Agenda packet — Monterey City Council, December 16, 2025

Council Chamber
580 Pacific St.

Monterey, California

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Council Regular Meeting and
Closed Session
Amended Agenda
Tuesday, December 16,
2025
4:00 PM
Mayor
Tyller Williamson
Councilmembers
Kim Barber, District 1
Ed Smith, District 2
Jean Rasch, District 3
Gino Garcia, District 4
City Manager
Hans Uslar
City Attorney
M. Christine Davi
HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING:
• In-Person: At the meeting location listed above.
• Remotely via ZoomGov webinar:
o On a computer or smartphone: https://monterey-org.zoomgov.com/j/1607729333 Zoom software must be up-to-date. For help, please use our Zoom Meeting Instructions. o By telephone dial 833-568-8864 (Toll Free), 669-254-5252 (CA) or 646-828-7666 (NY). If one number doesn’t work, please try another. Enter Webinar ID: 160 772 9333 # If asked for participant ID, press #. To raise your hand (or lower it), dial *9. Once called upon, dial *6 to unmute.
• 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). • Written comment: Emailed comments to [email protected] sent no later than ½ hour before the start of the meeting (sooner preferred) are not read aloud but are made available to the Council and public at monterey.gov/submitted-comments.

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. 30 minutes per item – Public Appearance and Public Hearing items b. 15 minutes per item – All other items (including, but not limited to, Consent, Closed Session, Presentations, and Requests to Agendize)
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 §84308), any party to a permit, license, contract, or other entitlement before the Council is required to disclose on the record any contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $500 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.

December 16, 2025 4:00 PM
2 AFTERNOON SESSION: 4:00 p.m.

Call to Order
Presentations (Afternoon)

1. Congratulate Fire Chief Andrew Miller on His Retirement and Recognize His 35 Years of Service to the Fire Profession in Monterey County and Tenure as the 11th and 13th Fire Chief to Lead the Monterey Fire Department (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Pledge of Allegiance
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.

Consent: Approval of Minutes

2. December 2, 2025 Regular Meeting (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

3. December 6, 2025 Special Meeting (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Consent: Award of Construction Contracts

4. Amend Resolution 25-060 to Include the Wave Street Curb Ramp Improvement Project In the Capital Improvement Program, Appropriate Funds, and Award a Construction Contract in the Amount of $1,049,874.25 to McKim Corporation for the Wave Street Curb Ramp Improvement Project (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1)
Consent: 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.

5. 2nd Reading of Ordinance Amending the Monterey City Code to Dissolve the Architectural Review Committee and Transfer its Powers and Duties to the Planning Commission (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Consent: 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.

6. Appropriate Additional Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) Funding and Award a Contract to Replace and Install New Lights at Sollecito Field to Musco Sports Lighting, LLC in the amount Not-to-exceed $464,200. (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities) ***NCIP*** December 16, 2025 4:00 PM
3 7. Authorize an Agreement with Amilia Technologies USA, Inc. for the Purchase of Cloud Hosted Recreation Software and Professional Services and Authorize the City Manager To Execute Agreements for Recreation Software and Merchant Services (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

8. Authorize a Budget Appropriation in the Amount of $461,153.47 from the Monterey Conference Center Reserve Fund to the Monterey Conference Center Building Maintenance Contractual Services Account to Complete Urgent Escalator Repairs (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Consent: Other

9. Appoint Councilmember Smith as Vice Mayor for 2026 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

10. Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 256 Figueroa Street; Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Mike Zimmerman (Surfside Enterprises, Inc.); Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Lease Amendment (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

11. Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 9 Wharf II (Sandbar & Grill); Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Craig Ling (Janeboy, Inc.); Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Lease Extension and New Lease Agreement (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

12. Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 560-570 Munras Avenue (Trader Joe's Shopping Center); Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: ROIC Monterey, LLC; Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Consent to Assignment of Ground Lease to ZH Asheville, LLC (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) End of Consent Agenda
Afternoon Session Items
Public Appearance (Afternoon)
Public Appearance items are on non-routine issues that might stimulate public interest and comments.

13. Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Letter in Support of the Proposed House Resolution:
“Lower Presidio National Historic Park Study Act” (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

14. Appoint Council Representatives to Outside Agencies and City Boards and Committees for 2026 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

15. Receive an Update and Provide Direction to Staff on the Development of a First Responder Fee Program (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
December 16, 2025 4:00 PM
4 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.

Adjourn to Closed Session
The City Council will take public comments on closed session items before convening to closed session.

Closed Session (Afternoon)
Part or all of a meeting may be closed to the public under special conditions. Council can consider only matters covered in the agenda descriptions.

16. Closed Session Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 256 Figueroa Street
Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete
Negotiating Parties: Mike Zimmerman (Surfside Enterprises, Inc.) Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Lease Amendment (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

17. Closed Session Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 9 Wharf II (Sandbar & Grill)
Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Craig Ling (Janeboy, Inc.)
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Lease Extension and New Lease Agreement
(Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

18. Closed Session Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 560-570 Munras Avenue (Trader Joe's Shopping Center) Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete
Negotiating Parties: ROIC Monterey, LLC
Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Consent to Assignment of Ground Lease to ZH Asheville, LLC (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

19. Conference with Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1): Stronghold Engineering, Inc. v. City of Monterey (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 18CV329015) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

20. Conference with Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1):

December 16, 2025 4:00 PM
5 1. Christina Bible v. City of Monterey (Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 25CV005738)

2. City of Monterey v. Leslie J. Flores, Trustee (Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 24CV000750)

3. Shai and Mira Missim v. City of Monterey (Monterey County Superior Court Case Nos. 25CV004945 and 25CV004949)

4. Pacific Western Bank v. City and Stronghold Engineering, Inc. (San Bernardino Superior Court Case No. CIVSB2212212; Fourth District Court of Appeal Case No.

E082907)

5. Stronghold Engineering, Inc. v. City of Monterey (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 18CV329015)

6. Stronghold Engineering, Inc. v City of Monterey (Riverside County Superior Court Case No. CVR12103427)

7. Save Tarpy Flats v. City of Monterey (Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 24 CV005125)

8. Cynthia Wills v. City of Monterey (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Case No. 25-720)

9. Richard and Mildred Zilinskas v. City of Monterey (United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Case No. 5:25-CV-07506) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

21. Conference with Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(2): Roohbakhsh v. City of Monterey (Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Case Nos. ADJ7673832; ADJ8647547; ADJ8647586; ADJ9131029:

ADJ10063343; ADJ10877055; ADJ10907943; ADJ11214034; ADJ11628889; ADJ18892404; ADJ18892405; ADJ13913182; ADJ20861765ADJ7210403; ADJ7096915; ADJ7210239; ADJ7210305; ADJ7210378; ADJ7210426; ADJ7248937; ADJ7268990, ADJ7384054; ADJ7601287; ADJ7601379; ADJ7601449) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
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. All comments and materials provided to the Council become part of the public record. Members of the public who comment in any fashion on an agenda item may be subject to the Levine Act which requires disclosure of campaign contributions of more than $500 to an officer of the City within the preceding 12 months.

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 people with disabilities 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, including to coordinate the use of a hearing device, please contact [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 communication-related assistance, dial 711 to use the California Relay Service (CRS) to speak to City offices. CRS offers free text-tospeech, speech-to-speech, and Spanish-language services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

CITY OF MONTEREY 24-HOUR SUGGESTION HOTLINES: (831) 646-3799 or [email protected] Upcoming city meetings are listed at monterey.gov/agendas For more information, call (831) 646-3935 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Hans Uslar, City Manager
Prepared by: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Congratulate Fire Chief Andrew Miller on His Retirement and Recognize His 35 Years of Service to the Fire Profession in Monterey County and Tenure as the 11th and 13th Fire Chief to Lead the Monterey Fire Department (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council congratulates and recognizes Fire Chief Andrew Miller on his retirement and recognizes his 35 years of service to the fire profession in Monterey
County and tenure as the eleventh and thirteenth Fire
Chief to lead the Monterey Fire Department.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Recognizing employees of the City at City Council
meetings, particularly employees for their retirement, is consistent with City policy.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no fiscal implications to receiving this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the Agenda Report Highlights
• Fire Chief Andrew Miller is retiring in
December 2025 after 35 years of
service in Monterey County.
• He served as both the 11th and
13th Fire Chief of the Monterey Fire
Department, leading over 100
personnel across six fire stations.
• Chief Miller played a key role in
regional collaboration and
strengthening the Monterey Fire
Department.
• His leadership contributed to
improved public safety and a
unified, future-ready fire department.
• The City Council will formally
recognize his contributions and wish
him well in retirement.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 1.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 1, Packet Page 6 №10/24
environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose not to make this recognition.

DISCUSSION:

Fire Chief Andrew Miller has dedicated 35 years of exemplary service to the fire profession in Monterey County. His career began as a firefighter, rising steadily through the ranks as Fire Engineer, Fire Captain, Battalion Chief, Fire Marshal, and Assistant Fire Chief before ultimately becoming Fire Chief.

With the merger of the Pacific Grove and Monterey Fire Departments in 2008, Chief Miller was hired as a City of Monterey employee, bringing with him invaluable experience and deep regional knowledge. He was promoted to Fire Chief of the Monterey Fire Department in 2010, a role he served until his initial retirement in 2013.

Demonstrating a continued commitment to the community, Andrew returned to lead the department again when he was rehired as Fire Chief in 2023. He will retire for the second time in December 2025, concluding a remarkable tenure during which he served as both the 11th and 13th Fire Chief to lead the Monterey Fire Department since its founding in 1890.

Throughout his leadership, Chief Miller provided strategic direction and operational oversight to a dedicated team of over 100 fire personnel. Under his command, the department operated six fire stations, delivering comprehensive fire suppression, emergency medical, rescue, and community safety services to residents and visitors.

Chief Miller’s unwavering dedication to public safety, regional collaboration, and a shared service model have left a lasting positive impact on the Monterey Fire Department and the greater region. His legacy is evident in a Fire Department that is now stronger, more unified, and better prepared for the future.

The City of Monterey is proud to recognize Fire Chief Andrew Miller for his dedicated service to the community and wishes him well in his retirement.

NR/ck
Attachment: Proclamation
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 2, Packet Page 7 ATTACHMENT 1
Proclamation Recognizing
Fire Chief Andrew Miller
on the occasion of his retirement
WHEREAS, Fire Chief Andrew Miller has dedicated 35 years of exemplary service to the fire profession in Monterey County, beginning his distinguished career as a firefighter and rising through the ranks as Fire Engineer, Fire Captain, Battalion Chief, Fire Marshal, Assistant Fire Chief, and ultimately Fire Chief; and,
WHEREAS, with the 2008 merger of Pacific Grove and Monterey Fire Departments, Chief Miller was hired as a City of Monterey employee, bringing with him invaluable experience and deep regional knowledge; and,
WHEREAS, Chief Miller was promoted to Fire Chief of the Monterey Fire Department in 2010, serving in that role until his retirement in 2013, and later returning to lead once again when he was rehired as Fire Chief in 2023; and,
WHEREAS, Chief Miller will retire for the second time in December 2025, concluding a remarkable tenure during which he served as both the 11th and 13th Fire Chief to lead the Monterey Fire Department since its founding in 1890; and
WHEREAS, throughout his leadership, Chief Miller provided strategic direction and operational oversight to a dedicated team of over 100 fire personnel, operating six fire stations and delivering comprehensive fire suppression, emergency medical, rescue, and community safety services to the residents and visitors; and,
WHEREAS, Chief Miller’s dedication to public safety, regional collaboration, a shared service model, strong operation expertise, and commitment to excellence have left a lasting and positive impact on the Monterey Fire Department, the City of Monterey, and the greater region; and, WHEREAS, his legacy is evident in a Fire Department that is now stronger, more unified, and better prepared for the future, thanks to his thoughtful leadership, and enduring commitment to the mission of protecting life, property, and community well-being; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED THAT I, Tyller Williamson Mayor of the City of Monterey, on behalf of the City Council and citizens, thank Andrew Miller, Fire Chief, for this dedication and genuine commitment to our community. We extend our heartfelt gratitude and warmest congratulations to Chief Miller on his retirement.

Dated: December 16, 2025 _______________________
Tyller Williamson, Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 1., Item Page 3, Packet Page 8

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Tuesday, December 2, 2025
4:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 580 PACIFIC ST.

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers

Present: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson

Absent: None
City Staff

Present:

City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Finance Director, Community Development Director, Police Chief, Fire Chief, Human Resources Director, Library & Museums Director, Public Works Director, City Clerk, Recreation Manager, Assistant Fire Chief, Assistant Human Resources Director, Police Lieutenant, Lieutenant, Assistant Police Chief, Parking Superintendent, Parks Supervisor, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer, Fleet Manager, Associate Planner, Administrative Assistant, Building Official, Streets and Utilities Operations Manager, Management Analyst (City Manager's Office), General Services Superintendent, Conference Center General Manager, Housing Manager, Communications Manager, Senior Building Inspector, Inspector, Senior Administrative Analyst (Fire), Code Compliance Coordinator, Engineering Projects Manager, Police Lieutenant, Senior Administrative Analyst (Police), Human Resources Analyst, Administrative Assistant (Property Management), Building Technician, Administrative Assistant (Building & Safety), Legal Secretary, Housing and Community Development Coordinators (2), Administrative Assistant (City Manager), Engineering Assistants II (2), Senior Parking Controls Technician, Senior Locksmith, Acting Records Supervisor, Division Chief, Fire Captain, Fire Engineer, Firefighter

AFTERNOON SESSION
Call to Order
Mayor Williamson called the meeting to order at 4:06 p.m. City Clerk Klein called the roll with the Council present as indicated above.

Presentations (Afternoon)

1. Recognize City Employees for Milestone Anniversaries in 2025 (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Recognized employees
The Council recognized, and their department heads made remarks praising, Chief Information Officer Blake, Public Works Director Renny, Senior Parking Controls Technician Diaz, Accounting Assistant Martin, and Assistant Fire Chief Moore, each celebrating 25 years of service to the City; and Street Maintenance Worker Cortez and Senior Locksmith Lamas, each celebrating 20 years of service to the City.

Public comment on the matter was received from Esther Malkin, who spoke highly of City employees and expressed her confidence in Assistant Fire Chief Moore.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 2.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 2., Item Page 1, Packet Page 9 City Council Minutes December 2, 2025
2 2. Congratulate City Manager Hans Uslar on His Retirement and Recognize His 28 Years of Service to the City of Monterey (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Congratulated and recognized City Manager Uslar The Mayor and City Council recognized City Manager Uslar for the humor, analytics skills, dedication, respect, and heart that he had shown during his 28 years of service to the City.

Additional remarks of recognition were made by Erin Davison on behalf of U.S. Congressman Jimmy Panetta, Isabel Meza on behalf of California State Senator John Laird and Assemblymember Dawn Addis, Police Chief Hober on behalf of the Monterey Executive Management Employees Association, Naval Support Activity Monterey (NSAM) Commanding Officer Captain Robert Smith on behalf of the Naval Postgraduate School and NSAM installation, and Defense Language Institute (DLI) Garrison Commander Colonel Dan Artino on behalf of the DLI and Presidio installation. City Manager Uslar spoke about his time at the City and shared his gratitude for his family, the elected officials and City employees he had worked with, and all residents and stakeholders.

Public comment was received from: Communications Manager Huelga, Lew Bauman, P. K.

Diffenbaugh of the Monterey Peninsula Unified School District, Administrative Assistant Goodwein, Mike Brassfield, Michael Clark and Ellen Martin of First Night Monterey, Management Analyst Ackermann, Rick Aldinger of Monterey County Hospitality Association, Tom Reeves, Elizabeth Jannasch, Rob O'Keefe of See Monterey, Hans Jannasch, Esther Malkin, Adam Pinterits of Monterey County Association of Realtors, Lori Mazzuca, and Chinyere Ogbonna of the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) Committee, who all praised and thanked City Manager Uslar for his many talents, actions, and dedicated service.

During public comments, Councilmember Smith left the Chamber from 5:17 p.m. to 5:18 p.m., Mayor Williamson left the Chamber from 5:24 p.m. to 5:30 p.m., and Councilmember Barber left the Chamber from 5:36 p.m. to 5:41 p.m.

General Public Comments
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from Rich Wilson and Daniel Armendariz.

Consent Agenda
Mayor Williamson stated that a member of the Council had requested that Item 6 be removed from the Consent agenda. Public comment on the Consent Items was not received.

On a motion by Councilmember Barber, seconded by Councilmember Smith, and carried by the following vote, the City Council approved the Consent Agenda except Item 6:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Consent: Approval of Minutes

3. November 18, 2025 Regular Meeting (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Approved
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 2., Item Page 2, Packet Page 10 City Council Minutes December 2, 2025
3 Consent: Award of Construction Contracts

4. Award a Contract in the Amount of $91,776.61 to Duke’s Root Control, Inc. for Annual Sewer Root Foaming 2025 (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 25-119 C.S.

Consent: Resolutions

5. Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Agreement for Public Library Resource Sharing between Libraries in the Cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and Carmel-by-theSea (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 25-120 C.S.

6. Approve the Purchase of Four (4) Ford Police Interceptors in the Amount of $235,571.04 from Folsom Lake Ford, Inc. (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Removed from Consent; Adopted Resolution No. 25-121 C.S.

The Council suggested that, as a way to retain some of the funds, staff consider whether future items like this could have a staggered payment schedule such as with payments being split into two consecutive fiscal years. Public comment was not received.

On a motion by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Rasch, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 25-121 C.S.:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
End of Consent Agenda
Adjourn to Ocean View Community Services District Meeting The Council adjourned to the Ocean View Community Services District meeting.

Ocean View Community Services District Meeting: Consent Agenda

7. Receive Ocean View Community Services District Quarterly Report (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Received report
City Attorney Davi gave a very brief verbal presentation and answered a Councilmember's question. Public comment was not received.

Adjourn to City Council Meeting
The Ocean View Community Services District convened back to the City Council meeting.

Public Appearance (Afternoon)

8. Receive a Report on the Concept for a Community Center Space at 205 Montecito Avenue in Partnership with the Boys and Girls Clubs of Monterey County and Provide Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 2., Item Page 3, Packet Page 11 City Council Minutes December 2, 2025
4 Direction to Staff (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Tabled (3-2, Councilmembers Smith and Rasch voting no) The Council discussed the matter, stating that based on comments received from the public it could be premature to bring the proposal before the Council at the present time.

A motion was introduced by Mayor Williamson, and seconded by Councilmember Garcia, to table the item.

In opposition to the motion, the Council expressed that it would be beneficial to the Council and the public to receive the report, and that members of the Council and public were ready to hear the report and hold a discussion on the matter.

In defense of the motion, it was stated that there was not significant new information to share with the public, that there was hesitation about unduly exciting the neighborhood about the project if it was not feasible, and that the matter shifted attention away from efforts to reinvigorate the Casanova Oak-Knoll Park Center. It was suggested to slow down and look at how best to serve neighborhoods throughout all of District 4. It was proposed that a town hall could be a more effective way of having a community conversation on the subject.

Public comment was received from: John McClellan, who spoke in support of the project concept and said it was separate from the need that existed in the neighborhood surrounding Montecito Park; Mike Brassfield, who said that City staff had run the Casanova Oak-Knoll Park Center successfully in the past and that the cost of the project concept was high in comparison with the City's current budget deficit; Esther Malkin, who commended the creative approach but agreed the timing might not be appopriate; and Lori Mazzuca, who echoed the call for a town hall and agreed this was not the time for discussion of the matter.

The motion carried by the following vote:

AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Williamson
NOES: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Rasch, Smith

9. Receive Public Testimony on the Proposal to Modify the Management Plan of the Monterey County Tourism Improvement District (MCTID) to Add the City of Sand City to the District (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Received public testimony
Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions. During the presentation, Councilmember Smith left the Chamber from 6:18 p.m. to 6:20 p.m.

Public comment was received from Rick Aldinger, who spoke in support of adding Sand City to the MCTID in order to project a unifying, welcoming message from the entire Monterey Peninsula, which he said would benefit everyone.

10. Measure P and S (Special Sales Tax) Annual Report on Conformity with Requirement that Expenditures be used Exclusively for the Rehabilitation, Repair, and Improvement of City Streets, Sidewalks, and Strom Drains and Disabled Access Improvements (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Received report
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 2., Item Page 4, Packet Page 12 City Council Minutes December 2, 2025
5 Measures P & S Oversight Committee members Rick Aldinger and Carol Chorbajian gave a verbal presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions with input from City Engineer/Deputy Public Works Director Easterling.

Public comment was received from: Daniel Armendariz, who spoke about the different qualities of paving materials; and Nina Beety, who alleged that a street closure had been conducted improperly using Measure S funds. The Council stated that it had approved the street closure.

The Council expressed dismay about the lower quality of street repairs by utilities negatively affecting the City's hard work to improve its streets. City Manager Uslar said that staff was working on an ordinance to help resolve the issue.

11. Approve Interim City Manager Employment Contract with Lew Bauman (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 19, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 25-122 C.S.

City Manager Uslar gave a brief verbal presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was received from Nina Beety, in opposition, citing concerns about Mr. Bauman's prior leadership at the County of Monterey.

On a motion by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 25-122 C.S.:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Adjourn to Closed Session
Public comment on the closed session was not received. The Council adjourned to closed session at 6:48 p.m.

Closed Session (Afternoon)

12. Conference with Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1): Stronghold Engineering, Inc. v. City of Monterey (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 18CV329015) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: No reportable action taken

13. Conference with Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d), Rappa v. City of Monterey (Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Case Nos. ADJ 1914164, 19141140) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: On a unanimous roll-call vote, confidential direction to legal counsel was given

14. Conference with Legal Counsel, Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2), (e)(1) (Six Cases) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: On a unanimous roll-call vote, confidential direction to legal counsel was given
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 2., Item Page 5, Packet Page 13 City Council Minutes December 2, 2025
6 The Council recessed at 7:17 p.m. and reconvened at 7:23 p.m.

EVENING SESSION AGENDA
Pledge of Allegiance
Councilmember Smith led the Pledge.

General Public Comments, Continued
Continued public comment on non-agendized matters was not received.

Announcements from Closed Session
Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira reported out from the closed session as indicated in the actions recorded for closed session items 12, 13, and 14, above.

Public Appearance (Evening)

15. Receive Presentation on Phase 1 Poll of Likely Voters: Potential Tax Measures to Reduce the City's $10 Million Structural (Annual) Budget Deficit (Not a Project Under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Received presentation
Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira and Lucia Del Puppo of FM3 Research gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions. During the presentation, Councilmember Garcia left the Chamber from 7:45 p.m. to 7:46 p.m. and Councilmember Smith left the Chamber from 8:04 p.m. to 8:06 p.m.

Public comment was received from: Daniel Almendariz, who provided suggestions for higher parking sales tax percentages and on how to present a sales tax increase to the public; Lori Mazzuca, who said that the polls showed that personal finances were important to voters and that impacts to local businesses should therefore be kept in mind when considering what taxes to propose to the voters; and Esther Malkin, who said that the Aquarium should contribute financially to the City by being subject to an admissions tax because it did not pay property taxes.

On question from the Council, Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira and City Clerk Klein explained that it was difficult to estimate in advance the cost of each individual ballot measure, but that putting one measure on the June 2026 ballot would be the primary expense and that it could be negligible to add a second. On question, City Attorney Davi said that in order to place a sales tax measure on the June 2026 ballot, the Council would have to declare a fiscal emergency. She said that exemptions could generally be done, but that they needed to be well justified. On question, City Manager Uslar explained the method by which the City evaluated and updated parking fees.

The Council expressed disappointment in the wording used in the poll question about an increased sales tax, and it was stated that this question should be clearer and should be presented as an increase of 0.375%. It was proposed that there should be a few different wording options presented to the polled voters regarding sales tax. It was proposed that the 0.5% sales tax due to expire in 2029 be brought to the voters as an extension in November 2028, and that the potential sales tax increase of 0.375% be brought to the voters in June 2026 with a declaration of fiscal emergency. Regarding a potential parking tax, it was stated that there was opportunity to Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 2., Item Page 6, Packet Page 14 City Council Minutes December 2, 2025
7 provide more clarity to the public. It was stated that the polling question about the potential parking tax could be presented in a clearer way to the voters, and that the question to the voters on the potential admissions tax should be posed with the option for imposing it on the Aquarium only.

On question, City Attorney Davi said that there were legal questions that needed to be resolved about the concept of proposing an admissions tax for the Aquarium solely. On question, City Manager Uslar said that the additional administrative work due to the imposition of a parking tax would fall to the private parking lot operators, similar to the administration required of lodging businesses to collect and transmit transient occupancy taxes (TOT).

The Council discussed the need to educate the public and to prioritize those educational efforts in order to produce the largest wins and greatest amount of revenue from the tax measures. It was suggested that in further polling the voters could be presented with various combinations of sales, parking, and vacancy taxes to see what polled best.

Council Comments
Councilmember Barber asked when the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) Committee would bring their project savings recommendations to the Council, and City Manager Uslar said the item should come forward to the Council in January 2026.

Councilmember Smith shared further congratulations to retiring City Manager Uslar.

Mayor Williamson reported on his recent ride-along with the Monterey Fire Department and remarked on the professionalism of the team and the appreciation shown by the public. He complimented Monterey Fire Department leadership for their dedication to training, and thanked the team for the good conversations and experiences they shared that day.

City Manager Reports
City Manager Uslar announced the following upcoming events: traditional tree lighting ceremony, Brighten the Harbor lighted boat parade, donuts and photo shoot with Santa, Christmas in the Adobes, and Monterey Police Department promotional ceremony.

Adjournment
The Council adjourned at 8:56 p.m. in memory of former Parks and Recreation Director Kay Russo.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Tyller Williamson
City Clerk Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 2., Item Page 7, Packet Page 15

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Saturday, December 6, 2025
7:30 AM
STEVENSON ROOM # 2 (UPSTAIRS), MONTEREY CONFERENCE CENTER 1 PORTOLA PLAZA, MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers

Present: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson

Absent: None
City Staff

Present:

City Attorney, Community Development Director, City Clerk, Planning Manager
Call to Order
Mayor Williamson called the meeting to order at 7:32 a.m. City Clerk Klein called the roll with the Council present as indicated above.

Special Meeting
Public Hearing

1. Adopt the Planning Commission Recommendation and Approve 1st Reading of an Ordinance Amending the Monterey City Code to Dissolve the Architectural Review Committee and Transfer its Powers and Duties to the Planning Commission (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Passed the ordinance to a second reading
Planning Manager Hill gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions together with input from City Attorney Davi.

Public comment was received from Julie Gorman, who asserted that the proposed ordinance would amend Visitor Accommodation Facilities (VAF) provisions in violation of the City Charter.

On question from the Council, City Attorney Davi agreed with the speaker that changing VAF development standards would require a vote of the people. She explained that the VAF development standards were not changing by way of this ordinance, and that the intent of the charter was being honored with this action. She noted that the Planning Commission's taking up the duties formerly accomplished by the Architectural Review Committee essentially constituted a name change. She explained that the process outlined in Charter Appendix A to Section 8.1, section 38-151(A)(b)(8) would require two hearings before the Planning Commission to allow the public the same opportunity for participation and speech as when such a matter would have been heard before the Architectural Review Committee prior to being heard before the Planning Commission.

On a motion by Councilmember Barber, seconded by Councilmember Smith, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted the Planning Commission's recommendation and approved the first reading of the ordinance, passing it to its second reading:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 3.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 3., Item Page 1, Packet Page 16 City Council Minutes December 6, 2025
2 Adjourn to Closed Session
Closed Session
Public comment on the closed session was solicited but not received. The Council adjourned to closed session at 7:44 a.m.

2. Title: Public Employment Appointment Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1), Unrepresented Employees: Prospective City Manager Candidate Interviews Action: No reportable action taken
Adjournment
The Council adjourned at 3:30 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Tyller Williamson
City Clerk Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 3., Item Page 2, Packet Page 17 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Cody Hennings, Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: Amend Resolution 25-060 to Include the Wave Street Curb Ramp Improvement Project in the Capital Improvement Program, Appropriate Funds, and Award a Construction Contract in the Amount of $1,049,874.25 to McKim Corporation for the Wave Street Curb Ramp Improvement Project (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the attached resolution:

1. Amending Resolution 25-060 to include the
Wave Street Curb Ramp Improvement Project
(Project) in the Capital Improvement Program
(“CIP”);

2. Authorizing the Finance Director, or their
designee, to appropriate $848,934.82 from the
Measure P/S Pavement Project (35c1553) and
$413,420.58 from the Measure P/S ADA
Project (33c1555) for a total of
$1,262,355.40to the Wave Street Curb Ramp
Improvement Project;

3. Approving the plans and specifications for the
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;

4. Accepting all responsive, responsible bids;

5. Awarding a Construction Contract for the Total
Bid to the lowest responsive, responsible
bidder, McKim Corporation, in the amount of
$1,049,874.25;

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

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

Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
approve the Wave Street Curb
Ramp Improvement Project, funded
by Measure P/S, with a total cost of
$1,262,355.40.
• McKim Corporation was awarded
the construction contract as the
lowest responsive bidder at
$1,049,874.25.
• The project includes ADA-compliant
curb ramps, pavement
rehabilitation, and stormwater
treatment installation at multiple
intersections along Wave Street.
• Construction is scheduled to begin
in early Spring 2026, with
monitoring for archeological impacts
during ground-disturbing activities.
• Measure P/S funds have
significantly improved the City’s
Pavement Condition Index from 54
to 81 over the past decade.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 4.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 4., Item Page 1, Packet Page 18 №11/25
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.

This action is also consistent with Council policy to approve budget amendments.

On May 13, 2025, the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects included in the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan are Consistent with the General Plan, Area Plans, Master Plans, Coastal Plans, Traffic Calming Plans, and Move Monterey Multimodal Plan.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

On November 18, 2025, nine (9) bids were received and were deemed responsive and responsible. The apparent lowest bidder came in below the Engineer’s estimate of $1,558,000.00. The bids were opened by the Finance Director’s designee as follows:

Bidder Total Bid
McKim Corporation $1,049,874.25
Precision Grade Inc $1,315,498.00
Coastal Paving & Excavating Inc. $1,399,810.00
Monterey Peninsula Engineering $1,477,731.00
The Don Chapin Company $1,482,309.00
McGuire and Hester $1,508,925.00
Granite Rock Company $1,581,808.00
S&H Construction, Inc $1,668,600.00
FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. $1,767,089.00
Engineer’s Estimate $1,558,000.00
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 4., Item Page 2, Packet Page 19 №11/25
Basis of award for this project is based on the Total Bid.

Estimated Construction Cost:

Total Bid $1,049,874.25
Construction Contingency (15%) $157,481.15
Total Construction Cost (This Authorization) $1,207,355.40 Construction Management (City Staff & Indirect Cost) $ 55,000.00 Total Estimated Cost to Complete the Project $ 1,262,355.40 Available Funding Sources:

Measure P/S ADA - 35C1555 $12,940,224.27
Measure P/S Pavement - 35C1553 $ 8,480,034.33
Total Available $21,420,258.60
These projects have an available funding balance of $21,420,258.60 as of November 19, 2025.

Following this appropriation, the Wave Street Curb Ramp Improvement Project will have an available balance of $1,262,355.40. Therefore, funding is available in the project account for the construction of the Total Bid.

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 consists of the demolition of existing curb ramps and construction of concrete curb, gutter, cross gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps and driveways, storm drainage, signage and stripping, and asphalt pavement. A stormwater treatment box will be installed at the intersection of Prescott Avenue and Wave Street. All work will be conducted within the public right-of-way.

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. All work will be conducted within the public right-of-way; therefore, the project would not have an impact on the environment.

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 proposed project would consist of improvements to the existing public right-of-way.

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 improvements' Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 4., Item Page 3, Packet Page 20 №11/25
limited scope and distinct locations.

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 as shown on the General Plan EIR Figure 8. The project involves demolition and replacement of existing curb ramps with a typical depth of excavation of less than 24 inches, a depth typically within fill material above native soil.

However, additional work including construction of concrete curbs, gutters, cross gutters, sidewalks, curb ramps and driveways, storm drainage, signage and stripping, and asphalt pavement, and the installation of a storm water treatment box at the intersection of Prescott Avenue and Wave Street, requires deeper excavation potentially at a depth within native soil.

Each location is less than 1,000 square feet. An Extended Phase 1 Archeological Assessment, dated May 14, 2025, was prepared for this project by qualified archeologist, Angie Moniz, M.A.

RPA with Dudek. The project will include monitoring of all ground disturbing activities during construction and will comply with regulations regarding accidental discovery of human remains; therefore, there would be no impacts to historic or archeological resources.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Council could choose not to award the construction contract for this project; however, this is not recommended since the proposed project implements maintenance activities that are required to maintain existing infrastructure.

DISCUSSION:

The project primarily involves constructing ADA compliant curb ramps on the Wave Street corridor at the intersections of Irving, Prescott, Hoffman, and McClellan, and pavement rehabilitation. This work will take place in early Spring of 2026.

The project plans and specifications were developed by City staff and consultants. The project was extensively advertised for construction bids through the City’s e-Procurement Portal, OpenGov Procurement, and plans are available for public review in the Office of the City Engineer (580 Pacific St., Room 7). On November 18, 2025, the City received nine (9) bids.

The lowest responsive, responsible bid was submitted by McKim Corporation in the amount of $1,049,874.25.00.

McKim Corporation has performed and successfully completed work in the City of Monterey, including Citywide Road Surface Repair 5 and Citywide Road Surface Repair 24/25. Staff are comfortable with the ability of the Contractor to perform the work successfully.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 4., Item Page 4, Packet Page 21 №11/25
This project is funded by Measure P/S, 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 towards improving the City’s average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) from 54 to 81 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 dedicated funding stream, the City would not be able to maintain its streets to the same level of service.

CH/pl
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Bid Evaluation Tab
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 Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 4., Item Page 5, Packet Page 22 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AMENDING RESOLUTION 25-060 TO INCLUDE THE WAVE STREET CURB RAMP

IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM,

APPROPRIATING FUNDS, AND AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,049,874.25 TO MCKIM CORPORATION FOR THE WAVE STREET CURB

RAMP IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, on the 18th day of November 2025, at 2:00 p.m. the City of Monterey Finance Director’s designee received nine (9) electronic bids through the City’s e-Procurement Portal, OpenGov Procurement, for the Wave Street Curb Ramp Improvement Project (35C1555 & 35C1553) (“Project”);
WHEREAS, McKim Corporation, Precision Grade, Inc., Coastal Paving & Excavating, Inc., Monterey Peninsula Engineering, The Don Chapin Company, LLC, McGuire and Hester, Granite Rock Company, S&H Construction, Inc., and FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. submitted responsive, responsible bids for the Project; WHEREAS, the basis of award for the project was the Total Base Bid; WHEREAS, McKim Corporation submitted the lowest responsive, and responsible bid in the amount of $1,049,874.25;
WHEREAS, this action adds this project to the Capital Improvement Program project; WHEREAS, sufficient funds are available in account 35C1555 & 35C1553 to appropriate to the new project; 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 consists of the demolition of existing curb ramps and construction of concrete curb, gutter, cross gutter, sidewalk, curb ramps and driveways, storm drainage, signage and stripping, and asphalt pavement. A stormwater treatment box will be installed at the intersection of Prescott Avenue and Wave Street. All work will be conducted within the public right-of-way. Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

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 Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 4., Item Page 6, Packet Page 23 significant. There would be no cumulative impact because the proposed project would consist of improvements to the existing public right-of-way.

Each location is less than 1,000 square feet. An Extended Phase 1 Archeological Assessment, dated May 14, 2025, was prepared for this project by qualified archeologist, Angie Moniz, M.A.

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

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

1. Amends Resolution 25-060 to include the Wave Street Curb Ramp Improvement Project (Project) in the Capital Improvement Program (“CIP”);

2. Authorizes the Finance Director, or their designee, to appropriate $848,934.82 from the Measure P/S Pavement Project (35c1553) and $413,420.58 from the Measure P/S ADA Project (33c1555) for a total of $1,262,355.40 to the Wave Street Curb Ramp Improvement Project;
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 4., Item Page 7, Packet Page 24

3. Approves the plans and specifications for the 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;

4. Accepts all responsive, responsible bids;

5. Awards a Construction Contract for the Total Bid to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, McKim Corporation, in the amount of $1,049,874.25;

6. 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

7. 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:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 4., Item Page 8, Packet Page 25 City of Monterey
Finance Department
Rafaela King, Finance Director
580 Pacific Street, Monterey, CA 93940

EVALUATION TABULATION
General Solicitation - WAVE STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (35C1555)

Page 1 ends

EVALUATION TABULATION
GEN No. TBD
WAVE STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (35C1555)
RESPONSE DEADLINE: November 18, 2025 at 2:00 pm
Tuesday, November 18, 2025

SELECTED VENDOR TOTALS
Vendor Total
McKim Corporation $1,049,874.25
Precision Grade Inc $1,315,498.00
Coastal Paving &
Excavating Inc.
$1,399,810.00
Monterey Peninsula
Engineering
$1,477,731.00
The Don Chapin Company $1,482,309.00
McGuire and Hester $1,508,925.00
Granite Rock Company $1,581,808.00
S&H Construction, Inc $1,668,600.00
FBD Vanguard
Construction, Inc.
$1,767,089.00

BID SCHEDULE
Vendor Total
McKim Corporation $1,049,874.25
Precision Grade Inc $1,315,498.00
Coastal Paving &
Excavating Inc.
$1,399,810.00
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 4., Item Page 9, Packet Page 26

EVALUATION TABULATION
GEN No. TBD
WAVE STREET CURB RAMP IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (35C1555)

Page 2 ends

Vendor Total
Monterey Peninsula
Engineering
$1,477,731.00
The Don Chapin Company $1,482,309.00
McGuire and Hester $1,508,925.00
Granite Rock Company $1,581,808.00
S&H Construction, Inc $1,668,600.00
FBD Vanguard
Construction, Inc.
$1,767,089.00
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 4., Item Page 10, Packet Page 27 ORDINANCE NO. ____ C.S.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№09/24

DISSOLVING THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AND TRANSFERRING ITS

POWERS AND DUTIES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY DOES ORDAIN, as follows:

SECTION 1:

WHEREAS, City boards, commissions, and committees are established to provide independent recommendations to the City Council, or, in the context of the Planning Commission and the Architectural Review Committee, to make independent decisions and take administrative actions;
WHEREAS, the City’s boards, commissions, and committees provide a valuable service to the community, which includes providing advice and guidance in their various spheres, receiving and acting on the input of the public, and advising the City Council; WHEREAS, on June 17, 2025, the City Council considered consolidating its boards, commissions, and committees to streamline processes for applicants and cut down on the number of meetings requiring administrative support;
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that merging duties of the Architectural Review Committee with the Planning Commission will achieve the City Council’s objectives; WHEREAS, although additional code amendments are needed to fully effectuate the intent of this ordinance, this action dissolves the Architectural Review Committee and transfers all of its duties to the Planning Commission;
WHEREAS, on November 25, 2025, the Planning Commission considered the proposed changes to the Zoning Code and it recommended adoption by the City Council; WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Committee was not created by City Charter.

Rather, the ARC was created in 1960 with the adoption of Ordinance No. 1231, decades prior to the implementation of Visitor Accommodation Facility (VAF) zones in the City Chater. This action is not changing the Charter’s VAF development standards. The City agrees that a change to the development standards would require a Charter amendment adopted by a vote of the people. Here, however, the proposed amendments reassign tasks from the Architectural Review Committee to the Planning Commission, thereby fulfilling the purpose and intent of the Charter’s VAF zone development standards; 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 Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 5.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 5., Item Page 1, Packet Page 28 excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability; NOW THEREFORE, the Monterey City Council declares as follows:

SECTION 2: The above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.

SECTION 3: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 3, Section 2-3.02(b) is deleted and subsections (c) through (h) are relettered as subsections (b) through (g).

SECTION 4: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 3, Section 2-3.04(e) through (h) are relettered as (f) through (i) and subsection (e) is amended to read as follows:
(e)(1) Term Limits. “No person shall serve more than 12 years total in appointed service. This term limit shall apply in the aggregate to all boards, commissions, and committees, regardless of whether such service is consecutive or nonconsecutive, or on a single body or in combination. This subsection applies to full terms commencing on or after January 15, 2026. (e)(2) Exceptions to Term Limits. The term limits set forth in (e)(1) shall not apply:
(i) to the Appeals Hearing Board, the Disabled Access Board, the Building and Housing Appeals Board, or the Measures P and S Oversight Committee. (ii) when no qualified residents apply for the appointment.

SECTION 5: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 3, Section 2-3.09(a)(2) is deleted and subsections (a)(3) through (a)(6) are relettered as subsections (a)(2) through (a)(5).

SECTION 6: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 3, Section 2-3.11, the first paragraph is amended to read as follows:
“The City Council may by unanimous vote elect honorary life members of the Planning Commission, Board of Library Trustees, Museums and Cultural Arts Commission, and Parks and Recreation Commission.”
SECTION 7: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 4, Planning Commission, Section 2-

4.01(h) is hereby re-lettered as subsection (j).

SECTION 8: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 4, Planning Commission, Section 2-

4.01(h) is added to read as follows:
“Architectural Review. Review projects to ensure the promotion of orderly development, ensure high quality design that is harmonious with project surroundings, and to preserve and promote the visual character of the City. The Planning Commission has assumed the foregoing duties and powers of the Architectural Review Committee, which was dissolved effective January 15, 2026.”
SECTION 9: Monterey City Code, Chapter 2, Article 5, Section 2-5.00, Architectural Review Committee, is amended to read as follows:

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 5., Item Page 2, Packet Page 29 (a) The Architectural Review Committee is dissolved effective January 15, 2026. The powers and duties of the Architectural Review Committee are hereby assumed by the Planning Commission.
(b) The Charter’s Visitor Accommodation Facility (VAF) development standards set forth in City Charter, Appendix A to Section 8.1 remain unchanged. Charter Appendix A to Section 8.1, section 38-151(A)(b)(8) shall require two hearings before the Planning Commission.
(c) References to the Architectural Review Committee contained in master plans, specific plans, area plans, land use plans, neighborhood plans, design standards, and guidelines may be ministerially updated to reflect the Planning Commission has taken over the role of the Architectural Review Committee.

SECTION 10: Monterey City Code, Chapter 31, Signs, the term “Architectural Review Committee” in Section 31-3, 31-4, 31-5(A)-(C), 31-7, and 31-8 is replaced with “Planning Commission.”
SECTION 11: Monterey City Code, Chapter 31, Signs, Section 31-5(E), Appeal, is amended to read as follows:
“Appeal. All appeals shall proceed pursuant to the process described in Section 38-203 et seq.” SECTION 12: Monterey City Code, Chapter 31, Signs, Section 31-6, Submittal Requirements, is amended to read as follows:
“Submittal requirements for Sign Permit applications shall be developed, maintained, and adopted by the Community Development Department, shall be made available to the public at City Hall, and shall be subject to review and oversight by the Planning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission.”
SECTION 13: The definition in Monterey City Code, Section 31-10(5) is deleted and 31- 10(6) through (59) are renumbered as 31-10(5) through (58).

SECTION 14: Monterey City Code, Chapter 33, Article 5, Division 3, Section 33-5.18(f) the term “Architectural Review Committee” is replaced with “Planning Commission.” SECTION 15: the term “Architectural Review Committee” is replaced with “Planning Commission” in Monterey City Code, Chapter 37, Preservation of Trees and Shrubs, Sections 37-12(D) and the (F), and the words “Planning Commission and” in (F) are deleted.

SECTION 16: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Zoning Ordinance, is hereby amended as follows:

The term “Architectural Review Committee” is replaced with “Planning Commission” in Chapter 38, Zoning Ordinance, in the following sections:
38-11
38-22(E)
38-23(E)(3)
38-23(G)
38-24(E)(4)
38-25(D)(7)(d)
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 5., Item Page 3, Packet Page 30 38-25(F)
38-26(M)(3)(a)
38-28(D)
38-29(D)
38-30(D)
38-31(D)
38-32(D)
38-36(C)
38-41(F)
38-46
38-50
38-63
38-64
38-90
38-112.4(f)(4)(i)
38-112.6(C)(2)
38-115
38-189(A)
38-189(A)(1)
38-189(A)(2)(a)
38-189(A)(2)(b)
38-191
38-192(A)
38-192(B)
38-192(C)
38-216(A)
SECTION 17: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Sections 38-22(D)(12)(c), 38- 23(D)(12)(c), 38-24(D)(15)(c), 38-25(D)(16)(c) are amended to read as follows:
“(c) Adopted View Impact policies.”
SECTION 18: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Sections 38-22(D)(12)(d), 38- 23(D)(12)(d), 38-24(D)(15)(d), 38-25(D)(16)(d) are amended to read as follows:
“(d) Adopted Tree Protection Standards.”
SECTION 19: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Section 38-26(N)(2)(f) is amended to read as follows:
f. Landscaping. A landscaping plan shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Commission. All landscaping shall be installed and shall be inspected by Community Development Department staff before occupancy of the dwelling units.

SECTION 20: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, the first paragraph of Sections 38- 22(D)(12), 38-23(D)(12), 38-24(D)(15), 38-25(D)(16), is amended to read as follows and the remainder of these sections remain unchanged unless otherwise modified by this ordinance:

Variations to Setback Standards. Setbacks shall be as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance; however, the Planning Commission may minimally vary any setback to achieve an improved relationship between the new construction and structures on adjacent lots and those in the Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 5., Item Page 4, Packet Page 31 immediate neighborhood. No variation to the standards shall be approved until notice is given to all adjoining property owners and the property owners across the street. If a variation is granted, it supersedes the need for a variance. Variations that do not conform with these standards shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of Monterey City Code section 28-156 et seq.

SECTION 21: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Sections 38-22(D)(12)(e), 38- 23(D)(12)(e), 38-24(D)(15)(e), 38-35(D)(15)(e) are deleted.

SECTION 22: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, the last two paragraphs of Sections 38- 22(D)(12)(e), 38-23(D)(12)(e), 38-24(D)(15)(e), 38-35(D)(15)(e) are deleted.

SECTION 23: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Section 38-37, Review of Plans, is amended to read as follows:

A. Ordinary non structural repairs, alterations, exterior remodeling, changes in landscaping or planting areas, or maintenance shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission. Any structural alteration shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission. Procedures for such review, including the right of appeal, shall be the same as for a use permit.

B. Expansion of visitor accommodation facilities shall be subject to review and approval by the Development Review Committee and the Planning Commission.

C. New limited visitor accommodation facilities shall be subject to review and approval by the Development Review Committee and the Planning Commission in deciding whether to approve or deny the project.

SECTION 24: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Section 38-65, Specific Purposes, is amended to read as follows:

The specific purpose of the D Design and Development Control Overlay District is to ensure appropriate review for projects in areas of environmental sensitivity or where urban design and site planning considerations are judged important. Three subdistricts are established to accomplish this objective:

D1 -- Design Control overlay district will require Planning Commission approval of all new construction and exterior alterations and additions. Specific limitations are set on conditions of approval to prohibit the Commission from imposing requirements that are more restrictive than those prescribed by applicable base district regulations of a valid use permit or variance.

D2 -- Development Control overlay district will require Planning Commission approval of all new construction and exterior alterations and additions. Conditions of approval may impose requirements that are more restrictive than those prescribed by applicable base district regulations if the Planning Commission finds these requirements are necessary to have a harmonious relationship with existing and planned uses in the vicinity and with sensitive environmental resources.

D3 -- Historic Development Control overlay district will require Planning Commission approval of all new construction, exterior alteration, or addition on a site which could affect a designated historic building or site. Conditions of approval may impose requirements that are more restrictive than those prescribed by applicable base district regulations in the Planning Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 5., Item Page 5, Packet Page 32 Commission finds these requirements are necessary to preserve the setting or to create a harmonious relationship with adjoining or nearby historic resources.

SECTION 25: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Section 38-68(B)(1), Review of Plans, is amended to read as follows:

B. D2 and D3 Districts. A two-part review process is required.

1. Initial Review. The Planning Commission shall review the concept plan required by Article 25. In the D3 district, the Historic Preservation Commission shall make advisory recommendation to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny the concept plan within 45 days of receipt of a completed application, unless an extension of time is acceptable to the applicant. Any requirements imposed pursuant to Section 38-67(B) must be supported by the required findings. The Planning Commission’s decision shall be final, unless appealed to the City Council in accord with Article

27. The Planning Commission, on its own motion, may refer its decision to the City Council for further consideration. The City Council shall act on a referral from the Planning Commission within 45 days or the Planning Commission’s decision is deemed affirmed.

SECTION 26: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Section 38-68(C), Review of Plans, is amended to read as follows:

C. Appeals. The applicant may appeal decisions of the Development Review Committee or Planning Commission in accord with Article 27.

SECTION 27: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Section 38-110, Refuse Storage Areas, is amended to read as follows:

Refuse storage areas shall be screened or located within a building and shall be provided prior to occupancy for all multifamily residential commercial, industrial, and public/semipublic uses.

Locations, screening, horizontal dimensions, and general design parameters of refuse storage areas shall be as prescribed by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission may waive the screening requirement for dumpsters and equipment for refuse collection and storage in an IL District, which are not visible from a public street.

SECTION 28: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Section 189(C) is deleted and subsection (D) is relettered as subsection (C).

SECTION 29: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Section 190, Submittal Requirements is amended to read as follows:

Submittal requirements for architectural review applications shall be developed, maintained, and adopted by the Community Development Department, shall be made available to the public at City Hall, and shall be subject to review and oversight by the Planning Commission on an annual basis, or as requested by the public or the Planning Commission.

SECTION 30: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Section 205, is hereby amended to delete the term “Architectural Review Committee.”
SECTION 31: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Section 208, Notice of Appeal – Form and Content is amended to read as follows:

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 5., Item Page 6, Packet Page 33 The notice of appeal shall be in writing and shall be filed in the Community Development Department upon forms provided by the City. The notice of appeal must set forth specifically the grounds of appeal and the action that is requested, and staff shall work to ensure that appeals are allowed to proceed whenever possible. Filing the appeal and payment of fees within the time limit shall stay the effective date of the action until a final determination on the appeal.

SECTION 32: Monterey City Code, Chapter 38, Section 210, Hearing Date - Notice.

A. Upon receipt of the notice of appeal and payment of fees, the City shall schedule and give notice of the date, time, and place of the public hearing. Notice of the date, time, and place of the public hearing will be provided within 45 days from the date of the filing of the appeal and the payment of fees as follows:

1. Publication of notice of hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Monterey not less than five days prior to date of hearing, except that an appeal hearing for a wireless facility application controlled by Section 38-112.4 shall be given not less than three business days prior to date of hearing.

2. Mailing notice as prescribed in Section 38-159 (C)

3. The Community Development Department shall process appeals to the Planning Commission. The City Clerk shall process appeals to the City Council.

4. The date of the appeal hearing shall be scheduled at the next reasonably available meeting.

B. Failure of parties to receive notice of hearing shall in no way affect the validity of action taken.

C. The date of hearing may be extended only upon written consent of the original applicant; however, once begun, a hearing may be continued if the City Council or Planning Commission needs further information to facilitate a fair and adequate determination of the appeal.

SECTION 33: If any section, sub-section, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted the Ordinance and each section, sub-section, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, sub-sections, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions to be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 34: All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

SECTION 35: 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:

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 5., Item Page 7, Packet Page 34 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 5., Item Page 8, Packet Page 35 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Mike Lewis, Senior Administrative Analyst and Shannon Leon, Recreation Manager
SUBJECT: Appropriate Additional Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) Funding and Award a Contract to Replace and Install New Lights at Sollecito Field to Musco Sports Lighting, LLC in the amount Not-to-exceed $464,200. (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities) ***NCIP***
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the attached resolution:

1. Appropriating Additional NCIP Funding and Awarding
a Contract for the Replace and Install New Lights at
Sollecito Field Project (ncp2515) to Musco Sports
Lighting, LLC in the Amount Not-to-Exceed $464,200,
for a term that expires on December 31, 2026;

2. Authorizing the City Manager, or his designee, to
execute the agreement with Musco Sports Lighting,
LLC; and

3. Allowing the term of the Agreement to be extended
for one year when no additional funding is requested.

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:

On August 13, 2024, the Planning Commission
confirmed the proposed project to be consistent with the General Plan, Specific Plans, Area Plans, Master Plans, Coastal Plans, Traffic Calming Plans, Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
approve an additional $42,200 in
NCIP funding and award a
$464,200 contract to Musco Sports
Lighting, LLC for replacing and
installing new lights at Sollecito
Field.
• The upgraded LED lighting system
will improve energy efficiency,
reduce greenhouse gas emissions,
and enhance safety and field
illumination.
• The project aligns with the Parks
and Recreation Master Plan and
supports community needs by
enhancing existing facilities.
• The new lighting system will reduce
energy usage by 50-70%, lower
operating costs, and improve
environmental impact with spill and
glare control.
• The project is expected to be
completed by January 2026 without
requiring design or engineering
services, addressing the current
backlog of projects.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 6.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 6., Item Page 1, Packet Page 36 №11/25
and the Move Monterey Multimodal Plan.

On November 13, 2024, the Parks and Recreation Commission found the proposed project to be consistent with the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.

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

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

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Council approved Resolution 24-179 C.S. adopting and approving funding for the Fiscal Year 2024/25 Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program on November 19, 2024. At the time the estimated cost of the Sollecito Field Project was $422,000. This project will require Council to appropriate an additional $42,200 from the NCIP Fund 216 to execute the contract.

The City wishes to enter into a contract with Musco Sports Lighting, LLC. under Sourcewell Contract #041123-MSL, utilizing the accepted “piggyback” purchasing process (Monterey City Code 28-14) for the Sollecito Field Lights Installation Project, for an amount not-to-exceed $464,200. The Finance Department approved this piggyback purchase on October 29, 2025.

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 consists of the replacement of lights at Sollecito Park, which would not result in an intensification of lighting. 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 involves the replacement of existing playground equipment.

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 Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 6., Item Page 2, Packet Page 37 №11/25
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 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 replacement lighting would be installed on existing poles; therefore, the project would not have an impact on historical or archeological resources.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

City Council could elect not to appropriate the additional $42,200 in NCIP funding and not to award the agreement; however, this is not recommended. The additional funding and contract are needed to replace the existing field lights at Sollecito Ballpark.

DISCUSSION:

On November 19, 2024, City Council approved Resolution 24-179 to appropriate funding for the Sollecito Field Light Upgrade Project, which at the time was estimated to cost $422,000. This project will require Council to appropriate an additional $42,200 from the NCIP Fund 216 to execute the contract.

City staff recommends that the City Council approve awarding this contract for the replacement of field lights at Sollecito Park. The replacement lighting and fixtures will be installed on existing light poles. This is a project that can be implemented quickly without the need for support from the Engineering Division staff, which has been impacted due to staffing shortages.

The existing ballpark lighting is beyond its operational life, and the lighting can no longer be repaired and needs to be replaced. The existing lighting system is outdated, inefficient, and no longer meets the standards for energy performance, safety, and field illumination. Upgraded lighting will benefit the Monterey Recreation Field Sports programs and leagues, local schools and outside youth and adult sports programs for this multi-use field, which is utilized over 300 days per year. Upgrading the ballpark lighting system is a cost-effective, environmentally responsible improvement that enhances safety, reduces operating costs, and fortifies community use.

The current lighting system relies on high-intensity discharge (HID) fixtures that consume excessive power and require frequent maintenance. Transitioning to LED technology is projected to reduce energy usage by 50-70%, resulting in substantial long-term utility savings.

Replacing legacy lighting supports the City’s sustainability and energy-reduction goals by lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Estimates include a reduction of 193 metric tons of CO₂, which is roughly equivalent to removing 42 passenger vehicles from the road for one year. LED fixtures are also compatible with smart controls for dimming and scheduling, allowing further efficiency improvements and salary savings. The replacement lighting will have same number of lumens or less on the field while the number of luminaires will be reduced from 64 to 46 due to LED’s providing more efficient lumens per watt. The new lighting will be placed to allow for better on-field vision. Additional key features include spill and glare control allowing for an improvement in environmental impact and lighting performance.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 6., Item Page 3, Packet Page 38 №11/25

The City is well served with robust and a well-designed system of parks and recreation facilities.

This project is consistent with the goals of the 2016 Parks and Recreation Master Plan and is supported by the Parks and Recreation Commission and Parks and Recreation Department staff. Parks and Recreation Master Plan Goal 3.1 Maintain and Enhance Existing Parks and Facilities states “The City’s primary priority should be to serve community needs through maintenance and enhancement of existing parks and facilities rather than investment in the development of new parks.”

The Sollecito Light Project is a straightforward, “low hanging fruit” project that can be accomplished quickly with great benefit for thousands of youth and adults living locally and within our region. This project does not require design or engineering services, which is currently contributing to the backlog of projects. The current timeline to complete this project is the end of January 2026 pending approval of the contract and placing the equipment order.

The new lighting equipment will be purchased and installed by Musco Sports Lighting. LLC, under the Sourcewell contract #041123-MSL. Sourcewell is a national cooperative procurement organization offering publicly solicited contracts to government entities nationwide for products and services at prices that have been assessed to be fair, reasonable and competitive. A cooperative procurement contract, such as Sourcewell is an exception to the City’s competitive procurement requirements pursuant to Monterey City Code section 28-14. Funding this project aligns with the City’s long-term capital improvement and sustainability objectives.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution to appropriate an additional $42,200 in funding from the NCIP Fund 216 and award a contract to Musco Sports Lighting, LLC. for the Sollecito Field Lights Project, in the amount not-to-exceed $464,200.

AR/ml
Attachments: 1. Resolution
e: Hans Uslar, City Manager
Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
Rafaela King, Finance Director
Andrea Renny, P.E., PTOE, Public Works Director
Reginald Paulding, P.E., Senior Engineer
Mike Lewis, Senior Administrative Analyst
Thys Norton, Park Operations Manager
Shannon Leon, Recreation Manager
Chinyere Ogbonna, NCIP Committee Chair
Dennis Duke, NCIP Committee Vice Chair
Parks and Recreation Commission
Bob Crookham, Musco Sports Lighting, LLC
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 6., Item Page 4, Packet Page 39 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

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

APPROPRIATING ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT

PROGRAM (NCIP) FUNDING AND AWARDING A CONTRACT FOR THE SOLLECITO FIELD

LIGHTS INSTALLATION PROJECT TO MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING, LLC IN THE AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $464,200
WHEREAS, on the 13th day of August 2024, the Planning Commission reviewed the ranked NCIP projects and confirmed the projects to be consistent with the General Plan, Specific Plans, Area Plans, Master Plans, Coastal Plans, Traffic Calming Plans, and the Move Monterey Multimodal Plan;
WHEREAS, on the 13th day of November 2024, the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the proposed projects and determined that the recommended Parks and Recreation related projects to be consistent with the Parks and Recreation Master Plan; WHEREAS, on the 19th day of November 2024, City Council adopted and approved the Fiscal Year 2024/25 Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) including the Sollecito Field Lights Installation (ncp2515) with an appropriation of $422,000 (Resolution 24- 179 C.S.);
WHEREAS, the City evaluated the procurement process utilized by Sourcewell and determined it to be an acceptable “piggyback” purchasing option allowing the City to utilize multi-agency contract pricing. The Finance Department approved the “piggyback” request on October 29, 2025;
WHEREAS, the City wishes to enter into a contract with Musco Sports Lighting, LLC under Sourcewell Contract #041123-MSL, utilizing the accepted “piggyback” purchasing process (Monterey City Code 28-14) for the Sollecito Field Lights Installation Project; 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 consists of the replacement of lights at Sollecito Park, which would not result in an intensification of lighting. 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 Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 6., Item Page 5, Packet Page 40 significant. There would be no cumulative impact because the project involves the replacement of existing playground equipment.

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 replacement lighting would be installed on existing poles; therefore, the project would not have an impact on historical or archeological resources.

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

1. Appropriates an additional $42,200 in funding from the NCIP Fund 216 to Sollecito Field Lights Installation Project (ncp2515) for a total project appropriation of $464,200.

2. Awards a Contract for the Sollecito Field Lights Installation (ncp2515) to Musco Sports Lighting, LLC. in the Amount Not-to-Exceed $464,200 for a term that expires on December 31, 2026.

3. Authorizes the City Manager, or his designee, to execute the agreement with Musco Sports Lighting, LLC.

4. Allows the term of the Agreement to be extended for one year when no additional funding is requested.

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

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 6., Item Page 6, Packet Page 41 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 6., Item Page 7, Packet Page 42 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
Prepared By: Angie Blake, Chief Information Officer and Shannon Leon, Recreation Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize an Agreement with Amilia Technologies USA, Inc. for the Purchase of Cloud Hosted Recreation Software and Professional Services and Authorize the City Manager to Execute Agreements for Recreation Software and Merchant Services (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution to authorize
an agreement with Amilia Technologies USA, Inc. for
purchase of Cloud Hosted Recreation Software and
Professional Services and authorize the City Manager
to execute agreements for recreation software and
merchant services.

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 selection of Amilia Technologies USA, Inc.
(Amilia) as the solution vendor for SmartRec services
is consistent with the City’s long-standing practice of providing responsive, high-quality and cost-effective
information technology solutions that support City
departments in achieving their missions and delivering
exceptional public service.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT
(LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Staff has negotiated a new ten-year service and
support agreement for the SmartRec solution.
• Year 1 cost: $38,112
• Annual increases: Not to exceed 5%
Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
authorize a ten-year agreement with
Amilia Technologies USA, Inc. for the
SmartRec cloud-hosted recreation
software and professional services.
• SmartRec provides features like online
registration, payment processing,
facility management, and client
account management to enhance
Parks & Recreation services.
• The software has significantly
increased online revenue collection
from 12.32% in FY 2019 to 93.4% in
FY 2025.
• Merchant service fees for payment
processing are collected by Amilia and
forwarded to their partner, Paysafe,
with no direct fees paid by the City.
• Funding for the software and merchant
service fees will be allocated from the
Information Services and Parks &
Recreation Department accounts.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 7.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 7., Item Page 1, Packet Page 43 №11/25
• Additional costs: Credit card and Automated Clearing House (ACH)/eCheck processing fee
Payment processing fees for credit cards and ACH transactions—collected online, in person, and via mobile devices—are collected by Amilia and forwarded to Amilia’s current integrated merchant services partner, Paysafe, allowing us to accept different payment methods including Apple Pay. Merchant fees fluctuate based on transaction volume and these transaction amounts are not static. In FY 2025, merchant fees totaled approximately $168,470 based on annual revenue of $6,106,294 for Monterey Recreation and the Monterey Sports Center (General Fund and Facility Maintenance Funds). The City entered into a separate agreement with Paysafe in order to receive merchant identification, credit card terminals, and online account access. No fees are being paid directly to Paysafe as the fee is being paid directly from the end user at during the payment process.

The software and support services from Amilia is considered a sole source purchase because they are the only provider of support and services for their products; as such, no formal competitive process for this purchase was necessary.

Funding for this purchase is available in the Information Services and Parks and Recreation Departments.
• Software expenditures will be charged to the Information Services Division contractual services account: 710-030-0340-0000-4220
• Merchant service fees will be charged to Parks & Recreation Department accounts for:

Monterey Recreation: 101-500-5110-0000-4241
Monterey Sports Center: 101-500-5180-0000-4241
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
[CEQA determination paragraph approved by Planning Division] The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378).

In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Council could choose not to renew services with Amilia. This action is not recommended due to SmartRec meeting all of the criteria and functionality needed for providing parks and recreation services for the entire Department. This alternative would leave the Parks and Recreation Department without the ability to accept registrations, credit cards, and ACH payments both inperson and online.

DISCUSSION:

Amilia Technologies USA, Inc. is the provider of the SmartRec software suite, an eCommerce and recreation management platform used for enrichment activities, classes, camps, and Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 7., Item Page 2, Packet Page 44 №11/25
programs across the Parks & Recreation enterprise—including Monterey Recreation and the Monterey Sports Center. SmartRec enables residents and customers to find, register, pay for, and manage services more easily through a modern, cloud-based system.

Key features and benefits of SmartRec:

• Management and Scheduling
• Online Registration & Online Configurable Registration Forms • Payment Processing (credit card, ACH/eCheck, mobile)
• Facility Management & Online Facility Bookings
• Activities, Memberships, and Private Lessons
• Accounting and Reconciliation Reports
• Calendar Management
• Attendance and Activity Reporting
• Client Database & Personal Account Management
• Recurring Payments & Autopay feature-fully automated
• GIS/Community Segment (verifies residency/non residency) • Access Management
• Tech Support (live chat)
• Knowledge base for staff and customers
• Ability for members to upload their own photos
• Cloud-based SaaS system
• Latest technology and security including PCI and ADA compliance Operational History and Performance
SmartRec was launched to the public in December 2022, following the transition to a modern cloud-based platform that enabled the Parks & Recreation Department to rebuild programs and services post-COVID-19. Staff continue to leverage SmartRec to increase enrollment, revenue, marketing capabilities, and customer communication.
• FY 2019: Only 12.32% ($671,396) of revenue was collected online via the legacy RecTrac system
• FY 2025: 93.4% ($5,654,668) of revenue was collected online via SmartRec’s client selfservice system This significant shift demonstrates strong customer adoption and the system’s impact in increasing accessibility and operational efficiency.

The City originally purchased SmartRec on August 1, 2021, and renewed that agreement for three additional years on January 1, 2023. The current agreement expires December 31, 2025 (Ag-10553). The proposed cost for the new agreement for the SmartRec solution is $38,112 for the first year with annual increases not to exceed 5% plus costs associated with credit card and ACH fees. This agreement includes the purchase of cloud-hosted recreation software and professional services for ten years and with Council approval the option to renew thereafter from Amilia Technologies USA, Inc. Staff also recommends that the City Manager or designee be authorized to execute agreements for recreation software and merchant services.

NR/ab/sl
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 7., Item Page 3, Packet Page 45 №11/25
Attachments: 1. Resolution
e: Rafaela King, Finance Director
Stella Sandoval, Assistant Finance Director
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 7., Item Page 4, Packet Page 46 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH AMILIA TECHNOLOGIES USA, INC. FOR

PURCHASE OF CLOUD HOSTED RECREATION SOFTWARE AND PROFESSIONAL

SERVICES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS FOR

RECREATION SOFTWARE AND MERCHANT SERVICES
WHEREAS, the City originally purchased SmartRec on August 1, 2021 and renewed that agreement for three additional years on January 1, 2023. The current agreement expires December 31, 2025;
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Department proposes authorizing a new agreement for recreation software services that provides an eCommerce platform for activities and recreation allowing the community to find, register and pay for activities online; WHEREAS, staff has negotiated a ten-year service and support agreement with Amilia Technologies USA, Inc., the cost renewal for the SmartRec solution is $38,112 for the first year with annual increases not to exceed 5% plus costs associated with credit card and ACH fees; WHEREAS, staff has negotiated reasonable and competitive rates for credit card and ACH service/transaction fees;
WHEREAS, the software and support services from Amilia is considered a sole source purchase because they are the only provider of support and services for their products; as such, no formal competitive process for this purchase was necessary; WHEREAS, the funding for this purchase is available in the Information Services and Parks and Recreation Department funds. Software expenditures will be charged to the ISD contractual services account 710-030-0340-0000-4220 and merchant service fees will be charged to the Parks and Recreation Department accounts for Monterey Recreation, 101-500- 5110-0000-4241 and the Monterey Sports Center, 101-500-5180-0000-4241; WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City Council to delegate authority to the City Manager to execute any necessary agreements for recreation software and professional services including merchant services providers, on a form approved by the City Attorney; 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; and; Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 7., Item Page 5, Packet Page 47

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

1. Authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to execute a ten-year professional services agreement with Amilia Technologies USA Inc. for purchase of cloud hosted recreation software and professional services with the option to renew thereafter.

The software cost for the SmartRec solution is $38,112 for the first year with annual increases not to exceed 5% plus costs associated with credit card and automated clearing house (ACH) / echeck fees.

2. Authorizes the City Manager, or designee to execute agreements for recreation software and professional services including merchant services providers for credit card and automated clearing house (ACH) / eCheck fees, on a form approved by the City Attorney.

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, 12/16/2025, Item No. 7., Item Page 6, Packet Page 48 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Jason Bradley, General Services Field Operations Manager SUBJECT: Authorize a Budget Appropriation in the Amount of $461,153.47 from the Monterey Conference Center Reserve Fund to the Monterey Conference Center Building Maintenance Contractual Services Account to Complete Urgent Escalator Repairs (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 Finance Director, or their designee, to appropriate $461,153.47 from the
Monterey Conference Center (“MCC”) Reserve Fund (101-
2669) to the MCC Building Maintenance Contractual
Services account (101-600-6232-0000-4220) to complete
urgent escalator repairs.

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 Project is consistent with the City Council’s Value Drivers and Strategic Priorities of Quality of Life – “Respond effectively to neighborhood concerns;” Fiscal Stewardship- “Prioritize funding models and sources for facility
rehabilitation, repair, and replacement.”
This action is also consistent with Council policy to authorize all budget amendments.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The MCC Contractual Services account (101-600-6232-0000-4220) is fully encumbered, with an available balance of $0.00. To complete the urgent escalator repairs, an appropriation from the Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
approve a $461,153.47 budget
appropriation from the Monterey
Conference Center Reserve Fund
for urgent escalator repairs.
• The step chains of all four
escalators have reached their
adjustment limit and require
replacement to prevent failure and
shutdown.
• Kone, Inc., the City's maintenance
contractor, provided the repair
quote, and the MCC Reserve Fund
has sufficient funds for the
appropriation.
• Not addressing the repairs could
result in escalator failure, impacting
safety and functionality.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 8.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 8., Item Page 1, Packet Page 49 №11/25
MCC Reserve Fund (101-2669) is necessary; the current available balance of the MCC Reserve Fund is $3,338,739. As of November 21, 2025, sufficient funding is available for this appropriation request.

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 choose not to authorize the appropriation of funds to complete this repair; however, this is not recommended. The step chains of all four escalators are in danger of failure, triggering a fault and subsequent shutdown of the escalator. If that occurs, the escalators will be unable to resume service and function safely and properly until the chains are replaced.

DISCUSSION:

During the latest annual escalator inspection at the Monterey Conference Center, it was noted by Kone, Inc. that the step chains for all four escalators have been adjusted the maximum number of times to allow for continued operation. Over the normal course of operation, step chains stretch, a natural result of friction heat built up during constant use. As they stretch, the chains sag below a certain threshold, prompting the need to tighten the chain. There is a limited number of times this adjustment can occur; at this time, there is no more room to tighten the chains, indicating the urgent need for replacement or the escalators will fail.

Kone, Inc, the City’s On-Call Elevator/Escalator Maintenance & Repair Contractor has provided a quote to repair the step chains in the amount of $461,153.47. To proceed with this work, an appropriation from the MCC Reserve Fund is necessary.

AR/jb
Attachments: 1. Draft 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.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 8., Item Page 2, Packet Page 50 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AUTHORIZING A BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $461,153.47 FROM THE

MONTEREY CONFERENCE CENTER RESERVE FUND TO THE MONTEREY

CONFERENCE CENTER BUILDING MAINTENANCE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES

ACCOUNT TO COMPLETE URGENT ESCALATOR REPAIRS
WHEREAS, during the latest annual escalator inspection, it was determined the maximum step chain adjustments to all four escalators located at the Monterey Conference Center (“MCC”) had been performed due to normal wear and tear, indicating the necessity of chain replacement;
WHEREAS, Kone, Inc, the City’s On-Call Elevator/Escalator Maintenance & Repair Contractor has provided a quote to repair the step chains in the amount of $461,153.47; WHEREAS, in order to proceed with this work, an appropriation from the MCC Reserve Fund (101-2669) to the MCC Contractual Services Account (101-600-6232-0000-4220) is necessary;
WHEREAS, sufficient funding is available in the Conference Center Reserve Fund, which has a balance of $3,338,739; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby authorizes the Finance Director, or their designee, to appropriate $461,153.47 from the Monterey Conference Center Reserve Fund (101-2669) to the Monterey Conference Center Building Maintenance Contractual Services account (101-600-6232-0000- 4220) to complete urgent escalator repairs.

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

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 8., Item Page 3, Packet Page 51 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 8., Item Page 4, Packet Page 52 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Clementine Bonner Klein, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Appoint Councilmember Smith as Vice Mayor for 2026 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council appoint Councilmember Smith as
the Vice Mayor for 2026.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The City’s Charter, Section 3.2 provides: “Vice-Mayor.

The Council shall select one of its members to serve as Vice-Mayor. The Vice-Mayor shall serve in the absence
or incapacity of the Mayor and shall have all rights and duties of the Mayor in his/her absence. The term of ViceMayor shall be coterminous with that of the Mayor unless a specific term is established by the City Council. The Vice-Mayor shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council.” In December 1992, by minute action, the City Council set the current policy which has the term of office for the appointed Vice Mayor rotate on a yearly basis.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: This action has no fiscal implications.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). 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 Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
appoint Councilmember Ed Smith
as Vice Mayor for 2026.
• The Vice Mayor position rotates
annually to ensure each
Councilmember serves at least once
during their four-year term.
• Councilmember Smith, elected in
November 2022, has not yet served
as Vice Mayor in his current term.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 9.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 9., Item Page 1, Packet Page 53 №10/24
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:

If the Council prefers a different system for appointment, the Council may postpone appointment of a Vice Mayor until it meets in January, and request staff to bring alternate Vice Mayor appointment policy options forward at that time for Council’s potential adoption.

DISCUSSION:

In December 1992, by minute action, the City Council set the current policy which has the term of office for the appointed Vice Mayor rotate on a yearly basis. Since that time, the City Council has rotated the office of Vice Mayor each calendar year, with the intent to ensure that each Councilmember has an opportunity to serve as Vice Mayor at least once during their four-year term. These appointments have also often made with experience at the dais in mind. The following is a history of the Council’s recent Vice Mayor appointments:
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Alan Haffa
Tyller Williamson
Ed Smith
Alan Haffa
Kim Barber
Gino Garcia
Because Councilmember Smith was most recently elected in November 2022 and took office in December 2022, he has not yet served as Vice Mayor for a year in his current term. Therefore, to achieve the policy goal of allowing a member to serve as Vice Mayor at least once during their four-year term, the next Vice Mayor in the rotation would be Councilmember Ed Smith for 2026.

Staff recommends that the Council appoint Councilmember Smith as Vice Mayor for a one-year term beginning January 1, 2026.

CBK
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 Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 9., Item Page 2, Packet Page 54 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Janna Aldrete, Property Manager
SUBJECT: Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 256 Figueroa Street; Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Mike Zimmerman (Surfside Enterprises, Inc.); Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Lease Amendment (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council appoint agency negotiators for a
closed session conference with real property
negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8 to discuss and provide confidential direction
regarding a lease amendment for the premises located
at 256 Figueroa Street.

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:

City Council approval is required for this type of real estate transaction. Closed session confidential review
of real estate matters is allowed.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: The Levine Act does not apply to
appointing agency negotiators; however, it does apply
to the underlying lease amendment.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no fiscal implications related to the
recommendation to appoint agency negotiators.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
appoint agency negotiators for a
closed session to discuss a lease
amendment for 256 Figueroa Street.
• The property is leased to Surfside
Enterprises, Inc., which subleases
the entire building to two long-term
tenants operating Sapporo Sushi &
Steakhouse and London Bridge
Pub.
• The lease, set to expire in March
2027, has no extension options, and
Surfside is requesting a lease
extension.
• Closed session discussions are
necessary to provide confidential
direction on real estate matters.
• The City Council has the option to
appoint different negotiators but
staff recommends proceeding with
the proposed negotiators.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 10.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 10., Item Page 1, Packet Page 55 №11/25
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 CEQA Guidelines Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.

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

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could decide not to appoint agency negotiators or appoint different negotiators.

This is not recommended by staff. It is appropriate that the Council appoint agency negotiators and authorize a confidential discussion regarding the lease amendment.

DISCUSSION:

The property located at 256 Figueroa Street is subject to a lease between the City and Surfside Enterprises, Inc. (“Surfside”). The lease commenced April 1, 2017 and is scheduled to expire March 31, 2027. There are no options to extend the lease and Surfside is requesting a lease extension.

Surfside does not occupy any space in the building, with 100% of the building being subleased to two sublessees. Chong Ae Chung and Kwan Sik Kim (aka Tommy Kim) lease the second floor and operate Sapporo Sushi & Steakhouse. John Eales leases the first floor and operates London Bridge Pub. They are both long-term sublessees.

It is recommended to conduct a closed session discussion with the City’s real estate negotiators to discuss the request. Closed session discussions are allowed and appropriate to provide confidential direction for real estate matters.

KC/JA/ad
e: Mike Zimmerman, Surfside Enterprises, Inc.

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 Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 10., Item Page 2, Packet Page 56 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Janna Aldrete, Property Manager
SUBJECT: Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 9 Wharf II (Sandbar & Grill); Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties:

Craig Ling (Janeboy, Inc.) ; Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Lease Extension and New Lease Agreement (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council appoint agency negotiators for a
conference with real property negotiators pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.8 to discuss and
provide confidential direction regarding a lease extension and new ground lease for the premises located at 9
Wharf II, Sandbar & Grill.

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:

City Council approval is required for this type of real estate transaction. Closed session confidential review of real estate matters is allowed.

The Surplus Land Act does not apply to Tidelands
property.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no fiscal implications related to the recommendation to appoint agency negotiators.

Agenda Report Highlights
• City Council is recommended to
appoint agency negotiators for a
lease extension and new ground
lease for 9 Wharf II, Sandbar & Grill.
• The current lease for Sandbar &
Grill, a successful waterside
restaurant, expires on December
31, 2025.
• Closed session discussions are
appropriate for confidential real
estate matters like this lease
transaction.
• Alternatives include not appointing
negotiators or appointing different
ones, but staff recommends
proceeding with the appointment.
• The Surplus Land Act does not
apply to Tidelands property.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 11.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 11., Item Page 1, Packet Page 57 №11/24
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.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could decide not to appoint negotiators or appoint different negotiators. This is not recommended by staff. It is appropriate that the Council appoint agency negotiators and authorize a confidential discussion regarding a new ground lease.

DISCUSSION:

Mr. Craig Ling has leased the property
located at 9 Wharf II since 2002 when
he was assigned the existing ground
lease from Cereus, Inc. The Sandbar
& Grill is a successful restaurant
located on Wharf II and provides a
unique waterside view of the harbor.

The current ground lease is scheduled
to expire December 31, 2025, and Mr.

Ling has requested a new ground
lease.

City Council approval is required for
this type of lease transaction. Closed
session discussions are allowed and
appropriate for confidential direction in
real estate matters of this type.

JA/ad
e: Craig Ling, Janeboy, Inc.

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 Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 11., Item Page 2, Packet Page 58 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Janna Aldrete, Property Manager
SUBJECT: Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 560-570 Munras Avenue (Trader Joe’s Shopping Center); Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: ROIC Monterey, LLC; Under Negotiation:

Price and Terms of Payment for Consent to Assignment of Ground Lease to ZH Asheville, LLC (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council appoint agency negotiators for a
closed session conference with real property
negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section
54956.8 to discuss and provide confidential direction
regarding a lease assignment for the premises located
at 560-570 Munras Avenue.

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:

City Council approval is required for this type of real estate transaction. Closed session confidential review
of real estate matters is allowed.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: The Levine Act does not apply to the
appointment of agency negotiators but it does apply to
the underlying lease assignment.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no fiscal implications related to the
recommendation to appoint agency negotiators.

Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
appoint agency negotiators for a
closed session to discuss a lease
assignment for 560-570 Munras
Avenue.
• The ground lease with ROIC
Monterey, LLC is set to expire in
2032, with eight 5-year extension
options available.
• ROIC has requested the City’s
consent for the assignment of the
lease to ZH Asheville, LLC, with a
response deadline of December 17,
2025.
• Closed session discussions are
necessary to provide confidential
direction on the lease assignment
request.
• The City Council has the option to
appoint different negotiators but
staff recommends proceeding with
the proposed negotiators.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 12.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 12., Item Page 1, Packet Page 59 №11/25
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could decide not to appoint agency negotiators or appoint different negotiators.

This is not recommended by staff. It is appropriate that the Council appoint agency negotiators and authorize a confidential discussion regarding the lease assignment.

DISCUSSION:

The property is subject to a ground lease between the City and ROIC Monterey, LLC (“ROIC”).

The lease is scheduled to expire August 27, 2032 and there are eight (8) 5-year options to extend the lease.

On November 26, 2025, the City received a request from ROIC for the City to consent to the assignment and assumption of the ground lease. The improvements are currently in escrow with ZH Asheville, LLC, the proposed assignee. In accordance with the assignment and subleasing section of the lease, the City must provide its consent or its determination not to consent to the assignment within 21 days following receipt of the request for consent. The City’s written response will need to be provided to ROIC no later than December 17, 2025.

KC/JA/ad
e: Zachary Wender, Jones Day
David Willoughby, Kennedy, Archer & Giffen
Don LeBuhn, Cushman & Wakefield
Rick Ryan, Cushman & Wakefield
Michael Schoeder, Cushman & Wakefield
Adrienne Fors, Perform Properties/ROIC
Todd Zapolski, ZH Asheville, LLC
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 12., Item Page 2, Packet Page 60 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Letter in Support of the Proposed House Resolution: “Lower Presidio National Historic Park Study Act” (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 in support of the proposed House Resolution titled,
“Lower Presidio National Historic Park Study Act.”
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:

It is within the City’s policy for the City Council to
authorize the Mayor to sign letters of support or
opposition on proposed legislation. This legislation
proposed by Congressman Jimmy Panetta would direct
the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special
resource study for the Lower Presidio Historic Park in
Monterey.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no direct cost for the City Council to support this proposed legislation. A special resource study of
the Lower Presidio Historic Park would lay the
groundwork for potential establishment of a National
Historic Park at the site, reducing the City’s costs for maintenance costs. The City spends approximately $80,000 annually for ongoing maintenance costs, including Museum and Museum Restroom cleaning and general park maintenance such as mowing and litter control, at Lower Presidio Historic Park. In addition, the U.S. Army, over the years, has requested that the Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
authorize the Mayor to support the
proposed House Resolution for the
Lower Presidio National Historic
Park Study Act.
• The study aims to explore the
potential designation of Lower
Presidio Historic Park as a National
Historic Park managed by the
National Park Service.
• Federal management of the park
could reduce the City’s annual
maintenance costs and address
long-term financial challenges.
• Public feedback shows strong
support for increased programs and
services at the park and for federal
management to ensure accessibility
and maintenance.
• Congressman Jimmy Panetta plans
to introduce the House Resolution
to Congress, with support from the
City.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 13.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 1, Packet Page 61 №10/24
City fund and construct projects at a cost of up to $1.5 million in General Fund monies to design and construct. Environmental review costs are unknown for this project.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose not to support the special resource study, but that is not recommended. The City Council has expressed an interest in reducing operational costs for the City given the City’s $10 million structural budget deficit. This step would allow the U.S.

Department of the Interior to conduct a resource study that could pave the way for a potential National Historic Park at Lower Presidio, reducing the City’s operational costs, while maintaining public access for park users.

DISCUSSION:

Background
Since 1847, the United States Army has owned the land commonly known as the Lower Presidio. The City of Monterey has leased 25.15 acres of the Presidio from the U.S. Army with the understanding that it would be developed as a historic park. The rich history of this area contains historic sites dating back thousands of years from the Rumsen Ohlone First Peoples, through the 1602 and 1770 Spanish arrivals, and later Mexican and early American development. The site can be recognized as the founding site of Monterey and Alta California.

It was home to the first United States Army fort on the west coast and was later designated the Presidio of Monterey. The area has served as an active United States military installation since 1846.

At the City Council meeting on October 1, 2024, staff delivered a report describing the historical significance of this area, the improvements and investments made by the City as well as future needs for investments. The City Council asked staff to gather public feedback on the future of Lower Presidio. Staff has conducted outreach with the community and continues to gather public feedback. A formal report is expected to be presented to Council by April 2026.

In parallel, City staff have reached out to Congressmember Jimmy Panetta and the National Park Service to discuss the potential of Lower Presidio Historic Park to be designated and managed as a National Historic Park for generations to come. Congressman Panetta supports the creation of a special resource study for Lower Presidio through his proposed House Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 2, Packet Page 62 №10/24
Resolution (H.R.), the Lower Presidio National Historic Park Study Act.

Lower Presidio Lease: Opportunities and Challenges
The site was added as “El Castillo” to the National Register of Historic Places in 1971 for the importance to Rumsen Ohlone, military, and politics/government. In the early 1980s, the U.S.

Army proposed selling 123 acres of Lower Presidio and 81 acres of Huckleberry Hill to private developers, but then-Congressman Leon Panetta successfully advocated against it in 1984, enabling Monterey to lease the land for public use. The City rezoned the property to prevent development, and by 1986, discussions began on preserving it as a historic park. In 1996, Monterey secured a 50-year lease with the Army to develop the Lower Presidio Historic Park, committing to its maintenance and operation, including the Presidio Museum.

Over the years, more than $1 million from various sources, including grants and City funds, has supported restoration projects, such as museum improvements, monument restoration, and park enhancements. Today, annual maintenance costs for the park and museum total approximately $80,000.

In recent years, the Army has shifted its approach to the Lower Presidio Historic Park lease, requesting increased City investment, including a $1.5 million slope stabilization project along Lighthouse Curve. A 2021 Army letter acknowledged the City's financial struggles but emphasized lease obligations to protect the land. Maintenance challenges arise from maintenance challenges that arise from being a culturally and recognized sensitive archaeological site.

Given the City’s long-term financial challenges, staff continues to explore ways to reduce the City’s financial burden to maintain this federal property while keeping the Lower Presidio Historic Park to remain accessible to the public. The potential formation of a Lower Presidio National Historic Park, managed by the National Park Service, achieves this goal.

The Future of Lower Presidio Historic Park
At its meeting on March 18, 2025, the City Council approved a public engagement approach on the Future of Lower Presidio Historic Park, which included implementing community surveys and workshops, along with formal recommendations expected in 2026. Also discussed with Council was potential federal management of the park, continued investment, and potential early termination of the lease. The City Council shared their interest in learning more about the federal management options.

Preliminary survey feedback shows that overall, 83.87% public have responded that the condition and maintenance of the park is Good or Excellent, and respondents are requesting increase public programs and services at the Park. The City does not currently have the resources for providing increased resources at this leased property.

There is also majority support for another public entity to maintain this public space, with opportunities to increase public engagement and gather additional feedback as creation of a Lower Presidio National Historic Site is explored. In the City’s recent survey to date, 51.53% of respondents would support another qualified public entity [such as the National Park Service] maintaining and providing public access to Lower Presidio Historic Park other than the City of Monterey, provided that the park would remain accessible and well maintained. 29% were Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 3, Packet Page 63 №10/24
neutral, and 19.35% disagreed. Furthermore, 80.65% of respondents stated that they would support community-led volunteer efforts to improve the park.

Concept: Lower Presidio National Historic Park
The concept of Lower Presidio Historic Park as a federally-managed park under the U.S.

Department of the Interior’s National Park Service is worth exploring, given that the site is already owned by the Federal government There are examples of National Park Service sites open to the public that are on land that is part of the Department of Defense. A federally managed Lower Presidio National Historic Park would preserve public access and reduce costs to the City of Monterey.

The first step to gaining National Historic Park status and the National Park Service management of the site is to conduct a Special Resource Study. Congressman Panetta has worked with staff from the City Manager’s Office and Library & Museums Department to draft the House Resolution that would direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of the Lower Presidio Historic Park.

This process would support preserving public park access while ensuring the Army maintains access for their needs. The study requires consultation with interested Federal agencies, including the Department of Defense, and local governmental entities to consider alternatives for preservation, protection, and interpretation. Designation as a National Historic Park would help safeguard these irreplaceable resources for future generations while respecting the site’s continued function by the U.S. Army Garrison Presidio of Monterey use when needed. The Garrison Commander for the Army Garrison supports the study and is aware of the proposed House Resolution.

Congressman Panetta plans to introduce the House Resolution, The Lower Presidio National Historic Park Study Act, to Congress in the upcoming weeks. The Congressman may make minor changes to the historical background section to the House Resolution before it is submitted. Staff recommends the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign a letter supporting the proposed House Resolution at its December 16, 2026 meeting.

Attachments:

1. Draft Letter

2. Draft of Proposed House Resolution
e: Rep. Jimmy Panetta, U.S. House of Representatives
Senator Alex Padilla, U.S. Senate
Senator Adam Schiff, U.S. Senate
Colonel Dan Artino, U.S. Army Garrison Presidio of Monterey Parks and Recreation Commission
Historic Preservation Commission
Museums and Cultural Arts Commission
Old Monterey Foundation
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 Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 4, Packet Page 64 ATTACHMENT 1
December 17, 2025
The Honorable Jimmy Panetta
200 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Re: Support for H.R. - The Lower Presidio National Historic Park Study Act Dear Representative Panetta:

On behalf of the City of Monterey, we write to express our strong support for your proposed House Resolution, the “Lower Presidio National Historic Park Study Act.” This legislation directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of the Lower Presidio Historic Park in Monterey, California.

The Lower Presidio Historic Park is a site of unparalleled significance, recognizing the contributions of Indigenous cultures, marking the beginning of the Spanish occupation of Alta California, and establishing American sovereignty and military strength on the West Coast. It was home to the first United States Army fort on the west coast and was later designated the Presidio of Monterey. The area has served as an active United States military installation since 1846.

The City of Monterey has a longstanding partnership with the Army regarding this historic location. While Lower Presidio Historic Park is located within the U.S. Army Garrison Presidio of Monterey, we are proud that the site has been open to the public under a lease agreement with the City of Monterey since 1996. This arrangement demonstrates our commitment to preserving the cultural, historical, and archaeological assets found within the study area.

This special resource study is a critical step that could pave the way for a new National Historic Park. The purpose of this House Resolution is to evaluate the national significance of the study area and determine the suitability and feasibility of designating it as a unit of the National Park System. Such a designation would honor the legacy of those who secured California for the United States.

Importantly, this process will support preserving public park access while ensuring the Army maintains access for their needs. The study requires consultation with interested Federal agencies, including the Department of Defense, and local governmental entities to consider Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 5, Packet Page 65

Page 2 ends

alternatives for preservation, protection, and interpretation. Designation as a National Historic Park would help safeguard these irreplaceable resources for future generations while respecting the site’s continued function by the U.S. Army Garrison Presidio of Monterey use when needed.

Thank you for your leadership in sponsoring the Lower Presidio National Historic Park Study Act. We look forward to working alongside you to elevate the importance of the Lower Presidio Historic Park on the national stage.

Thank you again for your cooperation and continued partnership. If you have any questions regarding this request, please contact me or Assistant City Manager Nat Rojanasathira at (831) 646-3760 or via email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Tyller Williamson
Mayor
CC: Senator Alex Padilla, U.S. Senate
Senator Adam Schiff, U.S. Senate
Colonel Dan Artino, U.S. Army Garrison Presidio of Monterey City Manager
Assistant City Manager
Library & Museums Director
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 6, Packet Page 66 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 7, Packet Page 67 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 8, Packet Page 68 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 9, Packet Page 69 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 10, Packet Page 70 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 11, Packet Page 71 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 12, Packet Page 72 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 13, Packet Page 73 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 13., Item Page 14, Packet Page 74 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Clementine Bonner Klein, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Appoint Council Representatives to Outside Agencies and City Boards and Committees for 2026 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council appoint Council representatives
to outside agencies and City boards and committees
for the calendar year 2026.

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.

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

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:

Charter section 4.5(a)(3) provides: “[t]he Council shall appoint by a vote of three of its members, all
members of municipal boards, commissions and
committees and representatives of the City to other
agencies.” Charter section 4.9 provides:
“Councilmembers may be members of the governing
body of any board, commission, agency or other
intergovernmental agency to which the City is entitled to appoint a representative. A Councilmember shall be appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the City Council.” CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None.

Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council will appoint
representatives to outside agencies
and City boards and committees for
2026.
• Councilmembers are assigned roles
based on their interests, expertise,
and prior satisfaction with their
assignments.
• The Council will review and modify
the 2025 appointments as needed
for 2026, including addressing
missed replacements.
• Staff recommends appointing a
representative to the Monterey
Conference Center Advisory Board.
• The appointments aim to enhance
collaboration, transparency, and
community engagement while
ensuring effective governance.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 14.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 14., Item Page 1, Packet Page 75 №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. 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.

DISCUSSION:

In addition to their duties on the City Council, Councilmembers serve on the boards and committees of various outside agencies and City committees as well as a number of internal boards and committees of the City. It has been the Council’s past practice to review these assignments annually and make appointments for the upcoming calendar year. Historically, the Council has distributed outside agency assignments among Councilmembers according to their areas of interest and expertise. Additionally, when Councilmembers are content with their current assignments and the Council is satisfied with its representation, the Council often reappoints members to the same roles they have held previously.

Staff recommends that the City Council make appointments for 2026 to the outside agencies and City boards and committees. Staff requests that the Council include in its appointments a Council representative to the Monterey Conference Center Advisory Board, for which the prior representative was Councilmember Haffa and the alternate is still Mayor Williamson. When the 2025 appointments were made, replacing the representative was inadvertently missed.

The appointments currently in place in 2025 are included in the draft 2026 Appointments Worksheet (Attachment 1), and can be modified as desired by the Council. Note: The list also includes staff appointments made by the City Manager, for reference only (staff appointments are not made by the City Council).

CBK
Attachments: 1. 2026 Appointments Worksheet
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 Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 14., Item Page 2, Packet Page 76 ATTACHMENT 1
2026 REPRESENTATIVES TO OUTSIDE AGENCIES AND CITY BOARDS AND COMMITTEES Approved [date]
Legend: R = Representative; a = alternate (a1, a2, etc. = 1st alternate, 2nd alternate, etc.); V = Voting Member; L = Liaison/Observer

OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Appointments Made by City Council
(stipend, if applicable)
Role Meeting Date/Time
of ea. mo. unless specified
Barber Garcia Rasch Smith Williamson Staff Liaison
For reference only;
staff is appointed by
the City Manager.

Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments
Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact) ($50/mtg. funded by City through June 30, 2026)
V
2 nd Wed. or as sched.
6:00 p.m. R Hill
Cannery Row Business Improvement District
(Contact)
L
2 nd Wed.
8:30 a.m. R Schmidt
Central Coast Community Energy
Policy Board (Agendas/Contact)
Seats rotate per MOU between Pacific Grove, Carmel-by-the-Sea, and Monterey (Ag-10560). For the two-year term 1/2025-12/2026, Monterey holds primary representative seats on both boards.

R
4x/yr. and as sched.

Usually 1:30 p.m. R Bauman
(City Manager)
Community Human Services
Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact) V
3 rd Thurs.
11:00 a.m. a R Wyatt
Monterey County Fair
Fairgrounds Subcommittee (Agendas/Contact) L 1x/yr. or as needed. R Hill Laguna Grande Regional Park Joint Powers Agency
Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact)
V Quarterly or as sched.
6:00 p.m. R a
Norton,
Rojanasathira
Monterey County Regional Taxi Authority (MST Administers) Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact) ($50/mtg. plus mileage) V 1x/yr. or as sched. R M. Garcia Monterey One Water
Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact) ($100/mtg. plus mileage) V Last Mon.
6:00 p.m. a R Hill
Monterey Peninsula Chamber of Commerce
Council of Monterey Business Associations (Contact) L
4x/yr. on a Thurs.
2:00-3:00 p.m. R
Cole,
Rojanasathira
Monterey Peninsula Water Management District
Policy Advisory Committee (Agendas/Contact) V As needed R Cole Monterey Salinas Transit
Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact) ($100/mtg. plus mileage) V 2 nd Mon.
10:00 a.m. a1 R
M. Garcia – a2
Easterling – a3
New Monterey Business Association
Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact) L
2 nd Thurs.
9:00 a.m. R a Roveri
North Fremont Business District
Advisory Committee (Contact) L
2 nd Wed. most months
9:00 a.m. R a Sabdo
Old Monterey Business Association
Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact) V
2 nd Wed.
3:30 p.m. R Buggert
ReGen Monterey (F.K.A. Monterey Regional Waste Mgmt. District) Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact) ($100/mtg.; Chair receives add’l $100/mtg.) 4-year term to end 12/2026 even if elected office ends prior to expiration of term. Legislation does not allow for alternates.

V
3 rd Fri. (alt 4th Fri.)
9:00 a.m. R Terrasas
Seaside Groundwater Basin Watermaster
Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact) 2-year term to end 12/2027 V
1 st Wed. or as sched.
2:00 p.m. R a
Hennings,
Easterling
Transportation Agency for Monterey County
Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact) ($50/mtg.) V
4 th Wed. or as sched.
9:00 a.m. a1 R
M. Garcia – a2
Easterling – a3
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 14., Item Page 3, Packet Page 77 ATTACHMENT 1
2026 REPRESENTATIVES TO OUTSIDE AGENCIES AND CITY BOARDS AND COMMITTEES Approved [date]
Legend: R = Representative; a = alternate (a1, a2, etc. = 1st alternate, 2nd alternate, etc.); V = Voting Member; L = Liaison/Observer

CITY BOARDS AND COMMITTEES
Appointments Made by City Council
Meeting Date/Time
of ea. mo. unless specified
Barber Garcia Rasch Smith Williamson Staff Liaison
For reference only;
staff is appointed by
the City Manager.

Monterey Conference Center (MCC) Advisory Board Bimonthly Wed., or as sched. 8:30 a.m. a
Rojanasathira,
Hufford
Ocean View Plaza Community Services District Board
($10/mtg.) The City Council serves as the OVPCSD Board of Directors.

Quarterly, as adjourned from
regular Council meetings R R R R R
Subcommittee on Commission Appointments
Subcommittee members are Mayor and Vice Mayor per Council policy. As needed R R Klein Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program
(NCIP) Committee As needed R
Paulding,
Easterling

OUTSIDE AGENCIES
Appointments Made Externally
For reference only; City Council does not make these appointments.

Appointments by outside agencies are added here administratively.

Role Meeting Date/Time
of ea. mo. unless specified
Barber Garcia Rasch Smith Williamson Staff Liaison
For reference only;
staff is appointed by
the City Manager.

City Selection Committee (Monterey County)
(Agendas/Contact)
City is represented by Mayor (CA Gov Code § 50270).

V Each Jan. and as sched. R n/a
Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission
Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact)
Appointed by the City Selection Committee, comprised of the mayors of each city within the county. Term: May 1, 2023 to May 3, 2027.

V
4th Mon.
3:00 p.m. R Hill
See Monterey (Monterey County Convention & Visitors Bureau) Board of Directors (Agendas/Contact)
City representative is nominated and elected through an application process. Current two-year term ends June 30, 2026.

V
Last Thurs. or as sched.
3:00-5:00 p.m. R
Rojanasathira,
Hufford
STAFF REPRESENTS CITY, APPOINTED BY CITY MANAGER – for reference only Access Media Productions – Board of Directors – V, 3rd. Mon. quarterly, 12:00-1:00 p.m. – Huelga Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments – Admin. Committee – V – Cole Authority for California Cities Excess Liability (ACCEL) – Board of Directors – V, Thurs. Quarterly – King Central Coast Community Energy – Operations Board – R – Bauman (City Manager) (see rotation notes above under Policy Board) Coalition of Homeless Service Providers – Board of Directors, Housing Pipeline Committee, Leadership Council – L, as needed – Wyatt Intergovernmental Support Agreement (IGSA) Team, formerly Presidio Municipal Services Agency – V, as needed – Renny, Rojanasathira Monterey Bay Defense Alliance – V, 2nd Mon. 9:00 a.m. – Ackermann Monterey Bay Regional Climate Action Compact – L, as needed – Terrasas Monterey County Integrated Waste Management Task Force – V, as needed – Terrasas Monterey County Mosquito Abatement District – Board of Directors – V, 2nd Tue., or as sched., 12:00 p.m. ($100/mtg.) 2-year 1st term ends Jan. 2, 2026, following terms 4 yrs. – Glass Monterey County Military & Veterans Affairs Advisory Commission – L, 2nd Wed. 2:00 p.m. – Ackermann Monterey Peninsula Airport District – L, as needed – Hill Monterey Peninsula Water Management District – Technical Advisory Committee – V, as needed – Cole Monterey Regional Storm Water Management Program (MRWSMP) Management Committee – V, as needed – Anderson - R, Baggot/Kreutzer - a Transportation Agency for Monterey County – Technical Advisory Committee – V, 1st Thurs. 9:30 a.m. – M. Garcia - R, Easterling - a1, Roveri - a2 Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 14., Item Page 4, Packet Page 78 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Andrew Miller, Fire Chief
Prepared By: Patrick Moore, Assistant Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Receive an Update and Provide Direction to Staff on the Development of a First Responder Fee Program (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council receive a presentation and provide comments and direction on the development of a First
Responder Fee program.

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:

If the Council provides direction to move forward with a First Responder Fee program, the City will need to
adopt an ordinance to authorize a fee schedule update
and add a municipal code which would allow for the
collection of the fee. Internal Fire Department policies would be adopted with specific guidelines on how the
fees are processed and the procedures associated with
the fee.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The First Responder Fee is a cost recovery fee for
emergency medical services provided by the Fire
Department.

The revenue generated from the fee will offset the costs to provide emergency medical services.

Recovering the cost of this service will free up funds and alleviate the burden on General Fund resources to purchase equipment and apparatus and allow those resources to be allocated to other needs within the City.

Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is considering
implementing a First Responder Fee
program to recover costs for
emergency medical services
provided by the Fire Department.
• Two fee collection options were
proposed: Option 1, billing
insurance companies only, or
Option 2, billing both insurance
companies and patients, with Option
2 offering higher revenue potential.
• Option 2 includes a compassionate
billing clause to waive fees for
patients facing financial hardship or
specific circumstances.
• The fee is calculated at $327 per
call, with projected annual net
revenue of $515,372 under Option 2
after third-party billing costs.
• Staff recommends proceeding with
Option 2 due to its financial viability
and ability to offset costs for
emergency medical services.

Date: 12/16/2025
Item No.: 15.

Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 15., Item Page 1, Packet Page 79 №11/25
425397.1
A third-party billing agency will be retained to handle the revenue collection. The fee associated with providing this service will be captured during the billing process. A provision will be added for compassionate billing to allow for a waiver of the fee for patients experiencing financial hardship.

An escalator will be built in based upon the annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward region. The fee will be adjusted annually by the Finance Department published in the fee schedule.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City Council can decide to move forward with one of the options below for a First Responder Fee program or could decide to not move forward with a First Responder Fee program.

DISCUSSION:

Monterey Fire Department as an Emergency Medical Services Provider Fire Departments no longer just fight fires – the Monterey Fire Department (MFD) primarily responds to emergency medical services (EMS) calls providing Basic Life Support (BLS) or Advanced Life Support (ALS) care. As the number of EMS calls rises, traditional revenue sources (such as taxes and general fund allocations) are increasingly insufficient to fully cover the costs of the medical emergency responses. This fee helps offset the cost of medical assessments and emergency responses not covered by taxes or the general fund. Over 20 other fire agencies/cities in California have adopted a similar first responder fee program to help sustain these services.

Emergency Medical Services Responder Fee
In August 2025, staff introduced the concept of a ‘First Responder Fee’ as a deficit reduction strategy as the City addresses its $10 million structural budget deficit. Council expressed interest in this fee as a revenue generating measure and expressed interest in learning more.

The City’s authority to impose the Emergency Medical Services First Responder fee comes from the Charter and powers as a Charter City to impose service and benefit fees in compliance Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 15., Item Page 2, Packet Page 80 №11/25
425397.1
with Prop 26. It is the same authority that allows the City to charge any other service fee. (Cal.

Const., art. XI, § 7.)
The proposed fee was calculated based on an average of the fully burdened costs of responding personnel to an EMS call, the California State Office of Emergency Services hourly rate for fire apparatus, a per incident cost for EMS supplies and overhead costs for the billing.

The fee is proposed at $327 per call and the fee analysis is attached to this report.

Under the proposed program, the City will charge fees for emergency medical responses. There are two options for collecting First Responder Fees:
1) Bill insurance companies with a write off for those fees not collected; or 2) Bill insurance companies with any uncollected fees subsequently billed to the patient.

If insurance does not pay the fee, the invoice would then be sent to the patient for payment.

Staff contacted several Fire Departments who currently charge a First Responder Fee regarding their rates of return. Staff also contacted Wittman Enterprises, a third-party billing company who represents over 40 Fire Departments and has been collecting a First Responder Fee for over 15 years regarding their experience. Based upon this research, an expected gross rate of return (prior to paying a third-party billing company) ranges from 5-10% for agencies who only bill insurance companies (Option 1) and 40-50% for those who bill insurance companies and patient billing (Option 2).

Option 1: Insurance Company Billing Only
Under the first option, the benefit would be that the patient would not see a bill. The insurance company would be billed directly, and any uncollected fees would be waived. Also, patients who do not have insurance would not be responsible for the fee. This option would be less impactful to the administrative staff and would require less public outreach. The drawback is that there is a minimal rate of return. Based upon the data collected from fire departments who are currently operating this way an estimated rate of return of 6% was used for the projected revenue calculation.
• Medical Incidents in Monterey in 2024: 3,716
• Potential First Responder Fee: $327
• Estimated Rate of Return: 6%
• Gross Projected Annual Revenue: $72,908
• Net Projected Annual Revenue (subtracting cost for 3rd party billing): $17,168 Option 2: Insurance and Patient Billing
Under the second option, the benefit would be a much higher rate of return. One drawback is that since the patient could potentially be billed for this service, there would need to be significant public outreach to explain to users why the public is being charged a fee for paramedic service that historically been part of Fire Department service delivery and not charged to users. There would be an increase in administrative workload and also a change in process where the firefighters who are providing the care would also collect billing information from patients. Another administrative workload includes tracking billing information and Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 15., Item Page 3, Packet Page 81 №11/25
425397.1
compassionate billing waivers. Additional administrative staffing will be necessary to absorb the increased workload associated with option 2.

A compassionate billing clause associated with the fee will be included to coincide with the City Code Article 4, Section 19-103 (e)(4)(i). Additional examples of hardship may include victims of crime, end-of-life situations, chronic medical conditions or uninsured patients. Using the City of Roseville’s insurance and patient billing model, residents would complete a form and submit their request for fee waiver directly with the City. These waivers would be approved and tracked by City staff.

Even though the billing would be handled by a third-party vendor, additional time would be required by City staff to reconcile anomalies with the data provided to the billing company. The impact to the administrative staff was highlighted by agencies who charge a First Responder Fee.

Based upon the data collected from fire departments who are currently operating this way an estimated rate of return of 47% was used for the projected revenue calculation. • Medical Incidents in Monterey in 2024: 3,716
• Potential First Responder Fee: $327
• Estimated Rate of Return: 47%
• Gross Projected Annual Revenue: $571,112
• Net Projected Annual Revenue (subtracting cost for third party billing): $515,372 Because of the low rate of return, third party billing vendors typically charge by each incident, not by a percentage of revenue collected. It is estimated to cost between $15 and $20 per call.

With approximately 3,716 calls per year, the cost of a third-party billing vendor is estimated to cost between $55,740 and $74,320 per year. A cost of $15 per incident was used for the projected revenue calculation.

Staff recommends moving forward with implementing Option 2. Option 1 is not financially viable based upon the projected revenue. The projected revenue for Option 2 would be significant enough to offset the costs associated with implementing the fee.

AM/pm
Attachments: 1. First Responder Fee Analysis
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 Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 15., Item Page 4, Packet Page 82 1 FIRST RESPONDER FEE ANALYSIS
To develop a cost of services (or user fee) analysis, the City of Monterey’s Fire Department prepared this analysis using the Department’s personnel fully burdened costs, EMS operating budget, four (4) years of call data, Cal OES rates and an estimate of a cost recovery fee to determine a fee level that best suits the Department’s needs in recovering the expenditures related to providing these services. The data used and the fee proposed is currently for the City of Monterey and does not include data from the contracting jurisdictions.

Analysis
Fully Burdened First Responder Personnel Costs
Each medical call involves three staff members: a Firefighter, a Fire Engineer and a Fire Captain. At least one of the members is a licensed paramedic. The City of Monterey Finance Department calculates the fully burdened rate of each position each fiscal year using average hourly rates, benefit rates and overhead rates as shown in the table below.

Overhead costs are derived from the City’s Cost Allocation Plan.

Fiscal year 2025/2026
Fully Burdened Rate
Fire Captain $144.64
Fire Engineer $125.00
Firefighter $113.36
Call Data
The next step in the analysis was a review of the Department’s call data. The data below is for Emergency Medical Service (EMS) calls within the City of Monterey for the years of 2021 through 2024.

Average Time per EMS call 2021-2024
Average Time to
Respond
Average Time on
Scene
Average Time per
EMS Call
In hours 0.08 0.38 0.46
In hh:mm:ss 00:04:53 00:22:37 00:27:30
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 15., Item Page 5, Packet Page 83 2 Engine costs
Cal OES issues a Rate Letter each year for the California Fire Assistance Agreement (CFAA) orders and requests. Within the letter lists hourly reimbursement rates for emergency apparatus. The City of Monterey Fire Department also uses these rates for reimbursement for DUI incidents. The 2025 rates are below.

Emergency Apparatus Rates
Typing Hourly
Type I $173.47
Type II $163.55
Type III $156.74
Type IV – VII $150.47
Water Tender Tactical I $148.07
Water Tender Tactical II $127.21
The City of Monterey operates three (3) engines and one (1) aerial fire truck 24/7. Medic Engine 11, Medic Engine 12 and Medic Engine 13 are Type I engines and are staffed ALS at all times. The truck is staffed ALS as available. The engines respond first out to medical calls, so the Type I hourly rate of $173.47 is most appropriate for a reimbursement rate.

EMS Supplies and Service Costs
The City of Monterey Fire Department budgets for EMS supplies and services each year for Monterey and the Monterey Regional Airport. Supplies include gloves, masks, bandages, oxygen, etc. and services include service for equipment (such as the heart monitors and Lucas devices), Medical Director agreement, medical waste disposal, etc. For FY26, the department budgeted $99,000. A portion of this budget is used for the Monterey Regional Airport EMS supplies. To calculate the portion of the EMS budget to be allocated to the Airport, the EMS calls for the Airport and the City of Monterey were analyzed as below.

FY 25 EMS calls
City of Monterey Monterey Regional Airport
Total EMS Calls 3716 23
Percent of Calls 99.385% 0.615%
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 15., Item Page 6, Packet Page 84 3 Supply/Service Cost per call in Monterey
EMS Budget Monterey Percent of Calls Monterey EMS Budget $99,000 99.385% $98,391
Cost per Call
Monterey EMS Budget Monterey EMS Calls Cost per Call
$98,391 3,716 $26.64
Administrative Fee
The City of Monterey Fire Department will contract with a third-party administrator to bill and collect the First Responder fee. The administrative fee is estimated at 16% of the fee.

Calculation of the Fee
Fully
Burdened
Cost
Average
Estimated Time
per Call
Average Estimated cost of
Providing Medical
Services
Firefighter $113.36 0.46 $51.96
Engineer $125.00 0.46 $57.29
Fire Captain $144.64 0.46 $66.29
Engine Rate $173.47 0.46 $79.51
Supply/Service Cost $26.64
Subtotal $281.69
Administrative Fee 16% $45.07
Total $326.76
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 15., Item Page 7, Packet Page 85 4 Comparative Analysis
First Responder Fees have become more common in California in recent years as a way to recover the true costs of providing medical services. A summary of several First Responder Fees identified in nearby communities is shown below.
$327 $311
$502
$297
$323
$427
$225
$0
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
Proposed
City of
Monterey
El Dorado
County Fire
Protection
District
Sacramento
Metro Fire
Department
City of
Rocklin Fire
Department
City of
Benicia Fire
Department
City of San
Jose
Sonoma
County Fire
District
First Responder Fees
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 12/16/2025, Item No. 15., Item Page 8, Packet Page 86

Monterey City CouncilDecember 16, 2025

Monterey City Council
December 16, 2025