the election there are no eligible candidates nominated for the office of mayor then the term limits would not apply.

2. Charter section 4.1 – City Council. The proposed revision states that Councilmembers are elected every four years and their term ends when their successor is appointed. It clarifies that the filing period for candidates to fill the term at the next general election is extended for five days.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 3, Packet Page 252 The revision imposes term limits, two successive full terms [8 years], unless by the 88th day before the election there are no eligible candidates nominated for the office of City Councilmember then the term limits would not apply.

3. Legislation (Section 4.4)
Current law requires ordinances to be published in the newspaper at least three days before its adoption. This publication requirement cost the city approximately $24,000 in FY 22-23, and thus far in FY 23-24, approximately $31,300. The proposed amendment requires publication of the ordinance number and title at least once in a newspaper within 15 days of its adoption.

The amendment allows ordinances to be adopted without reading in full the title or text. It also allows for adoption with substantive or clerical amendments between the time of its introduction and the time of its final passage as long as the general scope and original purpose are retained.

Charter Amendment No. 3 – Article 6, Fiscal Administration (Attachment 3)

1. Article 6.4 Leases of City Property
Section 6.4 provides that all leases of city property shall be at fair market rent as established by sound appraisal practices. The proposed amendment would allow the City to enter into leases that are below fair market rate rent when such leases are in the best interests of the public and further a public policy. For example, the Monterey Bay Aquarium, Monterey Peninsula Chamber of Commerce, Monterey Yacht Club, First Night Monterey, the American Legion Post 41, etc.

2. Article 6.6 Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Section 6.6, approved by the voters in 1988, establishes the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program. This program allocates 16% of Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) to the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Committee (NCIP) to make recommendations on capital projects of community-wide benefit.

The proposed revisions include updating the definition of Capital Project to provide more flexibility in the types of projects that are eligible for NCIP funding as follows:

The definition of Capital Projects is to be broadly construed to fulfill the intent of this Section. A Capital Project means a project that costs at least $50,000, has a useful life of more than one year, and results in the creation, acquisition, revitalization, study, or maintenance of a fixed asset.

This revision will allow for ordinary infrastructure maintenance, which to date has not been authorized.

The definition of Ordinary and Necessary Services, taken from Blacks Law Dictionary, has been added as follows:

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 4, Packet Page 253 (c) Ordinary and Necessary Expense Defined. Ordinary and Necessary Expense means an expense that is normal or
usual and helpful or appropriate for the operation of the City.

The definition clarifies the circumstances under which the City Council may determine that there are insufficient funds available to provide the ordinary and necessary services in any budget year.

Also, the proposed amendment will allow, as part of the annual budget, the City Council to appropriate 2% of the Allocation Requirement to the General Fund for General Fund purposes including but not limited to the maintenance of Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Capital Projects.

In sum, it is requested that the City Council review and comment on the draft Charter amendments. Final review and approval will be at a future meeting.

CD/hs
Attachments: 1. Draft Charter Amendment No. 1 – Clerical and Technical Updates

2. Draft Charter Amendment No. 2 – Terms of Office and Legislation

3. Draft Charter Amendment No. 3 – Article 6, Fiscal Administration 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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 5, Packet Page 254 ATTACHMENT 1
CHARTER AMENDMENT NO. 1 - Clerical and Technical Updates Sec. 2.2 Eligibility of Elective Officers. No person shall be eligible for election to, or hold, any elective office of the City unless he/she shall they have been a resident and elector of the City for the period of time and have such other qualifications as are prescribed by S state law for Councilmembers of G general L law Ccities.

Sec. 5.1 City Manager. The Council shall select the City Manager who shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council, except as otherwise provided by contract. The City Manager shall be the administrative head of the City and shall have such powers as are necessary to carry out and enforce all ordinances, resolutions, rules and directions of the City Council and the general laws of the State of California applicable to the City.

The City Manager shall appoint and remove all officers and employees of the City except those appointed by the City Council or the Library Board of Trustees, in accordance with the rules and regulations established by the City Council for appointment and removal.

The City Manager may appoint an Assistant City Manager who shall have all of the powers and duties of the City Manager in the event of the City Manager’s absence or disability. In the absence of the Assistant City Manager and the City Manager, the Council may appoint an Interim City Manager to act during the absence or disability of the City Manager.

The City Manager may appoint a Secretary to the City Manager, who shall serve at the pleasure of the City Manager, the provision of this Charter or any ordinance, resolution or regulation pertaining to the removal of officers and employees notwithstanding.

The City Manager shall appoint a City Clerk who shall maintain the official records of the City and perform such other duties as required.

Sec. 7.1 Public Library and Board of Library Trustees.

There shall be a Board of Library Trustees consisting of five (5) members to be appointed by the Council. Terms of Library Trustees shall be four (4) years. The terms shall be staggered.

The Board of Library Trustees shall have the following powers, duties, and responsibilities:
(a) To select all books, magazines, periodicals, recordings, films, pictures, photographs, programs received through electronic media, documents, or any other cultural items for circulation from or study in the Monterey Public Library.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 6, Packet Page 255 ATTACHMENT 1
(b) To make and enforce such bylaws, rules and regulations as it may deem necessary for the administration of the Monterey Public Library program. (c) To appoint and remove the Library Director who shall be the department head., and any such other library personnel as may be necessary for the operation of the library program.
(d) To perform such additional duties and have such additional powers as may be prescribed by ordinance or resolution.

There shall be maintained a library trust fund which shall consist of the present library trust fund together with all gifts, devises, or bequests received for the use of donated to the library hereafter and all miscellaneous revenues of the library, except fines.

Expenditures from said the library trust fund shall be made authorized by the Council for such library purposes as are upon requested by the Library Board and as are in conformity accordance with the conditions of any such gifts, devises, or bequests.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 7, Packet Page 256 ATTACHMENT 2
CHARTER AMENDMENT NO. 2
Article 2, Elections, Initiative, Referendum and Recall Sec. 2.8 Term of Office of Councilmember Filing as a Candidate for Mayor.

Terms of office for councilmembers who file for the office of Mayor shall automatically expire on the date the next municipal election is held after filing their successor is appointed. The filing period for candidates to fill the councilmember’s term at the next general election shall be extended an additional five (5) days.

Article 3, The Mayor
Sec. 3.1 The Mayor.
(a) The Mayor shall be a member of the City Council and entitled to vote on all matters coming before the Council. The Mayor He/she shall preside at all meetings of the City Council and perform such other duties as prescribed by the Council consistent with the office of Mayor. The Mayor shall execute all official documents of the City as required by law or order and shall represent the City at ceremonial functions as he/she the Mayor deems appropriate.
(b) A Mayor shall be elected every two years at each general municipal election and shall hold office for the term of two (2) years from and after his/her installation and until his/her their successor is elected and qualified.
(c) No former Mayor shall hold any compensated appointive City office or regular City employment until one (1) year after the expiration of the term for which they were elected to the Council.
(d) Except as set forth in Subsection (e), the term of office for Mayor shall be limited to four (4) full successive terms. This section applies to full terms of office commencing on or after November 5, 2024. The terms of office served as Mayor do not count against the term limits for the office of a Councilmember. (e) A person who is ineligible to hold the office of Mayor due to the term limits specified in this Section may nonetheless file nomination papers with the City Clerk. On the 88th day before the election, the City Clerk shall reject and refuse to process nominating papers for a person who is ineligible to hold office based on this Section if there is at least one eligible candidate nominated for the office of Mayor. If, by the 88th day before the election there are no eligible candidates Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 8, Packet Page 257 ATTACHMENT 2
nominated for the office of Mayor, then the term limits set forth in this Section do not apply. The intent of this Subsection is to allow persons who are ineligible for the office of Mayor due to term limits to hold the office of Mayor when there are no other eligible candidates.

Article 4, City Council
Sec. 4.1 City Council
(a) The Council shall be comprised of the Mayor and four (4) Councilmembers and shall be the legislative body of the City.
(b) Two Councilmembers shall be elected at each General Municipal Election and shall hold office for the term of four (4) years from and after their installation in office and every four years thereafter and shall hold office until their successors are elected and qualified.
(c) Councilmembers shall not be eligible to hold any other office or employment with the City except as members of Boards, Commissions, and other agencies as authorized of which they are constituted such a member by gGeneral lLaw or by appointment of the Mayor and/or Council.
(d) The Council may, by ordinance, provide for the compensation of Councilmembers provided that said compensation shall not exceed the amount permitted by State Law for gGeneral lLaw cCities of the same population; may provide for additional compensation for the Mayor; and may provide that increases shall take effect during the term of office of Councilmembers. Monies paid by other agencies to the Mayor or Councilmembers serving on the legislative body of said agencies shall not be considered compensation for the purposes of this section. (e) No former Mayor or Councilmember shall hold any compensated appointive City office or regular City employment until one (1) year after the expiration of the term for which they were he/she was elected or appointed to the Council. (f) The term of office for Councilmembers shall be limited to two full successive terms. This Section applies to full terms of office commencing on or after November 5, 2024. The terms of office served as a Councilmember do not count against the four-term limit for Mayor.
(g) A person who is ineligible to hold the office of City Councilmember due to the term limits specified in this Section may nonetheless file nomination papers with the City Clerk. On the 88th day before the election, the City Clerk shall reject and refuse to process nominating papers for a person who is ineligible to hold office based on this Section if there is at least one eligible candidate nominated for the office of City Councilmember. If, by the 88th day before the election there are no eligible candidates nominated for the office of Councilmember, then the term Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 9, Packet Page 258 ATTACHMENT 2
limits set forth in this Section do not apply. The intent of this Subsection is to allow persons who are ineligible for the office of City Councilmember due to term limits to hold the office of City Councilmember when there are no other eligible candidates.

Sec. 4.4 LEGISLATION
(a) In addition to other acts required by law or specific provisions of this Charter to be done by ordinance, acts which provide for the following shall be done by ordinance:
a.1. Provide for a criminal or civil penalty or adopt any rule or regulation for violation of which a criminal or civil penalty is imposed. b.2. Levy any tax.
c.3.Regulate the use of property or regulate the conduct of persons. (b) No ordinance or resolution shall be passed without receiving the affirmative vote of at least three (3) members of the Council.
(c) Ordinance Adoption Procedure.

1. Except as provided in subsection (d), no ordinance shall be passed by the City Council on the day of its introduction, nor within five days thereafter.

A proposed ordinance may be amended or modified between the time of its introduction and the time of its final passage provided the general scope and original purpose are retained. , 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

2. An ordinance may be adopted at a regular, adjourned, or special meeting.

3. An ordinance may be adopted without reading the text or the title. or until its publication at least three (3) days before its adoption. In the case of an ordinance being amended before its adoption as amended, and where such amendment is made for the correction of clerical error or omission of form only, then such ordinance need not be republished.

Ordinances and resolutions need not be read either in whole or in part prior to their adoption except as may be otherwise required by ordinance or general law. (d) Effective Date. An ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final passage except an ordinance shall take effect immediately on the day of its introduction if it is an ordinance:
a. 1. Relating to an election.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 10, Packet Page 259 ATTACHMENT 2
b. 2. For the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety, containing a declaration of the facts constituting the urgency and is passed by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Council.
c. 3. Relating to taxes for the usual and current expenses of the City. d. 4. Covered by particular provisions of law prescribing the manner of its passage and adoption.
(e) Within fifteen days after the adoption of an ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published, at least once, in a newspaper of general circulation the ordinance number and title.
(f) No ordinance, or portion thereof, shall be amended or repealed except by ordinance.
(g) All ordinances and resolutions shall be signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 11, Packet Page 260 ATTACHMENT 3
CHARTER AMENDMENT – NO. 3
ARTICLE 6 – FISCAL ADMINISTRATION

LEASES OF CITY PROPERTY
Sec. 6.4
(a) All leases of City property shall be at fair market rent as established by sound appraisal practices.

1. Exception.

A. A lease may be below fair market rent if the lease is with a qualified nonprofit organization that is organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in Section 501(c)(3) or other comparable provision of the Internal Revenue Code, or a public school, or other government entity, and the City Council makes the following findings:
i. That the lease furthers a specific public policy; and ii. That the lease is in the best interest of the public.

B. A lease that is below fair market rent pursuant to this section shall contain a provision that the tenant will pay prevailing wages for construction and comply with relevant prevailing wage statutes, as may be applicable.
(b) All leases in excess of for more than one (1) year shall contain a provision for the increase or reconsideration of rent at fair market value in accordance with accepted commercial lease practices.

NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Sec. 6.6
(a) Purpose: The purpose of the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program is to iensure that a minimum portion of the City’s annual budget is expended to improve the residential neighborhoods of the City and to provide for Ccapital Pprojects of community-wide benefit.
(b) Capital Projects Defined: The definition of Capital Projects is to be broadly construed to fulfill the intent of this Section. A Capital Project means a project that costs at least $50,000, has a useful life of more than one year, and results in the creation, acquisition, revitalization, study, or maintenance of a fixed asset..Capital Projects include, but are not limited to, streets, storm drains, sewers, sidewalks, lighting, traffic control devices, landscaping and beautification, parks, recreational facilities, and other public buildings, Capital Projects do not include ordinary services.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 12, Packet Page 261 ATTACHMENT 3
(c) Ordinary and Necessary Expense Defined: Ordinary and Necessary Expense means an expense that is normal or usual and helpful or appropriate for the operation of the City.
(d) (c) Annual Budget:

1. As part of the annual budget, the City Council shall appropriate at least sixteen percent (16%) of the Transient Occupancy Tax estimated to be collected during the fiscal year to be expended on Neighborhood and Community Capital Projects (“Allocation Requirement”) Improvements.

2. As part of the annual budget, the City Council shall appropriate 2% of the Allocation Requirement to the General Fund for General Fund purposes including but not limited to the maintenance of Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Capital Projects.

3. Exceptions to the Allocation Requirement.
i. If the Council determines that there are insufficient funds available to provide for the Ordinary and Necessary Expenses services in any budget year, they may, by an affirmative vote of four (4) members of the City Council, reduce the amount to be appropriated for Neighborhood and Community Improvements.
ii. The proceeds of any Transient Occupancy Tax increase adopted by voters after November 3, 2020 shall not be subject to the Allocation Requirement.
(e)(d) Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Committee: The City Council shall appoint at least one (1) resident from each residential neighborhood to the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Committee. The Committee shall recommend a list of Ccapital improvements Projects desired to be accomplished in each neighborhood. Recommendations may include multi-year projects and funding. (f)(e) Council Action: From the recommendations of the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Committee the Council shall include a Neighborhood Improvement and Community Improvement Program in the annual budget. The determination of the projects, priorities, and expenditures shall be within the sound discretion of the City Council.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 14., Item Page 13, Packet Page 262 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Rafaela T. King, CPA, MBA, Finance Director
Prepared By: Kyle R. Olsen, Finance Analyst
SUBJECT: Adopt the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 Operating Budget and Position Control List (PCL) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council approve a resolution adopting the FY 2024-25 Operating Budget and Position Control List.

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:

The recommended actions are consistent with City Charter section 6.3 and with established policy and procedures for adopting and amending the annual budget.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The General Fund’s expenditures are expected to exceed revenues by $3,309,543 before taking into consideration transfers in/out. When transfers in/out are included, the City is projecting a net operating deficit of $6,760,994. Staff intends to use anticipated and projected savings as well as the City’s unassigned fund balance, as needed, to balance the budget.

Other funds include Special Revenue Funds, Enterprise Funds, Internal Service Funds, and Agency Funds. These funds are shown in aggregate in this report, and in detail format in the attached Exhibit A.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 1, Packet Page 263 №10/24
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 to appropriate different amounts or choose to remove items from the budget.

DISCUSSION:

After analyzing and using all available resources, Staff is pleased to present to the City Council of Monterey a balanced budget proposal, which is reflective of our City’s Vision, Mission, Value Drivers, and Strategic Priorities. The proposed budget is based on the City’s detailed projections of the City’s Finance Team and represents the best available projections of the City’s fiscal future.

Principles for the 2024-25 Budget
Community Engagement
New to the budget process this year was the completion of several Community Engagement Listening Sessions hosted by the Finance Department. The sessions were promoted on social media, email blasts, and the City’s public engagement portal, Have Your Say Monterey.

The sessions were held on February 26, 2024, in New Monterey at Scholze Park Center, February 29, 2024, at the Monterey Public Library, and on March 2, 2024, at Casanova Oak Knoll Park Center. A total of 27 citizens attended the three sessions. City Staff provided an overview of the budget process, educated the citizens on different types of funding and allowable uses, provided a hands-on exercise to gather public feedback, and provided members of the public to ask questions about the City’s budget process and provide additional input.

Additionally, the City put out a survey on Have Your Say Monterey. The survey was open for one month and was promoted on the City’s website, virtual communications, and on flyers at the Library and Sports Center. The City received a total of 588 responses. The demographics of respondents are as follows: Seventy percent (70%) of respondents are residents of Monterey.

Forty-five percent (45.3%) of respondents were 55 or older. Sixty-one percent (61.3%) of respondents had income levels lower than $200,000. Sixty-three percent (63.5%) of respondents were female.

During the budgeting process, the City attempted to incorporate survey and listening session feedback from citizens. One direct outcome of the feedback from citizens was the decision to increase the number of positions at the library. These increases will allow the library to open at least one additional day per week. Other suggestions were taken into consideration in various departments and programs throughout the City.

Continue to Maintain Strong Reserve Levels
Since the COVID-19 pandemic, the City has continued to make investments in its reserves to create a stronger financial footing during uncertain times. Consistent with the City Council’s strategic priority and focus on fiscal health, the FY 2023-24 Budget codified a comprehensive Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 2, Packet Page 264 №10/24
set of Reserve Policies that outlined a strategy for building and using the reserved funds. Since FY 2021-22, the City has seen an increase in City Reserves of approximately $19M. These policies clearly show how the City is addressing the various issues that have, for a long time in the City’s history, been placed on hold for lack of funding.

The FY 2024-25 budget continues to provide allocations to the City’s reserves – this includes a significant contribution to the City’s Economic Uncertainty Fund to maintain the reserve at 20% of the General Fund’s projected expenditures. Also, the FY 2024-25 budget makes contributions to the City’s Sports Center Reserve, Conference Center Reserve, Pension Reserve, Library Building Reserve, and Safety Building Reserve. Additionally, the FY 2024-25 budget makes contributions to two reserve funds outside the General Fund: Sea Level Rise Reserve (Tidelands Fund) and the Parking Facilities Reserve (Parking Fund). The amounts listed below are consistent with the City’s Reserve Policies and are subject to change per deliberation of City Staff and at the direction of Council. A further discussion of the City’s reserve contributions is later in the Agenda Report.

Closely Tracking and Limiting Expenditures
Over the past several years, the City has taken steps to track and regulate City spending. After the adoption of the FY 2023-24 budget, the Finance Department initiated the process of sending out monthly spending reports to all departments. In these monthly reports, the Finance Department identified accounts that were trending or forecasted to be over budget. This regular process has provided opportunities for the Finance Department to work with departments and identify potentially problematic accounts sooner and more frequently. Additionally, the Finance Department has continued to emphasize that Department Heads have the authority to initiate a net-zero transfer from one account to another within their respective departments in case one account is overburdened. This has led to more accurate account levels throughout the City.

Overall, the City has benefitted from one-time savings in the budget. FY 2022-23 provided the City with savings and savings are projected again in FY 2023-24; however, the City cannot depend on one-time savings indefinitely and a balanced budget is essential.

Factors contributing to one-time savings the past two years include (1) Salary Savings due to vacancies, (2) underspending in Operations, (3) maintaining C.O.R.E. (Change the way we do business to be more streamlined, Operational reductions or services provided by someone else, where appropriate, Revenue enhancements through economic development, fees, taxes, cost recoveries, and Employee contracts that attract and retain talent and are financially sustainable.), (4) increase in revenues and (5) unspent encumbered funds. The Finance team along with the City Manager’s Office are working diligently to streamline and improve processes in these factors to provide funding in deferred maintenance and other city programs and projects.

As mentioned above, the City has benefited from underspending in Operations; while these savings will support the City’s overarching fiscal goals, the FY 2024-25 budget makes strides to right size Operational Accounts and shift resources from accounts which have been over budgeted the past few years and reallocated the budget to accounts which are in more need. To do this, the Budget Team focused on the requests of the departments while evaluating over budgeted accounts. The Budget Team also focused on identifying underused accounts and shifting funds from these accounts to other accounts with greater needs. In total, the Budget Team identified approximately $2 million that could be redirected within the City’s General Fund.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 3, Packet Page 265 №10/24
As a result of the Budget Team’s focus, the City’s Operations & Maintenance Budget is projected to increase only 4%.

Making Critical Investments
The FY 2024-25 Budget must take critical steps to improve the City’s infrastructure. Of note:
 Infrastructure Improvements: The City continues to invest in its infrastructure and facilities. The FY 2024-25 budget provides funding to Parks and Recreation to replace outdated equipment such as tables, chairs, exercise equipment, and modern facilities for part-time staff at the City’s Recreation Park Centers, including the Monterey Sports Center. Also, the FY 2024-25 Budget provides funding to improve the Library HVAC systems, Veterans Park Showers, and much-needed improvements to the Hilltop Center clay room and flooring.
 Measure P & S: Measure P & S continues to provide a dedicated revenue source to tackle the Sidewalks, Streets, Pavements and ADA improvements. Of note, this Measure sunsets in March of 2027. The City continues to keep this date in focus to renew the Measure to continue the progress and upkeep of these major structures without tasking the General Fund.
 Capital Improvements: The City continues to plan and work on the various capital improvements throughout the city. The 2024-25 budget includes a $2.5M allocation from the General Fund, $500K from the Sports Center Reserve and $500K from the Facility Maintenance Fund. The details of the Capital Improvement Program projects will be presented during a separate report at this meeting.

Financial Challenges Facing the City of Monterey
Throughout and since the COVID-19 pandemic, the City has faced unprecedented economic instability. Though economic conditions have somewhat stabilized over the past several years, the City continues to face uncertainty that is unlikely to subside in the near future. Of note:
 Inflation and Rising Costs: Inflation continues to put additional needs and pressure on our operational accounts. Like businesses and residents, the City also sees increased costs in purchasing the supplies necessary to operate and maintain our infrastructure. In many instances, costs have risen more than twofold. These additional costs for supplies, services, salaries, and benefits have increased expenditures across all City departments. In reviewing the last ten years of expenses, the seven years prior to COVID-19 the average actual increase for expenses per year was 4%. In the last three fiscal years following COVID-19, the average increase per year is 14%, which equates to an average of $10.5M each year.
 Growth in the Hospitality Sector: The City of Monterey has rebounded nicely from the COVID-19 pandemic, and while much of the revenue that was lost during the 2020 recession has been restored, growth in the hospitality sector is expected to only increase marginally over the next several years as international travel increases and American and International travelers look abroad for their travel. Monterey continues to be a major destination; however, the City cannot expect the major increases it has enjoyed over the past several years.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 4, Packet Page 266 №10/24
SUMMARY OF THE FY 2024-25 BUDGET
Operating Budget
In total, the FY 2024-25 budget allocates $105,908,972 million in revenue and $109,218,516 million in expenditures in the City’s General Fund as well as $115,761,678 million in revenue and $87,560,706 million in expenditures in other funds. Additionally, the FY 2024-25 budget provides for $18,080,983 in transfers in/out, of which $16,436,229 is allocated to Capital Improvement Projects. Exhibit A, attached to this report, provides a detailed overview of the City’s revenue, expenditures, transfers in/out, and the City’s position control. A summary is below, and select items follow in this report:

OPERATING BUDGET - REVENUES
FUND

OPERATING

REVENUE TRANSFERS IN TOTAL
General Fund* $105,908,972 $ 778,715 $106,687,687
Other Funds $115,761,678 $ 17,402,268 $133,163,946
Total $221,670,650 $ 18,180,983 $239,851,633

OPERATING BUDGET - EXPENDITURES
FUND

OPERATING

REVENUE TRANSFERS OUT TOTAL
General Fund* $109,218,516 $ 4,230,166 $113,448,682
Other Funds $ 87,560,706 $ 13,950,817 $101,511,523
Total $196,779,222 $ 18,180,983 $214,960,205
*Includes Fund 105 - Facility Maintenance Fund
Maintain and Improve Services
The FY 2024-25 budget continues the City’s high standard of providing services to the Citizens of Monterey. Included in the budget are the following select items:
 $100,000 to continue with City’s Special Event Support Program (Community Grants).

These funds provide support to various community programs organized by local nonprofits and other community leaders.  $35,000 to continue support of First Night Monterey.
 $250,000 for the continuation of the City’s Rental Assistance Program – established in FY 2023-24.

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 5, Packet Page 267 №10/24
Five Year Projection
A summary of the General Fund 5-Year Forecast is as follows. It assumes continued moderate growth in the City’s revenues and conservative increases in operating costs.

The above forecast includes modest anticipated salary and operational savings which the City expects each upcoming Fiscal Year. Along with savings, there are other ways which the City can bring the City’s budget closer to operational balance:
 Operationalize anticipated savings. The City regularly has a number of vacant positions or other unspent funds at the end of the fiscal year. Closing these positions and identifying the areas where savings are regularly found, the operating budget could experience relief and release funds for other uses.
 Budgeting for Realistic Project Completion. Each year, the City has a number of projects which are budgeted and adopted; however, are not fully completed or in some cases, not started. A closer evaluation of what can be realistically completed in a given fiscal year, would provide a more realistic view of the City’s anticipated spending.  Review of the City’s Purchase Order Policy. Each year, the City rolls over a certain number of purchase orders. A review of the policy and scrutiny over which purchase orders are permitted to roll over would mitigate the potential for funds to be tied up in purchase orders unnecessarily.

Reserve Contributions
Consistent with the City’s Reserve Policies, the FY 2024-25 budget includes several additions to the City’s reserves. This includes a contribution to the City’s Economic Uncertainty Fund to maintain the reserve at 20% of the General Fund’s expected expenditures. In total, the FY 2024-25 budget includes the following contributions to the General Fund’s reserves:
 Economic Uncertainty Fund: $1,566,833
 Conference Center Facilities Reserve: $750,000
 Sports Center Facilities Reserve: $500,000
 Pension Reserve: $1,000,000
 Technology Reserve: $1,090,000
General Fund
FY 2023-24
Adopted FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 Revenue $99,670,016 $105,877,013 $106,386,792 $109,100,107 $112,229,033 $114,736,461 Expenditure $97,872,467 $109,218,516 $112,932,626 $116,782,207 $117,359,835 $117,949,014 Projected Carry Over From Previous Fiscal Year $5,446,359 $5,452,511 $5,821,846 $6,041,693 $6,048,256 Over/(Under $1,797,549 $2,104,857 ($1,093,323) ($1,860,254) $910,892 $2,835,703 Transfer In $678,715 $778,715 $778,715 $737,715 $678,715 $678,715 Transfer Out - Other ($140,000) ($153,118) ($140,000) ($140,000) ($140,000) ($140,000) Transfer Out - ISD ($1,090,000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Transfer Out - Debt Service ($542,316) ($542,416) ($546,936) ($540,682) ($544,041) ($546,626) Transfer Out - CIP ($2,000,000) ($3,500,000) ($500,000) ($500,000) ($500,000) ($500,000) Net Transfer (Use) ($3,093,601) ($3,416,819) ($408,221) ($442,967) ($505,326) ($507,911) Operating Surplus/(Deficit) ($1,296,052) ($1,311,962) ($1,501,544) ($2,303,221) $405,566 $2,327,792 *Includes Fund 105 - Facility Maintanence Fund
FIVE YEAR FORECAST: FY 2023-24 THROUGH FY 2028-29*
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 6, Packet Page 268 №10/24
 City Facilities: $250,000
 Safety Building Reserve: $250,000
 Library Building Reserve: $250,000
Furthermore, the FY 2024-25 budget includes important contributions to reserves in funds outside the General Fund in the Parking Fund and Tidelands Fund:
 Parking Facilities Reserve (Parking Fund): $250,000
 Sea Level Rise Reserve (Tidelands Fund): $250,000
Additionally, City staff recommend using $500,000 of the Sports Centers Facilities Reserve for Capital Improvement Projects. This is reflected in the above transfers in/out amount. A full table of the City’s reserves, including reserve balances, can be viewed in Attachment A of this report.

Staffing Changes
Consistent with the City’s value drivers, the City is continuously evaluating its staffing levels to ensure the City is operating as efficiently as possible and meeting the needs of Monterey’s constituents. These staffing changes balance what the City can afford this upcoming year and the City’s value driver of ‘providing sufficient resources and support to develop, retain, and recruit a high-quality City workforce’.

For the FY 2024-25 Budget, staff proposes the following positions be added to the Position Control List (PCL):
 Management Analyst (1), City Manager’s Office (General Fund)  Purchasing Analyst (1), Finance Department (General Fund)  Accountant/Auditor (1), Finance Department (General Fund)  Assistant Library Director (1), Library & Museums Department (General Fund)  Library Assistant II (1), Library & Museums Department (General Fund)  Librarian (1), Library & Museums Department (General Fund)  Assistant Planner (1), Community Development Department (General Fund)  Property Technician (1), Community Development (General Fund)  Senior Project Manager (1), Public Works (General Fund)  Facility Coordinator (1), Parks & Recreation (General Fund)  Risk Specialist (1), Finance Department (Liability and Property Insurance Fund)  Building Maintenance Craftsworker (2), Public Works (Presidio Fund)  Senior Project Manager (1), Public Works (Presidio Fund)  General Services Field Operations Manager (1), Public Works (Presidio Fund)  HVAC Senior Technician (2), Public Works (Presidio Fund)  Senior Craftsworker (1), Public Works (Presidio Fund)  Assistant Parking Superintendent (1), Public Works (Parking Fund) Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 7, Packet Page 269 №10/24
A summary of these staffing changes, including positions removed from the PCL and their impact on the budget is below:

With these changes, there is a net increase of 14 positions to the PCL, bringing the City’s total number of full-time and regular part-time employees to 472.75 positions. The increased amount in salaries and benefits are included in the proposed budget. Exhibit A includes the full position control list by department.

Exhibits: Exhibit A – Preliminary Budget Book
The provided agenda report and presentation deliver an overview and highlight of the FY 2024- 25 budget with some history and analysis to give a brief synopsis of the financial picture for the upcoming fiscal year.

The Preliminary Budget Book (Exhibit A), attached to this report, provides the details of the City’s projected revenues, expenditures, transfers in/out, debt schedule and the City’s Position Control List. This is a preliminary budget book as it contains the key information that the City Council is asked to adopt. After the budget is adopted, the Budget Book will be finalized. The final book will have any new changes or updates provided during the council meeting and will also include additional sections that include the City Manager’s Message, Department Narratives, Financial Policies, and detailed tables and graphs. City staff is excited to utilize the OpenGov online platform for this year’s online budget book. Along with tools that will save Department Title Quantity Salary Benefits Retirement Total CMO Management Analyst 1.00 $ 105,538 $ 29,248 $ 13,541 $ 148,327 Finace Purchasing Analyst 1.00 $ 100,512 $ 29,175 $ 12,896 $ 142,583 Finance Finance Analyst (1.00) $ (100,512) $ (29,175) $ (12,896) $ (142,583) Finance Accountant/ Auditor 1.00 $ 87,732 $ 28,990 $ 11,256 $ 127,978 Library Assist Library Director 1.00 $ 152,870 $ 29,934 $ 19,613 $ 202,417 Library Library Assistant II RPT 0.75 $ 47,159 $ 9,914 $ 4,636 $ 61,709 Library Librarian RPT (0.75) $ (52,907) $ (1,973) $ - $ - Library Librarian FT from RPT 1.00 $ (19,737) $ 28,905 $ 10,503 $ 19,671 Planning Assistant Planner 1.00 $ 80,000 $ 28,878 $ 10,264 $ 119,142 PW Engineering Senior Project Manager 1.00 $ 156,139 $ 29,982 $ 20,033 $ 206,154 PW Engineering Construction Proj Manager (1.00) $ (122,016) $ (29,487) $ (15,655) $ (167,158) Recreation Facility Coordinator 1.00 $ 85,584 $ 28,959 $ 10,980 $ 125,523 Finace Risk Specialist 1.00 $ 77,124 $ 28,836 $ 9,895 $ 115,855 Parking Asst Parking Superintendant 1.00 $ 118,748 $ 29,440 $ 15,235 $ 163,423 POM PW Gen Serv Building Maint Craftsworker 2.00 $ 73,992 $ 28,791 $ 9,493 $ 112,276 POM PW Gen Serv Senior Project Manager 1.00 $ 156,139 $ 29,982 $ 20,033 $ 206,154 POM PW Gen Serv Senior Engineer (1.00) $ (150,468) $ (29,900) $ (19,305) $ (199,673) POM PW Gen Serv
Gen Serv Field Operations
Manager 1.00 $ 133,848 $ 29,659 $ 17,173 $ 180,680
POM PW Gen Serv Administrative Analyst (1.00) $ (100,512) $ (29,175) $ (12,896) $ (142,583) POM PW Gen Serv HVAC Sr. Tech 2.00 $ 86,052 $ 28,966 $ 11,040 $ 126,058 PW Gen Serv Sr. Craftsworker 1.00 $ 83,472 $ 28,928 $ 10,710 $ 123,110 Property Mgmt Property Technician 1.00 $ 86,000 $ 28,965 $ 11,034 $ 125,999 TOTAL 14.00 $ 1,084,757 $ 357,842 $ 157,583 $ 1,767,338 FY 2024-25 Position Control List Changes Summary
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 8, Packet Page 270 №10/24
valuable time and energy of City staff, the new online budget book will increase transparency and accessibility to the City’s annual budget. The City will also continue to provide printed copies of the budget book for viewing in the City Clerk’s Office and downloadable on the City’s website at monterey.gov/budget . It is anticipated that the full, online budget book will be completed in mid-July.

KRO
Attachments: 1. Resolution – Budget and Position Control List

2. Exhibit A – Preliminary Budget Book
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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 9, Packet Page 271 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
ADOPTING THE FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2024-25 OPERATING BUDGET AND

POSITION CONTROL LIST
WHEREAS, the proposed operating budget of the City of Monterey for the fiscal year 2024-25 was prepared and submitted to the City Council by the City manager in accordance with Section 6.3 of the City Charter;
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the proposed operating budget and thereafter caused a public appearance to be held concerning the budget; WHEREAS, the proposed operating budget includes changes to the position control list; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines”), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein. The City Council hereby adopts and approves the proposed operating budget for FY 2024-25 with Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Exhibit A contains the information required by Section 6.3 of the Monterey City Charter as the budget and position control list of the City of Monterey in the following amounts:

Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 10, Packet Page 272

OPERATING BUDGET - REVENUES
FUND

OPERATING

REVENUE TRANSFERS IN TOTAL
General Fund* $105,908,972 $ 778,715 $106,687,687
Other Funds $115,761,678 $ 17,402,268 $133,163,946
Total $221,670,650 $ 18,180,983 $239,851,633

OPERATING BUDGET - EXPENDITURES
FUND

OPERATING

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT monies may be transferred from one account to another with the approval of the City Manager or designee except for the following transfers which may be made only with the approval of the City Council:

A. Transfers to or from Special Revenue Funds where state or federal regulations require Council approval;
B. Transfers to or from Enterprise Funds;
C. Transfers from unappropriated reserved or fund balances.

D. Transfers from Library Trust Fund pursuant to Charter section 7.1.

E. Transfer from the Museum Trust Fund pursuant to City Code section 21-4.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT sixteen percent (16%) of the total projected revenue from Transient Occupancy Taxes is hereby appropriated in the amount of $5,760,000 for use in the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program for FY 2024-25. This amount is the total appropriation from which all applicable City administration and program expenses will be deducted as appropriate. (Charter section 6.6.) BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Manager is hereby authorized to create fund accounts and projects as necessary to accurately record the appropriations in this budget, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency reimbursement funding as applicable; Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 11, Packet Page 273 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the proposed transfers included in the Interfund Transfers schedule that is part of the FY 2024-25 Proposed Operating Budget as proposed are hereby adopted and approved; and that the Finance Director is hereby authorized to make administrative budget adjustments to the schedule as deemed necessary.

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, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 12, Packet Page 274

OPERATING BUDGET
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 STARTING JULY 1
EXHIBIT A1
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 13, Packet Page 275

COMBINED

STATEMENTS
FY 2024-25 OPERATING BUDGET
EXHIBIT A2
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 14, Packet Page 276

CATEGORY GENERAL FUND SPECIAL DEBT SERVICE PERMANENT ENTERPRISE INTERNAL SERVICES AGENCY GRAND TOTAL PROPERTY TAXES $ 15,795,810 $ 28,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ 15,823,810 $ SALES TAX $ 15,748,711 $ 11,952,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ 27,700,711 $ CONF CTR FACILITIES DIST TAX $ - -$ $ 6,000,000 $ - $ - $ - -$ $ 6,000,000 TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES $ 30,250,000 $ 5,771,110 $ 12,064 $ - $ - $ - -$ 36,033,174 $ BUSINESS LICENSE $ 4,800,000 -$ $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ 4,800,000 UTILITY USERS TAXES $ 4,997,218 -$ $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ 4,997,218 FRANCHISE FEES $ 2,765,500 -$ $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ 2,765,500OTHER TAXES $ 528,214 $ 76,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ 604,214 LICENSES & PERMITS $ 2,015,320 -$ $ - $ - $ 840,000 $ - -$ $ 2,855,320 FINES & FORFEITURES $ 257,000 -$ $ - $ 1,707,500 - $ $ - -$ $ 1,964,500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL $ 2,171,650 $ 3,370,583 $ - $ - $ 32,700 $ - -$ $ 5,574,933 INTEREST $ 1,630,947 $ 1,360,573 $ - $ 265 $ 394,213 $ 1,585$ - $ 3,387,583 RENTS $ 2,828,329 $ 4,040,403 $ - $ - $ 853,000 $ - -$ $ 7,721,732 FEES & CHARGES $ 20,800,412 $ 15,547,491 $ - $ 14,653,409 - $ $ 31,823,667 -$ 82,824,979 $ OTHER REVENUES $ 1,319,862 $ 16,869,340 $ - $ - $ 241,200 $ 184,575 2,000$ $ 18,616,977 TOTAL SOURCES $ 105,908,972 $ 59,015,500 $ 6,012,064 $ 265 $ 18,722,022 $ 32,008,242 $ 3,585 $ 221,670,650 CATEGORY GENERAL FUND SPECIAL DEBT SERVICE PERMANENT ENTERPRISE INTERNAL SERVICES AGENCY GRAND TOTALSALARIES/BENEFITS $ 79,958,654 $ 12,050,971 $ - $ 8,159,664 - $ $ 4,862,087 -$ 105,031,376 $ SERVICES/SUPPLIES $ 15,769,817 $ 19,754,557 $ 4,444,813 $ 5,842,960 - $ $ 4,831,635 300$ $ 50,644,081 SERVICES/SUPPLIES INCL INTERNAL SVC CHGS $ 272,810 $ 418,640 $ - $ - $ 429,500 $ 18,358,781 8,000$ $ 19,487,731 EQUIPMENT OUTLAY $ 616,400 $ 7,500 $ - $ - $ 237,500 $ 1,289,000 -$ $ 2,150,400 INTERNAL SERVICE CHARGES $ 11,100,835 $ 2,957,308 $ 80,119 $ 2,332,159 - $ $ 895,262 -$ 17,365,684 $ SERVICES/SUPPLIES HPM DIVISION $ 602,950 - $ $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ 602,950 ANTICIPATED ADJUSTMENTS $ 1,500,000 -$ $ - $ - $ - $ - -$ $ 1,500,000 TOTAL USES $ 109,218,516 $ 35,791,926 $ 4,524,932 $ - $ 17,001,782 $ 30,236,766 $ 8,300 $ 196,782,222 NET SOURCE/USE OF FUNDS $ (3,309,543) $ 23,223,574 $ 1,487,132 $ 1,720,240 265 $ $ 1,771,476 (4,715)$ $ 24,888,429

TYPES OF FUNDS

TYPES OF FUNDS
FY 2024-25 COMBINED STATEMENT (DOES NOT INLCUDE TRANSFERS IN/OUT AND CIP)

EXHIBIT A
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 15, Packet Page 277 3 FY 2024-25 OPERATING BUDGET

REVENUES
EXHIBIT A4
Council Regular Meeting, 6/4/2024, Item No. 15., Item Page 16, Packet Page 278

FUND TITLE
FY 2020-21
ACTUAL
FY 2021-22
ACTUAL
FY 2022-23
ACTUAL
FY 2023-24

AMENDED
BUDGET
FY 2023-24
ACTUAL (as of
May 21, 2024)
FY 2024-25

PROPOSED
Fund 101 -- GENERAL FUND
3110 PROPERTY TAXES $ 13,267,772 $ 13,680,790 $ 14,728,138 $ 15,055,291 $ 15,180,360 $ 15,795,810 3120 SALES TAX $ 10,594,210 $ 14,937,322 $ 15,479,785 $ 15,528,406 $ 10,077,966 $ 15,748,711 3140 TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES $ 12,909,693 $ 28,375,420 $ 30,282,539 $ 30,306,295 $ 24,253,368 $ 30,250,000 3150 BUSINESS LICENSE $ 3,450,914 $ 3,215,649 $ 3,862,220 $ 3,870,000 $ 4,547,462 $ 4,800,000 3160 UTILITY USERS TAXES $ 3,654,753 $ 4,184,273 $ 4,700,838 $ 4,468,520 $ 3,750,001 $ 4,997,218 3170 FRANCHISE FEES $ 1,988,129 $ 2,892,821 $ 2,746,824 $ 2,755,000 $ 2,380,787 $ 2,765,500 3190 OTHER TAXES $ 572,210 $ 717,958 $ 517,910 $ 503,548 $ 352,637 $ 528,214 3300 LICENSES & PERMITS $ 1,771,564 $ 1,792,347 $ 2,052,133 $ 1,817,000 $ 1,910,186 $ 2,015,320 3400 FINES & FORFEITURES $ 221,793 $ 245,867 $ 271,255 $ 243,500 $ 230,196 $ 257,000 3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL $ 2,560,877 $ 8,638,757 $ 2,011,887 $ 1,810,933 $ 1,089,940 $ 2,171,650 3600 INTEREST $ 785,739 $ (166,181) $ 1,062,098 $ 913,218 $ 1,562,945 $ 1,630,947 3620 RENTS $ 2,264,960 $ 2,930,602 $ 2,407,041 $ 2,542,466 $ 2,436,380 $ 2,828,329 3700 FEES & CHARGES $ 12,690,908 $ 15,365,090 $ 18,011,747 $ 19,066,637 $ 17,750,435 $ 20,800,412 of which, Fund 105 - Facility Maintenance Fund $ - $ 105,277 $ 221,961 $ 255,461 $ 262,061 $ 300,959 3800 OTHER REVENUES $ 344,697 $ 665,483 $ 356,110 $ 1,664,483 $ 1,475,109 $ 1,319,862 Total 101 -- GENERAL FUND $ 67,078,218 $ 97,476,198 $ 98,490,524 $ 100,545,297 $ 86,997,772 $ 105,908,972 Fund 205 -- SEWER MAINS FUND
3600 INTEREST $ 5,862 $ (10,995) $ 10,763 $ 10,713 $ 17,772 $ 17,396 3700 FEES & CHARGES $ - $ - $ - $ 5,000 $ - $ 5,000
Total 205 -- SEWER MAINS FUND $ 5,862 $ (10,995) $ 10,763 $ 15,713 $ 17,772 $ 22,396 Fund 210 -- WHARF I SPRINKLER SYSTEM FUND
3700 FEES & CHARGES $ 40,319 $ 34,723 $ 33,845 $ 40,000 $ 33,859 $ 30,000 Total 210 -- WHARF I SPRINKLER SYSTEM FUND $ 40,319 $ 34,723 $ 33,845 $ 40,000 $ 33,859 $ 30,000 Fund 215 -- SKYLINE FOREST SERVICE DIST
3110 PROPERTY TAXES $ 28,213 $ 29,344 $ 31,655 $ 28,000 $ 32,460 $ 28,000 3600 INTEREST $ 1,695 $ (3,038) $ 2,833 $ 3,120 $ 5,357 $ 5,303 Total 215 -- SKYLINE FOREST SERVICE DIST $ 29,907 $ 26,306 $ 34,489 $ 31,120 $ 37,818 $ 33,303 Fund 216 -- NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT FUND
3140 TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES $ 2,459,538 $ 5,404,814 $ 5,767,989 $ 5,771,110 $ 4,620,062 $ 5,771,110 3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL $ 1,960 $ 268,351 $ 20,311 $ - $ - $ - 3600 INTEREST $ 65,577 $ 44,296 $ 191,248 $ 91,820 $ 303,051 $ 269,080 Total 216 -- NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT FUND $ 2,527,075 $ 5,717,461 $ 5,979,547 $ 5,862,930 $ 4,923,113 $ 6,040,190 Fund 241 -- FEDERAL/STATE PROJECTS FUND
3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL $ 73,122 $ 43,743 $ - $ - $ 8,027 $ - Total 241 -- FEDERAL/STATE PROJECTS FUND $ 73,122 $ 43,743 $ - $ - $ 8,027 $ - Fund 249 -- STATE COPS - AB1913 (DVO)
3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL $ 156,727 $ 161,285 $ 165,271 $ 165,000 $ 161,159 $ 200,000 3600 INTEREST $ 1,234 $ (1,554) $ 4,449 $ - $ 1,835 $ 7 Total 249 -- STATE COPS - AB1913 (DVO) $ 157,960 $ 159,730 $ 169,720 $ 165,000 $ 162,994 $ 200,007 Fund 251 -- GAS TAX FUND
3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL $ 596,139 $ 649,027 $ 695,773 $ 784,111 $ 617,814 $ 784,111 3600 INTEREST $ 12,755 $ (13,048) $ 13,870 $ 20,797 $ 42,380 $ 39,748 3800 OTHER REVENUES $ - $ 29,787 $ - $ - $ - $ -
Total 251 -- GAS TAX FUND $ 608,894 $ 665,766 $ 709,643 $ 804,908 $ 660,194 $ 823,859 Fund 252 -- STREET INFRASTRUCTURE REHAB FUND (MEASUR
3120 SALES TAX $ 8,643,025 $ 11,453,238 $ 11,804,659 $ 11,852,000 $ 7,798,286 $ 11,952,000 3600 INTEREST $ 25,656 $ (160,252) $ 155,614 $ 109,524 $ 392,936 $ 358,231 3800 OTHER REVENUES $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 325,403 $ -
Total 252 -- STREET INFRASTRUCTURE REHAB FUND (ME $ 8,668,682 $ 11,292,986 $ 11,960,274 $ 11,961,524 $ 8,516,624 $ 12,310,231 Fund 253 -- CCFD BONDS - PROJECT FUND
3600 INTEREST $ 290 $ (5) $ 1 $ 155 $ 9 $ 155
Total 253 -- CCFD BONDS - PROJECT FUND $ 290 $ (5) $ 1 $ 155 $ 9 $ 155 Fund 254 -- CCFD-CITY REVENUE FUND
3600 INTEREST $ 9,225 $ (21,127) $ 20,639 $ 18,739 $ 31,077 $ 30,420 Total 254 -- CCFD-CITY REVENUE FUND $ 9,225 $ (21,127) $ 20,639 $ 18,739 $ 31,077 $ 30,420 Fund 257 -- TRANSPORTATION SAFETY & INVESTMENT PLAN
3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL $ 1,035,331 $ 1,280,008 $ 1,330,512 $ 1,313,934 $ 1,035,473 $ 1,313,934 3600 INTEREST $ 41,007 $ 37,813 $ 95,817 $ 54,487 $ 109,760 $ 112,268 Total 257 -- TRANSPORTATION SAFETY & INVESTMENT PL $ 1,076,338 $ 1,317,820 $ 1,426,329 $ 1,368,421 $ 1,145,233 $ 1,426,202 Fund 258 -- SB1 ROAD MAINTENANCE & REHABILITATION
3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL $ 517,737 $ 568,773 $ 628,436 $ 703,538 $ 530,264 $ 703,538 3600 INTEREST $ 23,435 $ 16,271 $ 43,242 $ 24,585 $ 60,169 $ 54,159 Total 258 -- SB1 ROAD MAINTENANCE & REHABILITATION $ 541,172 $ 585,043 $ 671,678 $ 728,123 $ 590,433 $ 757,697 Fund 261 -- ALVARADO STREET MAINT DISTRICT
3190 OTHER TAXES $ 48,976 $ 49,021 $ 52,092 $ 48,500 $ 51,267 $ 48,500 3600 INTEREST $ 450 $ 35 $ 236 $ 106 $ 17 $ -
Total 261 -- ALVARADO STREET MAINT DISTRICT $ 49,427 $ 49,056 $ 52,328 $ 48,606 $ 51,284 $ 48,500 Fund 262 -- CALLE PRINCIPAL MAINT DISTRICT
3190 OTHER TAXES $ 28,901 $ 25,503 $ 25,180 $ 27,500 $ 3,703 $ 27,500 3600 INTEREST $ 251 $ (373) $ 355 $ 414 $ 382 $ 559
Total 262 -- CALLE PRINCIPAL MAINT DISTRICT $ 29,152 $ 25,130 $ 25,535 $ 27,914 $ 4,085 $ 28,059 Fund 263 -- S CANNERY ROW PARKING DISTRICT
3600 INTEREST $ (10) $ (26) $ (6) $ - $ - $ -
FY 2024-25 SUMMARY OF REVENUES BY FUND AND TYPE (excludes CIP and transfers-in)

Monterey City CouncilJune 4, 2024

Monterey City Council
June 4, 2024