0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
Q40 ¿Sobre qué base cree que fue discriminado? (seleccione todo lo que corresponda)
Answered: 0 Skipped: 3
Total Respondents: 0
! No matching responses.
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Raza
Color
Religión
Origen Nacional
Edad
Genero
Ascendencia
Estado Civil
Orientación Sexual
Estado familiar (por ejemplo, padre soltero con hijos, familia con hijos o esperando un hijo) Fuente de ingresos (por ejemplo, asistencia social, seguro de desempleo) Discapacidad/Condiciones médicas (ya sea usted o alguien cercano a usted) Otro(a) (por favor describa):
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 483, Packet Page 486 LA CIUDAD DE MONTEREY FINANCIACIÓN DE SUBVENCIONES EN BLOQUE DE DESARROLLO COMUNITARIO (CDBG) Encuesta de Residentes
65 / 73
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
Q41 Si contesto que Si, ¿cómo fue discriminado? (seleccione todo lo que corresponda)
Answered: 0 Skipped: 3
Total Respondents: 0
! No matching responses.
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
No se le muestro un apartamento o unidad en venta
Depósito de seguridad más alto que el estándar de la industria Alquiler más alto que el anunciado
Proporcionó diferentes servicios o instalaciones de vivienda Otro(a) (por favor describa):
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 484, Packet Page 487 LA CIUDAD DE MONTEREY FINANCIACIÓN DE SUBVENCIONES EN BLOQUE DE DESARROLLO COMUNITARIO (CDBG) Encuesta de Residentes
66 / 73
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
Q42 Si contesto que Si, ¿ha reportado del incidente?
Answered: 0 Skipped: 3
TOTAL 0
! No matching responses.
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Si
No
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 485, Packet Page 488 LA CIUDAD DE MONTEREY FINANCIACIÓN DE SUBVENCIONES EN BLOQUE DE DESARROLLO COMUNITARIO (CDBG) Encuesta de Residentes
67 / 73
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
Q43 Contesto No ¿Por qué?
Answered: 0 Skipped: 3
TOTAL 0
! No matching responses.
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
No sé dónde denunciar
No creo que haga alguna diferencia
Miedo a las represalias
El proceso es muy complicado
Otro(a) (por favor describa):
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 486, Packet Page 489 LA CIUDAD DE MONTEREY FINANCIACIÓN DE SUBVENCIONES EN BLOQUE DE DESARROLLO COMUNITARIO (CDBG) Encuesta de Residentes
68 / 73
Q44 Contesto Si, ¿cómo reporto el incidente?
Answered: 0 Skipped: 3
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 487, Packet Page 490 LA CIUDAD DE MONTEREY FINANCIACIÓN DE SUBVENCIONES EN BLOQUE DE DESARROLLO COMUNITARIO (CDBG) Encuesta de Residentes
69 / 73
33.33% 1
66.67% 2
Q45 ¿Ha asistido a una capacitación sobre vivienda justa? Answered: 3 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 3
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Si
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Si
No
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 488, Packet Page 491 LA CIUDAD DE MONTEREY FINANCIACIÓN DE SUBVENCIONES EN BLOQUE DE DESARROLLO COMUNITARIO (CDBG) Encuesta de Residentes
70 / 73
100.00% 1
0.00% 0
Q46 Contesto Si, ¿Fue gratis o hubo un costo?
Answered: 1 Skipped: 2
TOTAL 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Gratis
Hubo un costo
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Gratis
Hubo un costo
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 489, Packet Page 492 LA CIUDAD DE MONTEREY FINANCIACIÓN DE SUBVENCIONES EN BLOQUE DE DESARROLLO COMUNITARIO (CDBG) Encuesta de Residentes
71 / 73
0.00% 0
100.00% 1
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
Q47 Contesto Si, ¿dónde fue la capacitación?
Answered: 1 Skipped: 2
TOTAL 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
En Casa
En el Trabajo
Ciudad de
Monterey
Otro(a) (por
favor
describa):
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
En Casa
En el Trabajo
Ciudad de Monterey
Otro(a) (por favor describa):
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 490, Packet Page 493 LA CIUDAD DE MONTEREY FINANCIACIÓN DE SUBVENCIONES EN BLOQUE DE DESARROLLO COMUNITARIO (CDBG) Encuesta de Residentes
72 / 73
33.33% 1
66.67% 2
Q48 ¿Ha visto o escuchado un Anuncio de Servicio Público (PSA) de Vivienda Justa?
Answered: 3 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 3
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Si
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Si
No
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 491, Packet Page 494 LA CIUDAD DE MONTEREY FINANCIACIÓN DE SUBVENCIONES EN BLOQUE DE DESARROLLO COMUNITARIO (CDBG) Encuesta de Residentes
73 / 73
100.00% 1
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
0.00% 0
Q49 Contesto Si, seleccione todo lo que corresponda:
Answered: 1 Skipped: 2
Total Respondents: 1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
TV
Radio
En línea
Volante
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
TV
Radio
En línea
Volante
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 492, Packet Page 495 From: CPD DAS for Field Operations
To: Anastacia Wyatt
Cc: Clarke, Adriane J; Blanco, Rebecca A; SFCPDMail
Subject: NOTIFICATION: Monterey, CA FY25 Consolidated Plan/Action Plan Date: Friday, July 18, 2025 8:24:44 AM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Dear Grantee,
This message serves as notification that the Department is questioning the accuracy of the City of Monterey’s certification that the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds described in its Fiscal Year 2025 Consolidated Plan/Action Plan (the Plan) will be administered in conformity with applicable laws, including Executive Orders. HUD is providing this opportunity for your jurisdiction to comment (i.e., provide specific evidence demonstrating compliance with the certification) by responding to this notification. The grantee’s demonstration of the accuracy of its certification should include taking the actions described below by 5:00 pm EDT, Thursday, July 24, 2025. Failure to address HUD’s concerns regarding the certification may result in HUD determining that the certification is inaccurate or unsatisfactory, which will result in disapproval of the Plan.
During HUD’s review of the Fiscal Year 2025 Consolidated Plan/Action Plan submitted by your jurisdiction, the Department identified language in the Plan that appears to be inconsistent with Executive Order 14151 Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing, and Executive Order 14173 Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring MeritBased Opportunity, and Executive Order 14168 Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government. Specifically, the jurisdiction’s Plan states the following:
were unsheltered and sleeping in streets, abandoned buildings, vehicles, encampment areas, or other similar locations. The sheltered population was living in emergency shelters or transitional housing, which does not include people living in permanent supportive housing or participating in rapid rehousing programs. Countywide 66 percent of people experiencing homelessness were male, 32 percent were female, and 1 percent were transgender.” (page 56, emphasis added)
across the region Adopt a five-year plan Invest strategically Build political will for affordable housing Include people with lived experience of homelessness Engage new partners Center equity” (page 82, emphasis added)
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 493, Packet Page 496 This language includes provisions that appear to be inconsistent with the implementation of federal programs pursuant to the referenced executive orders. To address this issue, your jurisdiction should provide assurance to the Department by taking the following actions:
1. Removing or replacing all “equity,” “inclusion” and DEI references throughout the document and replace with “activities and actions that do not violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964” ;
2. Removing all “transgender” references throughout the document; and
3. Provide the following assurance statements within the Plan:
“The City of Monterey agrees that its compliance in all respects with all applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws is material to the U.S. Government’s payment decisions for purposes of section 3729(b)(4) of title 31, United States Code.” “The City of Monterey will not operate any programs that violate any applicable Federal antidiscrimination laws, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” “The City of Monterey shall not use grant funds to promote “gender ideology,” as defined in Executive Order (E.O.) 14168, Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.”
The grantee should re-submit the Plan to HUD by the deadline noted above. Please work to revise and resubmit your Plan in HUD’s Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS) and reply to this message indicating that you have re-submitted the plan in IDIS. You are welcome to provide in your email response the section or page that contains the assurance statements. If HUD disapproves the Plan, the grantee must resubmit its Plan within 45 days after first notification of Plan disapproval (see 24 CFR 91.500(d)).
If you should have any questions, please reach out to the Office of Community Planning and Development Office of Field Operations at [email protected]. [NOTICE: This message originated outside of the City of Monterey mail system -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] ATTACHMENT 2
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 494, Packet Page 497 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
Prepared By: Clementine Bonner Klein, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Receive Updates and Provide Guidance on Matters Relating to Boards, Commissions, and Committees: (1) Governance Policy Changes that Will Provide for a Mayor/Vice Mayor Subcommittee to Interview and Nominate Applicants, (2) Process for Dissolving the Architectural Review Committee, (3) Potential Combination of the Historic Preservation Commission with the Museums and Cultural Arts Commission, and (4) Potential Term Limits for Members of Boards, Commissions, and Committees (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council receive updates and provide guidance about the work in progress toward implementing Council’s June 17, 2025 direction regarding boards, commissions,
and committees, and provide guidance on potential term
limits members.
VALUE DRIVERS:
Foster a local government that is transparent and
collaborative; and solicits, welcomes and appreciates input from all.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
It is appropriate for the Council to receive updates from staff on prior Council direction, and to consider and provide policy guidance on whether to implement term limits for members of boards, commissions, and committees.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The proposed actions to receive updates and provide
guidance would have no fiscal impact.
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 Agenda Report Highlights
Council provided direction to form a
Mayor/Vice Mayor Subcommittee
for interviewing and nominating
board and commission applicants.
Ordinance to dissolve the
Architectural Review Committee
and transfer its duties to the
Planning Commission is in
progress.
Further details on combining the
Historic Preservation Commission
with the Museums and Cultural Arts
Commission will be provided later.
Council to provide direction on
establishing term limits for board,
commission, and committee
members.
Governance Policy update to be
formally adopted at the August 5,
2025, City Council meeting.
Date: 7/23/2025
Item No.: 2.
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 2., Item Page 1, Packet Page 498 №11/25
Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
The Council could opt not to receive updates from staff. The Council could also decline to provide guidance on term limits.
DISCUSSION:
On June 17, 2025, the Council reviewed and discussed several matters relating to boards, commissions, and committees, and directed staff to:
Bring an amendment to the Council’s Governance Resolution, forming a Standing Subcommittee, consisting of the Mayor and Vice Mayor, charged with conducting board and commission interviews and making appointment nominations (this action will also necessitate updating the Council’s annual appointments chart); Bring forward legislation combining the Architectural Review Committee and the Planning Commission; and
Provide the Council with greater detail about the potential to combine the Historic Preservation Commission with the Museums and Cultural Arts Commission.
This item provides updates on these three matters. And, in addition, due to the related nature of the subject, staff also determined that it would be appropriate at this time to ask the Council for direction on potential term limits for members of boards, commissions, and committees, which was an opportunity identified by the Council at a recent public meeting. (1) Update the Governance Policy
At the meeting of June 17, 2025, the Council voted unanimously in favor of forming a standing subcommittee, consisting of the Mayor and Vice Mayor, to conduct board, commission, and committee interviews and make appointment nominations to the Council in public, duly noticed meetings that may be attended and commented upon by all. (Note: The full Council will then make appointments at a Council meeting by majority vote, pursuant to the City Charter.) Because the policy for board, commission, and committee appointments is part of the larger Council Policy on Governance, a resolution updating the Governance policy must be adopted in order to enact and form the Subcommittee on Commission Appointments. With the Council’s approval, staff will bring the updated policy forward for adoption at the next regular meeting.
Staff has prepared the draft policy, and for preview and discussion purposes only it is attached to this report (Attachment 1). In the draft policy, the subcommittee and public meeting provisions are added, and as directed by Council in June, it is expressly provided that applicants may attend their public interviews remotely. The process now also covers nominating Monterey residents for appointment to outside agency committees, adding transparency to how the City Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 2., Item Page 2, Packet Page 499 №11/25
recommends residents for roles on bodies like Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC)’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Advisory Committee. Provisions of the current policy such as outreach methods, reappointment requirements, and what factors should be considered by the subcommittee in evaluating applicants and by the Council in making appointments, are kept in place.
Because the Council had expressed an interest in the possibility, but did not direct, that the Subcommittee would use standardized protocols for consistency and fairness, once the Subcommittee is created by the adoption of the policy update, the City Clerk plans to agendize the first public Subcommittee meeting for the Subcommittee members to provide guidance and develop any desired Subcommittee guidelines and standards. These could include standardized interview questions, length of time for each interview, how long to wait for a no-show before moving on, and so on. In addition, once the Subcommittee is created, in order to facilitate the administration of the Council policy and the Subcommittee guidelines and standards, the City Clerk will develop procedures for staff to follow in supporting the Subcommittee on Commission Appointments. These procedures will include, based on the Council’s guidance in June, providing applicants with scheduling flexibility by offering at least two dates for interviews.
Pending additional feedback from the City Council, the update to the Governance Policy will be brought to the City Council for formal adoption at its meeting on August 5, 2025, along with the corresponding update to the Chart of 2025 Representatives to Outside Agencies and City Boards and Committees.
(2) Update on the Process for Dissolving the Architectural Review Committee (ARC) Staff is working to bring forward an ordinance that will dissolve the ARC and transfer its powers and duties to the Planning Commission. Because this ordinance will alter the Zoning Ordinance, it must first be presented to the Planning Commission. The tentative schedule based on currently available information is:
August 12 – Planning Commission holds a hearing to review the ordinance. If approved:
September 2 – Council conducts its first reading of the ordinance. If passed:
September 16 – Council conducts its second reading of the ordinance. If adopted:
October 16 – Ordinance goes into effect, dissolving the ARC.
At the present time, there are three seats on the Planning Commission that need to be filled.
One is an unscheduled vacancy resulting from Commissioner Fletcher’s resignation in March 2025. The other two are regular term expirations ending June 30, 2025, for which the current members will continue to serve until they are reappointed, replaced, removed, or they resign, whichever comes first. Any resident of Monterey may apply and be considered for these three seats.
(3) Update on Potential Combination of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) with the Museums and Cultural Arts Commission (MCAC)
At the meeting of June 17, 2025, the Council determined that based on information available at the time, it would be premature to make a decision on combining the HPC and MCAC, but directed staff to bring further information at a later time. This is a brief update to note that based on the guidance received at that meeting and as noted elsewhere in this report, City staff has been prioritizing the other matters of higher importance to the Council, and will bring further details to the Council on this matter at a future date.
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 2., Item Page 3, Packet Page 500 №11/25
(4) Direction on Potential Term Limits for Board, Commission, and Committee Members At the public Council workshop on January 29, 2025, one opportunity identified by the Council was the potential to establish term limits for members of boards, commissions, and committees.
Staff wishes to learn from the Council whether there is a majority interest in pursuing term limits, and asks that the Council provide direction if so.
Recommendation
In summary, staff recommends the following:
1. Review and provide feedback on the draft Governance Policy update
2. Receive an update from staff relating to dissolving the ARC
3. Receive an update from staff relating to potentially combining the HPC with the MCAC
4. Provide guidance on potential term limits for appointed members NR/cbk
Attachments: 1. Draft Policy
e: All members of Boards, Commissions, and Committees
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.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 2., Item Page 4, Packet Page 501 ATTACHMENT 1
UPDATE TO SECTION B - DRAFT FOR PREVIEW
B. Appointing Members to Boards, Commissions, and Committees
1. California Law. The appointments process will be conducted in compliance with the Maddy Act (Gov. Code § 54970 et seq.) and the Ralph M. Brown Act (Gov. Code § 54950 et seq.).
2. Outreach. In addition to legal noticing requirements, the City’s list of interested parties will be notified to solicit applications for every vacancy, whether it is an expiring regular term or an unscheduled vacancy. Staff may advertise more broadly as needed to reach more residents. The Council, and members and staff of the bodies with vacancies, are encouraged to spread the word and help solicit applications.
3. Applications. All interested residents will be provided a standard application.
4. Reappointments. Each City board, commission, or committee member with an expiring term must submit a new application to be considered for reappointment. City staff will compile a factual report on each re-applicant, to include their attendance records, compliance with mandated filings and trainings, Council district, and special eligibility requirements if applicable.
5. Transparency. All applications and factual reports are public records and will be provided publicly and timely for all to view.
6. Subcommittee Interviews and Nominations. A standing “Subcommittee on Commission Appointments,” consisting of the Mayor and Vice Mayor, will meet in public, noticed meetings that all may attend and comment upon, to conduct interviews and nominate applicants for appointment. In evaluating applicants, the Subcommittee will consider their interests and skills, Councilmember district representation, and the specific needs of the body at the time of appointment. Applicants may attend their interviews remotely if desired. Any member of the Council may attend a meeting of the Subcommittee as long as they merely observe and do not participate. The Subcommittee’s nominations will be presented on a future City Council agenda for consideration.
7. Appointments. Appointments will be made by majority vote of the City Council in accordance with the City Charter. The Council is encouraged to consider Councilmember district representation in making appointments.
8. Monterey Residents Appointed to Outside Agencies. The process outlined above will be used, using the outside agency’s application if applicable, when an external meeting body requires the City to nominate or recommend a Monterey resident as part of their appointment requirements. The Subcommittee will hold interviews and make the nominations.
City Council Policy:
Governance
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 2., Item Page 5, Packet Page 502 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Tyller Williamson, Mayor
Prepared By: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Letter and Submit Public Comment to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to Reconsider the Long-Term Water Demand Forecasts in the Proposed Decision for Application 21-11-024 (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 and submit public comment to the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to reconsider the long-term water demand forecasts in the proposed decision for application 21-11-024.
VALUE DRIVERS:
Champion regional and local efforts to secure adequate, affordable, and sustainable water sources for the city, now and into the future.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
It is within the City Council’s purview to weigh in on policy matters affecting the City of Monterey and to submit comments to State agencies such as the CPUC.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There is no cost associated with authorizing the Mayor to sign this letter and submit public comment to the CPUC.
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, Date: 7/23/2025
Item No.: 3.
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 3., Item Page 1, Packet Page 503 №10/24
this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
N/A
DISCUSSION:
The draft letter (attached) from Mayor Williamson to the California Public Utilities Commission requests a reconsideration of long-term water demand projections for Application 21-11-024.
The Mayor will discuss the proposed letter with the City Council at its special meeting on July 23, 2025.
Attachment: Draft Letter
TW/nr
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.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 3., Item Page 2, Packet Page 504 DRAFT
July 23, 2025
California Public Utilities Commission
Alice Busching Reynolds, President
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102
Re: Application 21-11-024 – Request for Reconsideration of Long-Term Demand Forecasts Dear President Reynolds and Commissioners:
On behalf of the Monterey City Council, I respectfully request that the California Public Utilities Commission reconsider the long-term water demand projections included in the proposed decision for Application 21-11-024. These projections—used to justify future water supply investments—must reflect the actual, evolving needs of our community, particularly as we work toward long-term housing, affordability, and environmental sustainability goals.
The City of Monterey is currently reevaluating how it uses its allocated water from the Pure Water Monterey (PWM) expansion project, which is expected to complete construction later this year. As part of this process, our staff has identified a number of legal lots of record where allocations were previously granted but are no longer valid—often because the original recipients have passed away or development is no longer feasible. These changes are not yet reflected in the broader demand projections. Additionally, new housing development not only consumes water, but also produces wastewater that can be treated and returned to the system through advanced water recycling like that used in the PWM program. However, the additional supply potential from this future wastewater has not been factored into the current demand modeling.
We want to acknowledge the performance of the PWM base project, which has consistently met its contractual delivery obligations every year since it came online and has even provided surplus water to regional reserves. With the completion of the current expansion, the Monterey Peninsula will have a reliable and climate-resilient water supply approaching 12,000 acre-feet per year. This capacity, paired with updated usage patterns that show current demand remaining under 9,000 AFY, supports a more moderate and flexible water planning outlook.
We are also deeply concerned about the affordability impacts of planning around inflated demand projections, particularly when they could lead to investments that significantly raise
ATTACHMENT
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 3., Item Page 3, Packet Page 505
water rates. Monterey residents already face some of the highest water costs in the country. Those costs are borne most heavily by our seniors on fixed incomes, young families, and workers in our hospitality and service industries. These are the very people who keep our community running. Any decision that contributes to rising water rates must be grounded in accurate, transparent analysis.
This issue is particularly urgent as the City of Monterey works to meet our State-mandated 2023–2031 Housing Element goals, which include a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) target of 3,654 new housing units. We take this mandate seriously. However, building these homes—especially affordable ones—requires not only sufficient water supply but smart and flexible water planning. If inflated projections are used as the basis for future supply decisions, it could lock the region into costly infrastructure prematurely, before fully exhausting the opportunities presented by local, sustainable, and more cost-effective alternatives.
Finally, as stewards of one of the most beautiful coastal regions in California, we have a duty to ensure that any future water supply solution protects the environment. Expanding our water portfolio must be done carefully, with full appreciation for the impact on our aquifers, ecosystems, and coastline. We are fortunate to have a successful, locally supported project in PWM, which aligns with our environmental values and long-term goals.
For these reasons, the City of Monterey respectfully urges the Commission to revise the demand forecast in this proceeding to reflect current conditions, realistic assumptions, and the supply potential already in place. A thoughtful and accurate approach will ensure water affordability, support much-needed housing, and safeguard our environment for generations to come.
Thank you for your careful consideration.
Sincerely,
Tyller Williamson
Mayor
ATTACHMENT
Council Special Meeting, 7/23/2025, Item No. 3., Item Page 4, Packet Page 506