Agenda packet — Monterey City Council, February 17, 2026

Council Chamber
580 Pacific St.

Monterey, California

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Council Regular Meeting and
Closed Session
Tuesday, February 17, 2026
4:00 PM
Mayor
Tyller Williamson
Councilmembers
Kim Barber, District 1
Ed Smith, District 2
Jean Rasch, District 3
Gino Garcia, District 4
Interim City Manager
Lew Bauman
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.

February 17, 2026 4:00 PM
2 Call to Order
AFTERNOON SESSION: 4:00 p.m.

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

1. February 3, 2026 Regular Meeting (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Consent: Award of Construction Contracts

2. Awarding Three Professional Services Agreements in the Amount of $500,000 Each for Electrical Engineering Design Services for Projects Within the City of Monterey to:
(1) Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc.; (2) Advance Design Consultants, Inc.; and (3) Integrated Project Solutions (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.

3. Authorize the Police Chief to Execute a Memorandum of Understanding with the Community Human Services’ Street Outreach Program for Homeless Youth (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

4. Authorize the Fire Chief to Execute a Memorandum of Understanding with the Primary Participating Fire Agencies and Mobile Only Agencies Regarding Shared Use of Tablet Command (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

5. Amend Resolution 25-062 to Authorize the Allocation of $67,100 in Undistributed State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Grant Funds awarded in FY 2025-2026 to Gathering for Women - Monterey and Community Human Services to Assist Persons Experiencing Homelessness (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

6. Authorize Agreement with SHI International, Corp for Citywide Virtual Server and Data Storage Solution in the Amount of $445,582.06 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

7. Authorize the City of Monterey Cemetery El Encinal to Buy Back Cemetery Niche 39 in Wall Q Located in the Lakeside Columbarium for $3,974.48 payable to Mr. Armando Claude and Ms. Janice Atencio (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
February 17, 2026 4:00 PM
3 8. Adopt a Resolution to Oppose New and Existing Offshore Oil and Gas Drilling and Deep Seabed Mining and Authorize Submittal to the Federal Register (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

9. Designate the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, and Finance Director as Agents for the City of Monterey to Act on Behalf of the City for the Purpose of Obtaining Financial Disaster Assistance (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

10. Amend the Professional Services Agreement with ZFA Structural Engineers for the Fire Station 12 Renovation Geotechnical and Structural Analysis to increase the not-toexceed amount from $74,950 to $122,145 Effective August 5, 2025 ***NCIP*** (Exempt from CEQA, Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities) Consent: Other

11. Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 798 Del Monte Avenue; Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Anthony Giammanco (El Estero Boating); 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)

12. Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 177 Municipal Wharf #2; Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Robbie Torrise (Robbie's Ocean Fresh Seafood, 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)

13. Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 601 Wave Street, Suite 500; Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Adam Silverstein (Silverstein's Deli Delights, LLC); Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for New Lease Agreement (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
End of Consent Agenda
Afternoon Session Items
Public Hearing (Afternoon)
Public Hearings are held to receive a staff presentation and public comment on certain items prior to City Council action. NOTICE CONCERNING YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS: If you challenge the City Council’s zoning, planning, or land use decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing on the matter, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at the time of or prior to the public hearing. (Government Code section 65009.)

14. Approve a General Plan Map Amendment at 5 Mandeville Court (APN: 259-031-050- 000) from Medium Density Residential to Employment to Correct a Clerical Error (CEQA: Certified Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2023080034), Article 11, Section 15168(c))
February 17, 2026 4:00 PM
4 Public Appearance (Afternoon)
Public Appearance items are on non-routine issues that might stimulate public interest and comments.

15. Receive Public Testimony on the Proposal to Modify the Monterey County Tourism Improvement District (MCTID) Management District Plan 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)

16. Authorize Mayor to Sign Comment Letter on a Project Application Submitted to the County of Monterey for 711 Viejo Road (APN 103-011-015-000) that Proposes Construction of a 386,510 Square Foot Multi-Family Residential Building Consisting of 239 Dwelling Units - 191 Market Rate and 48 Low Income in the Unincorporated Area of the County of Monterey (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

17. Amend Resolution 25-058 Authorizing Changes to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget to Increase Revenues and Expenditures in the General Fund and Other Funds, Designate Funds into the Economic Uncertainty Reserve, and Update the Position Control List (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
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.

18. Closed Session Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: 177 Municipal Wharf #2
Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete
Negotiating Parties: Robbie Torrise (Robbie's Ocean Fresh Seafood, 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)

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

Shai and Mira Nissim v. City of Monterey (Monterey County Superior Court Case Nos. 25CV004945 and 25CV004949)(Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

20. Conference with Legal Counsel, Deciding Whether to Initiate Litigation Pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(d)(4) (One Case) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Recess
Reconvene
EVENING SESSION AGENDA: Approximately 7:00 p.m.

No discussion of a new item will be started after 10:30 p.m. unless agreed upon by Council.

February 17, 2026 4:00 PM
5 Pledge of Allegiance
General Public Comments, Continued
Any person who did not offer a general public comment in the afternoon session may speak to any item that is not on the agenda and that is in the City of Monterey’s subject matter jurisdiction.

Announcements from Closed Session
Evening Session Items
Presentations (Evening)

21. Receive a Presentation on the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) Committee’s Priority Voting Results Identifying Between $3 Million to $4 Million of Prior Year Projects for Defunding Pursuant to the City Council's Request (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Public Appearance (Evening)
Public Appearance items are on non-routine issues that might stimulate public interest and comments.

22. Declare a Fiscal Emergency Pursuant to California Constitution, Article XIIIC, Section 2(b) to Submit General Tax Measures to the Voters at the June 2, 2026 Election to Address Imminent Financial Risks (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)

23. Call a Special Election to Ask the Voters to Approve a Supplemental Transactions and Use Tax at the Rate of 0.375% for Nine Years and Request that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey Consolidate the Election with the Election to be Held on June 2, 2026 and to Conduct the Election on the City’s Behalf (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Council Comments
Councilmembers may ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement, or make a brief report on their activities. In addition, Councilmember or the City Council may provide a referral to staff or other resources for factual information. (Government Code section 54954.2(a)(3).)
City Manager Reports
The City Manager may make a brief report on their activities or a brief announcement. They may also ask for clarification or direction regarding scheduling of Council meetings and study sessions.

Adjournment
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on these matters within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, are available at: monterey.gov/submitted-comments and in the City Manager’s Office at 580 Pacific St., Room 1, Monterey, CA 93940 during regular business hours. 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.

February 17, 2026 4:00 PM
6 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

MINUTES

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

CITY OF MONTEREY
Tuesday, February 3, 2026
4:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 580 PACIFIC ST.

MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers

Present: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson

Absent: None
City Staff

Present:

Interim City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Finance Director, Police Chief, Library & Museums Director, Public Works Director, Parks and Recreation Director, City Clerk, Assistant Human Resources Director, Property Manager, Recreation Manager, Parks Supervisor, Assistant Fire Chief, Sports Center Manager, Administrative Analyst/Public Information Officer, Parking Superintendent, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer, Associate Planner, Associate Civil Engineer (x2), Environmental Regulations Analyst, Senior Park Maintenance Worker, Street Maintenance Lead Worker
Call to Order
Mayor Williamson called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. City Clerk Klein called the roll with the Council present as indicated above.

Pledge of Allegiance
Councilmember Smith led the Pledge.

AFTERNOON SESSION
Presentations (Afternoon)

1. Recognize February 2026 as Black History Month (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Recognized Black History Month
Councilmember Barber presented the proclamation and Councilmembers spoke about the importance of recognizing Black History Month and celebrating diversity.

Public comment was received from Esther Malkin, who spoke in appreciation of diversity on the Council dais and among City staff.

2. Receive a Presentation Introducing Nicole Banks as the City’s New Parks and Recreation Director (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Received presentation
Interim City Manager Bauman and Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira gave a short verbal presentation outlining the recruitment process, after which Parks and Recreation Director Banks gave a verbal presentation introducing herself and explaining her goals for the department. The Council made brief remarks welcoming Parks and Recreation Director Banks.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 1.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 1., Item Page 1, Packet Page 7 City Council Minutes February 3, 2026
2 Public comment was received from Esther Malkin, who welcomed Parks and Recreation Director Banks and said she looked forward to talking with her about Laguna Grande Park.

General Public Comments
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from: Adma Khoury, Mohammed, Bill Douros, and Esther Malkin.

Consent Agenda
Public comment on the Consent Items was solicited but not received.

On a motion by Councilmember Garcia, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following vote, the City Council approved the Consent Agenda:

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

3. January 20, 2026 Regular Meeting (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Approved

4. January 28, 2026 Special Meeting (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Approved
Consent: Award of Construction Contracts

5. Award a Construction Contract in the Amount of $420,095.00 to Southwest Pipeline and Trenchless Corp. for the Sanitary Sewer System Rehabilitation Aguajito Sewer Cured-inPlace Pipe (Exempt from CEQA, Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-011 C.S.

6. Award a Construction Contract to Eaton Corporation in the Amount of $192,950.00 for the Removal and Replacement of 90 Enersys Batteries at Camp Roberts – Project POM 25-011 ***IGSA*** (Categorically Excluded from NEPA 32 CFR, Part 651, Section II(g)(1) (CEQA Not a Project))
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-012 C.S.

Consent: Ordinances

7. 2nd Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 31 of the Monterey City Code to add a Ten-Foot Spacing Requirement between Temporary Signs on Private Property (Exempt from CEQA Article 19, Section 15303, Class 3)
Action: Adopted Ordinance No. 3716 C.S.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 1., Item Page 2, Packet Page 8 City Council Minutes February 3, 2026
3 Consent: Resolutions

8. Award a Job Order Contract in the Amount of $150,000 to Mary’s Pest Control, Inc. for Presidio of Monterey Pest Control Services ***IGSA*** (Categorically Excluded from NEPA 32 CFR, Part 651, Section II(g)(1) (CEQA Not a Project)) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-013 C.S.

9. Order Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Alvarado Street Maintenance District No. 85-1 (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-014 C.S.

10. Order Engineer’s Report for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Calle Principal Maintenance District No. 00-1 (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-015 C.S.

11. Award a Contract to ComSonics, Inc. for the Purchase of an Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) Camera System and Associated Software and Services for the Parking Division in an Amount Not to Exceed $182,255.27 (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-016 C.S.

Consent: Other

12. Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: 160 Municipal Wharf #2 and Approximately 3,238 Square Feet of Area Located Under the Wharf #2 Warehouse; Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Art Seavey and Amanda Fay (Monterey Abalone Company); 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)
Action: Appointed agency negotiators Cole and Aldrete
End of Consent Agenda
Afternoon Session Items
Public Appearance (Afternoon)

13. Appoint Dante G. Hall as City Manager, Approve Employment Contract, and Amend the City’s Full-Time Salary Schedule (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-017 C.S.

City Attorney Davi gave the staff presentation. The Council spoke about the recruitment, application, and interview process and explained why they had selected Mr. Hall out of the many qualified applicants. Appreciation was expressed for the recruiter, the internal candidates, the Human Resources Department, and the community stakeholders who had provided feedback.

Regarding the proposed salary, it was noted that the City desired to stay competitive and offer comparable salaries in order to recruit and retain talented employees.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 1., Item Page 3, Packet Page 9 City Council Minutes February 3, 2026
4 Public comment was received from Nina Beety, who expressed confidentiality concerns related to Councilmembers having had their cellular phones present in the room during interviews, and asserted that Mr. Hall had been responsible for the City of Hercules being named a "Smart City." The Council stated that the timeline and process for the recruitment had been publicly shared in Council meeting materials. It was stated that the Council had upheld the confidentiality of the interview process. It was stressed that Mr. Hall would bring policy decisions such as "Smart City" designations to the Council, and would uphold the direction that he received from the Council.

On a motion by Mayor Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Smith, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-017 C.S.:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Councilmember Smith left the Chamber at 5:03 p.m. and returned at 5:04 p.m.

14. Authorize the City Manager or Designee to Execute an Agreement with the Monterey County Office of Education (MCOE) for an Amount Not to Exceed $120,668.40 for Production and Broadcast Services (Not a Project Under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Authorized City Manager or designee to execute the agreement with MCOE Communications Manager Huelga gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.

Public comment was received from: Kodiak Adams and Noa Daniels of Access Media Productions ("AMP"), Nina Beety, and Esther Malkin, who all spoke in support of retaining AMP, for various reasons and citing benefits to working with a non-profit and to keeping services local.

The Council discussed the matter. It was expressed that AMP had been part of the Monterey community for many years and that the Councilmembers knew and liked the AMP employees. It was suggested that the matter could perhaps be postponed. The "local" qualification, which had not been a factor in the bid process, was discussed. It was discussed that the RFP could perhaps be redone with a local preference.

On question, City Attorney Davi said that a request for proposals ("RFP") would need to be reissued if the Council wished to develop new criteria. She advised that an RFP should not be crafted to reach a conclusion. She advised that in regards to local preference, MCOE would be considered local.

The Council stressed that the RFP process had been done fairly and equitably and that the Council had an obligation to honor the process. It was stated that MCOE was a proven service provider. It was stated that Salinas, where MCOE offices were located, was local, and that while it would be ideal to keep business local to the Monterey Peninsula, MCOE's recommended proposal would save the City money which it was stressed should be the Council's focus. It was noted that the Council had asked City staff to find cost savings opportunities and that the Council had an obligation to use residents' dollars wisely and thoughtfully.

The Council expressed its appreciation for AMP and AMP staff's services, and stressed that this was a challenging decision and that the Council understood the impact it would have. It was hoped that there would be employment opportunities for AMP staff at MCOE. It was stated that Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 1., Item Page 4, Packet Page 10 City Council Minutes February 3, 2026
5 beyond the confines of this contract decision, the City was here to partner and help find opportunities for AMP and its staff.

On a motion by Mayor Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Smith, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-018 C.S.:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Council Comments
Councilmember Rasch reported on her attendance at the Monterey Vista Neighborhood Association meeting and on the association's discussion on the City's tree ordinance. She asked that the City take time to review the draft ordinance together more deeply with the community before a final draft would be put through the rigors of the CEQA process. In response, Interim City Manager Bauman explained that the CEQA process was a thoughtful, deliberate process that would take time and would provide for the engagement with the community.

Councilmember Smith recognized Sabrina Hiltunen as the new Executive Director of the Old Monterey Business Association ("OMBA"). He said that the OMBA board had discussed downtown security and whether there was a way to get additional support from the City for the security presence downtown. He said he would bring a draft memo from OMBA to the City Manager and Police Chief.

Mayor Williamson, regarding the OMBA memo, noted that there might be an opportunity to adjust the security hours to assist downtown business owners. He said that typically the Council held a strategic planning discussion early in the calendar year and that this year the discussion would be put off for a few months so that it could be conducted together with the new City Manager. He said he was eager to get the tree ordinance done. He reported out from Monterey One Water (M1W), sharing a basic overview of M1W's operations and updates on its utility and electric reliability program, which he explained was intended to modernize and improve the energy needed for M1W's systems and was funded largely by grants.

Councilmember Smith left the Chamber at 5:55 p.m. and returned at 5:57 p.m.

City Manager Reports
Interim City Manager Bauman announced that there were vacancies available to be filled on the City's boards, commissions, and committees and gave information on how Monterey residents could apply. He invited all to buy tickets to attend the annual Chocolate and Wine event at the Monterey Public Library, hosted by the Monterey Public Library Friends and Foundation on Feb 21, 2026, and to attend the next free Pop Up Fun event at Montecito Park, scheduled for February 7, 2026.

Adjourn to Closed Session
Public comment on the closed session was solicited but not received. The Council adjourned to closed session at 6:02 p.m.

Closed Session (Afternoon)

15. Closed Session Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 1., Item Page 5, Packet Page 11 City Council Minutes February 3, 2026
6 Property: 160 Municipal Wharf #2 and Approximately 3,238 Square Feet of Area Located Under the Wharf #2 Warehouse
Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete
Negotiating Parties: Art Seavey and Amanda Fay (Monterey Abalone Company) 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)
Action: On a unanimous roll call vote, the Council gave confidential direction to its property negotiators

16. Conference with Legal Counsel, Deciding Whether to Initiate Litigation Pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(d)(4) (One Case - Re: Zoning Code Violations at 548 Mar Vista Dr., Monterey, Owned by Desiree Albert, Trustee) (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: On a unanimous roll call vote, the Council authorized the initiation of litigation related to 548 Mar Vista Drive
Adjournment
The Council adjourned at 6:50 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Tyller Williamson
City Clerk Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 1., Item Page 6, Packet Page 12 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Scott Bowen, Engineering Project Manager
SUBJECT: Awarding Three Professional Services Agreements in the Amount of $500,000 Each for Electrical Engineering Design Services for Projects Within the City of Monterey to: (1) Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc.; (2) Advance Design Consultants, Inc.; and (3) Integrated Project Solutions (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the attached resolutions:

1. Awarding a professional service agreement for
electrical engineering design services for
projects within the City of Monterey to Salas
O’Brien Engineers, Inc., for a term of one year,
with the option to extend for four additional oneyear terms, with an annual fee not to exceed $500,000;

2. Awarding a professional service agreement for
electrical engineering design services for
projects within the City of Monterey to Advance
Design Consultants, Inc., for a term of one year,
with the option to extend for four additional oneyear terms, with an annual fee not to exceed $500,000;

3. Awarding a professional service agreement for
electrical engineering design services for
projects within the City of Monterey to Integrated
Project Solutions, for a term of one year, with the
option to extend for four additional one-year
terms, with an annual fee not to exceed
$500,000; and

4. Authorizing the City Manager, or their designee,
to execute the professional services agreements
upon receipt of information required by the
request for proposal (RFP).

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.

Agenda Report Highlights
• The City of Monterey plans to award
three professional services
agreements for electrical
engineering design services to
Salas O’Brien Engineers, Advance
Design Consultants, and Integrated
Project Solutions, each with an
annual fee cap of $500,000.
• Agreements will have an initial oneyear term with the option to extend for four additional one-year terms.
• On-call consulting services will help
manage workload fluctuations,
ensure timely project completion,
and maintain compliance with
Federal and State standards.
• A selection committee evaluated 13
proposals, disqualifying four, and
selected the top three firms based
on expertise, capacity, and cost.
• Individual project task orders will be
issued based on specific needs,
negotiated scope, schedule, and
fees.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 2.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 1, Packet Page 13 №11/25
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.” This action is also consistent with Council policy to approve Professional Services Agreements exceeding $75,000. These services will augment the City’s capacity for project delivery, consistent with the City Council’s vision and strategic initiative.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: Yes.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Fees for on-call electrical engineering design services will be based on a project-by-project basis directly charged to individual project budgets. Each project is separately approved and budgeted by Council. Consultant support may cost more than having City staff deliver projects; however, consultants can provide specialized knowledge to support projects, improve the production rate, and provide additional quality assurance. The City is under no obligation to expend any funds under these professional services agreements.

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.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Council could decide that on-call electrical engineering design services are not required at this time, or that a separate request for proposals (RFP) process be performed for each individual project; however, these alternatives are not recommended. Requiring individual RFPs could cause a backlog of funded CIP and NCIP projects due to the staff time and resources necessary to conduct the RFP process. Alternatively, Council could choose to approve a contract for only one or two firms. This alternative is not recommended as this would reduce flexibility and limit available expertise for the required services.

DISCUSSION:

The City currently has a significant number of funded projects under development and design.

Previous Council actions to augment staff by using on-call electrical engineering design firms have allowed more projects to progress through the design and implementation phases. On-call Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 2, Packet Page 14 №11/25
consulting services benefit the City and its customers by providing flexibility to meet fluctuations in the workload by ensuring technical support is immediately available to assist staff. This process maximizes cost savings and timing to provide prompt customer service and project delivery. Appropriate resources are essential to ensure timely project completion, adherence to project specifications, and the pursuit of grant funding opportunities. Having multiple electrical engineering design services contracts in place allows the City to meet the needs for project implementation and provide confidence that the work is done to current Federal and State standards.

Individual project task orders will be issued based on the consultant’s expertise, workload capacity, services to be performed, schedule requirements, and negotiated hourly rates submitted in their proposal. All task orders will be issued based on an agreed-upon, written scope of work, implementation schedule, and maximum fee arrangements negotiated on a project-by-project basis.

Selection of the best-qualified firms was made in accordance with Section 28-30 of the City’s Purchasing Ordinance. On December 4, 2025, a request for proposals was issued and advertised through OpenGov. Thirteen (13) proposals were received on January 13, 2026. Four (4) proposals were disqualified due to the Fee Schedule not being provided as a separate and sealed document from the proposal. A selection committee consisting of City staff independently evaluated and ranked the remaining nine (9) proposals. After deliberations, all nine (9) were ranked with the top three (3) firms selected for award. Each agreement will have an initial oneyear term and a $500,000 aggregate not-to-exceed fee for all tasks provided. The agreement will include an option for four (4) additional one-year extensions also with an annual not-toexceed funding limit of $500,000.

AR/sb
Attachments:

1. Resolution awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc.

2. Resolution awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Advance Design Consultants, Inc.

3. Resolution awarding a Professional Services Agreement to Integrated Project Solutions

4. Consultant Selection Evaluation Criteria
e: Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc.

Advance Design Consultants, Inc.

Integrated Project Solutions
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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 3, Packet Page 15 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AWARDING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000

FOR ON-CALL ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY OF MONTEREY TO SALAS O’BRIEN ENGINEERS, INC.

WHEREAS, on December 4, 2025, the City of Monterey ("City") issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) seeking qualified firms to provide professional electrical engineering design services to assist the Public Works Department with the planning, design, preparation of specifications, engineering analysis, and construction support of public works projects; WHEREAS, on January 13, 2026, the City received thirteen (13) proposals from firms that perform this work;
WHEREAS, staff formed a selection committee to independently review and score each firm’s proposal based upon specific criteria in the RFP in accordance with Section 28-30 of the City’s Purchasing Ordinance;
WHEREAS, four (4) of the proposals were disqualified due to the Fee Schedule not being provided as a separate and sealed document from the proposal; WHEREAS, after deliberations, remaining nine (9) firms were ranked, with the top three (3) firms, Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc., Advance Design Consultants, Inc., and Integrated Project Solutions selected for award;
WHEREAS, the firms will provide services on an on-call, as-needed, project-specific basis as defined by the City, and all task orders will have a defined scope, schedule, and fee arrangement that will be negotiated based on the hourly rate schedule included in the agreement;
WHEREAS, the City reserves the right to enter into agreements with multiple firms to ensure the availability of necessary expertise and resources to fulfill the requirements of the contract; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.;

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

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 4, Packet Page 16

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

1. Awards a Professional Services Agreement for On-Call Electrical Engineering Design Services for Projects within the City of Monterey to Salas O’Brien Engineers, Inc., for a term of one year, with the option to extend for four (4) additional one-year terms, with an annual fee not-to-exceed limit of $500,000.00; and,

2. Authorizes the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the On-Call Electrical Engineering Design Services Agreements upon receipt of the information required by the Request for Proposals (“RFP”).

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

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 5, Packet Page 17 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AWARDING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000

FOR ON-CALL ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY OF MONTEREY TO ADVANCE DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 6, Packet Page 18

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

1. Awards a Professional Services Agreement for On-Call Electrical Engineering Design Services for Projects within the City of Monterey to Advance Design Consultants, Inc., for a term of one year, with the option to extend for four (4) additional one-year terms, with an annual fee not-to-exceed limit of $500,000.00; and,

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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 7, Packet Page 19 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AWARDING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $500,000

FOR ON-CALL ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR PROJECTS WITHIN THE CITY OF MONTEREY TO INTEGRATED PROJECT SOLUTIONS.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 8, Packet Page 20

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

1. Awards a Professional Services Agreement for On-Call Electrical Engineering Design Services for Projects within the City of Monterey to Integrated Project Solutions, for a term of one year, with the option to extend for four (4) additional oneyear terms, with an annual fee not-to-exceed limit of $500,000.00; and,

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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 9, Packet Page 21 Engineering Division
Project Name:

Service Area:

Criteria Rank
#1 #2 #3 #1 #2 #3 #1 #2 #3 #1 #2 #3 #1 #2 #3 #1 #2 #3
Advance Design
Consultants 2
Bureau Veritas North
America
7 E2 Consulting
Engineers, Inc 6
Fieldtek Electric LLC 5
GAJ Engineering LLC 9
Integrated Project
Solutions 3
NV5 Consultants Inc 4
Salas O'Brien 1
Xpress Technical
Services, Inc. 8

SUMMARY SCORE SHEET
On-Call Electrical Engineering Design Project Code: N/A Citywide Include On-Call Services: Yes
100 pts
Firm
Qualifications
& Experience
Project
References Project Team Approach to Const Manag.

Procedure &
Schedule
Total Points:
20 pts 20 pts 20 pts 30 pts 10 pts
Last Modified: 7/18/25 Page 1 of 1
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 10, Packet Page 22 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
FROM: David J. Hober, Chief of Police
Prepared By: Alma A. Murphy, Senior Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: Authorize the Police Chief to Execute a Memorandum of Understanding with the Community Human Services’ Street Outreach Program for Homeless Youth (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council authorize the Police Chief to
execute the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
outlining the collaborative relationship between the
Monterey Police Department and Community Human
Services’ Street Outreach Program for Homeless Youth
(CHS).

VALUE DRIVERS:

Develop and retain a quality workforce by providing
sufficient resources and support to develop, retain, and recruit a high quality city workforce.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

It is within the Council’s purview to authorize the Police Chief to execute a new MOU outlining a collaborative
relationship between the Monterey Police Department
and Community Human Services’ Street Outreach
Program for Homeless Youth. It is consistent with the
City Council’s Value Driver and Quality of Life Strategic Priorities: 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; recognize that our workforce is our greatest
resource for providing the service that our community
deserves by providing city staff with the tools,
resources, coaching, and feedback they need to
perform well.

Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
authorize the Police Chief to
execute an MOU with Community
Human Services’ Street Outreach
Program for Homeless Youth.
• The partnership aims to improve
safety, self-sufficiency, and housing
outcomes for homeless and at-risk
youth while reducing adverse
community impacts.
• CHS provides mental health,
homeless, and substance use
services to promote stability,
healthier relationships, and
educational attainment.
• CHS provides mental health,
homeless, and substance use
services to promote stability,
healthier relationships, and
educational attainment.
• Without the MOU, the Police
Department cannot effectively
coordinate outreach and service
connections for youth safety and
support.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 3.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 1, Packet Page 23 №11/25
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City could choose not to sign the new MOU, however this is not recommended. Without Council approval of the proposed collaborative effort, the Police Department will be unable to coordinate, whenever available and appropriate, direct communication, outreach meetings, case conferencing, and other forums that support service connection and youth safety, in alignment with shared goals and community needs.

DISCUSSION:

The proposed collaborative agreement aims to promote safety, improve outcomes related to self-sufficiency and obtain housing for the homeless and at-risk youth, and reduce adverse community impacts across the City of Monterey.

CHS is a non-profit organization that has provided mental health services, homeless services, and substance use services throughout Monterey County. Their services promote selfsufficiency, increased stability, healthier relationships, educational attainment, connection and support. A partnership between the Monterey Police Department and CHS is mutually beneficial and supports improved outcomes and broadens community benefits. The agreement ensures that each entity remains independent of each other.

The Monterey Police Department will exercise reasonable discretion consistent with safety protocols and applicable laws as it applies to confidential information and recommends that City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the Police Chief to execute the MOU with CHS.

DJH/am
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. MOU
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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 2, Packet Page 24 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

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

AUTHORIZING THE POLICE CHIEF TO EXECUTE A NEW MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE COMMUNITY HUMAN SERVICES’ STREET OUTREACH

PROGRAM FOR HOMELESS YOUTH
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey Police Department aims to promote safety, obtain housing for the homeless and at-risk youth, and reduce adverse community impacts across the City of Monterey in collaboration with the Community Human Services’ Street Outreach Program for Homeless Youth;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey Police Department and the Community Human Services’ Street Outreach Program for Homeless Youth maintain a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding a collaborative relationship in alignment with shared goals and community needs; 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 Police Chief to execute a Memorandum of Understanding with the Community Human Services’ Street Outreach Program for Homeless Youth regarding a collaborative agreement that aims to promote safety, improve outcomes related to self-sufficiency and obtain housing for the homeless and at-risk youth, and reduce adverse community impacts across the City of Monterey. The MOU remains in effect until modified or terminated by either party with 30 days’ written notice.

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

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 3, Packet Page 25 ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 4, Packet Page 26

Page 1 of 4 ends

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU)
Between
CHS’ Street Outreach Program for Homeless Youth (CHS)
and
Monterey Police Department (MPD)
Effective Date: 12.9.25
I. Purpose
A. This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) outlines the collaborative relationship between Community Human Services’ Street Outreach Program for Homeless Youth (CHS) and the Monterey Police Department (MPD). The purpose of this agreement is to formalize partnership practices, strengthen coordination of services, and support effective street outreach to homeless and atrisk youth. Through this collaboration, the parties aim to promote safety, improve client outcomes related to self-sufficiency and obtaining housing, and reduce adverse community impacts across Monterey County. The parties will enhance communication, streamline referrals, and engage in multidisciplinary activities serving youth up to age 24.

II. Background
A. CHS is a nonprofit Joint Powers Authority (JPA) that has provided mental health services, homeless services, and substance use services throughout Monterey County since 1969 and maintains active working relationships with cities, the county, school districts, and law enforcement agencies across multiple jurisdictions.

B. The Street Outreach Program for Homeless Youth builds relationships with homeless and at-risk youth and engages them in services that promote selfsufficiency, increased stability, healthier relationships, improved income and educational attainment, connection to applicable referrals, and support in obtaining housing.

C. Partnerships with law enforcement jurisdictions are mutually beneficial and support improved client outcomes, stronger CHS program outcomes, enhanced police department outcomes, and broader community benefits across Monterey County.

D. This MOU provides a standard framework to formalize collaboration with any police department and is informed by CHS’s prior collaborative work with law enforcement through both formal and informal agreements.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 5, Packet Page 27

Page 2 of 4 ends

III. Scope of Collaboration
A. Participation in Collaborative Meetings
1) Police Departments often host multidisciplinary meetings with service providers and other departments. Whenever available and appropriate, CHS will participate in these MPD meetings, including case conferencing, outreach coordination meetings, and other forums that support service connection, youth safety, and coordinated outreach.

Likewise, when CHS hosts multidisciplinary meetings, MPD will participate whenever available and appropriate.

B. Partnership Expansion
1) CHS and MPD will use reasonable efforts to strengthen, formalize, and expand collaborative practices across jurisdictions where working relationships exist or emerge, in alignment with shared goals and community needs.

C. Field-Based Collaboration
1) MPD personnel may contact CHS when they encounter individuals who fall within CHS’s service population, and CHS may contact MPD when coordination would support youth safety or service connection. The parties will provide program information and support to one another through direct communication, case conferencing, presentations, outreach materials, and field-based engagement, as appropriate and when requested.

D. Mutual Referrals and Communication
1) When CHS encounters situations requiring MPD involvement, CHS will contact MPD consistent with safety protocols and applicable laws. 2) When MPD encounters homeless or at-risk youth who may benefit from CHS services, MPD will use best efforts to notify or refer these individuals to CHS when appropriate and legally permissible. 3) The parties will maintain regular communication to coordinate outreach, share non-confidential information, and resolve operational concerns.

E. Coordinated Outreach and Joint Activities
1) When appropriate and applicable, CHS and MPD will collaborate during community outreach, youth engagement activities, and non-crisis interactions involving homeless youth, including joint field outreach or ride-along participation when suitable and permitted by MPD policy.

F. Training and Information Sharing
1) CHS may provide MPD with in-service training on CHS programs, referral processes, youth engagement strategies, and available community resources.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 6, Packet Page 28

Page 3 of 4 ends

2) MPD may provide CHS with information or training that supports safe and effective coordination.
3) Information may be shared through presentations, meetings, direct communication, and distributed materials.

IV. Confidentiality
A. MPD may contact CHS about individuals encountered in the community who appear to fall within CHS’s service population. This does not violate confidentiality because such individuals are not CHS clients unless already enrolled. Once an individual becomes a CHS client, confidentiality laws apply, and CHS may only confirm or disclose information when legally permitted, such as when a mandated reporting obligation applies, when there is an imminent risk of serious harm, during a medical emergency, under a valid court order, or when another lawful exception exists. Information-sharing will occur in accordance with all applicable confidentiality laws to support coordinated outreach and youth safety. MPD may share observations with CHS, while CHS will share client information only when legally permitted.

B. Both parties will comply with all applicable confidentiality laws, including HIPAA, the HITECH Act, 45 CFR Parts 160 and 164, the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA), Welfare and Institutions Code 5328, and 42 CFR Part 2 when applicable.

C. Protected Health Information (PHI), Personally Identifiable Information (PII), and other confidential client information will only be shared as permitted by law, including when including but not limited to client authorization or a legally recognized exception applies. This MOU does not authorize disclosure beyond what federal or state law allows.

D. The parties may exchange non-confidential information, or information that does not identify a CHS client, to support coordinated outreach, youth safety, and service connection.

E. Any unauthorized use or disclosure of confidential information will be promptly reported to the other party according to applicable federal and state requirements and each party’s internal policies.

F. Each party will ensure that staff involved in collaborative activities receive training on confidentiality requirements, including HIPAA, CMIA, WIC 5328, 42 CFR Part 2, mandated reporting obligations, and the expectations of this MOU.

G. Third parties who may access confidential information must sign appropriate confidentiality agreements unless an existing agreement already governs their access.

H. When confidentiality requirements differ, the more restrictive standard will apply.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 7, Packet Page 29

Page 4 of 4 ends

V. Relationship of Parties
A. CHS and MPD remain independent entities. This MOU does not create an agency, partnership, or employment relationship. Neither party may bind the other except as expressly stated. CHS staff do not act in a law enforcement capacity.

VI. Compliance
A. Both parties agree to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and relevant policies and procedures relating to the activities conducted under this MOU.

VII. Term and Termination
A. This MOU is effective on the date signed by both parties and remains in effect until modified or terminated by either party with 30 days written notice.

Confidentiality obligations survive termination.

VIII. Authority
A. Each individual executing this MOU affirms that they are authorized to sign on behalf of their respective organization and that the agreement is binding according to its terms. Each party is responsible for obtaining any required internal approval before execution.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Community Human Services
Name:

Signature:

Title:

Date:

Monterey Police Department (MPD)
Name:

Signature:

Title:

Date:

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 8, Packet Page 30 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Patrick Moore, Fire Chief
Prepared By: Cheryl Kouretas, Senior Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: Authorize the Fire Chief to Execute a Memorandum of Understanding with the Primary Participating Fire Agencies and Mobile Only Agencies Regarding Shared Use of Tablet Command (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council authorize the Fire Chief to execute a new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the
primary participating fire agencies and mobile only agencies regarding shared use of Tablet Command. The primary
participating agencies are the City of Monterey, City of Marina, City of Salinas, City of Greenfield, City of Seaside, Monterey County Regional Fire District and North Monterey County Fire District. The mobile only agencies are Big Sur Volunteer Fire Brigade, Correctional Training
Facility/Salinas Valley State Prison California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Fire Department, Gonzales Fire Department and Mid Coast Fire Brigade.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

It is within the Council’s purview to authorize the Fire Chief to execute a new MOA regarding the terms for shared
participation, governance and cost responsibilities related to the joint use of the Tablet Command incident management system.

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

There is no cost to execute a new MOU. The City of Monterey is party to the 911 Emergency Communications Agreement with the County of Monterey. The City pays for 911 dispatch Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
authorize the Fire Chief to execute a
new Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) for shared use of the Tablet
Command system.
• Tablet Command is a mobile
command-and-control platform that
enhances situational awareness and
decision-making for public safety
teams.
• The MOU establishes guidelines for
the use, governance, and costsharing of Tablet Command among participating fire agencies.
• The City of Monterey is part of the
911 Emergency Communications
Agreement, which includes the cost
for Tablet Command services
Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 4.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 4., Item Page 1, Packet Page 31 №11/25
services under the agreement which includes the cost for Tablet Command Services. This MOU establishes the guidelines of the system.

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:

There are no alternatives. The City of Monterey is party to the 911 Emergency Communications Agreement with the County of Monterey. The City pays for 911 dispatch services under the agreement which includes Tablet Command. The MOU establishes the guidelines of Tablet Command.

DISCUSSION:

The City of Monterey is party to the 911 Emergency Communications Agreement with the County of Monterey. The Emergency Communications Executive Board approved an agreement with Tablet Command on behalf of the participating agencies. The administration and cost sharing of the services is managed by the County of Monterey under the current 911 Emergency Communications Agreement. The new Memorandum of Understanding is to establish guidelines for use of Tablet Command by existing and future fire agencies.

Tablet Command is a mobile command-and-control platform that enables public safety teams to manage operations with greater speed and clarity. The system brings together mapping, unit locations, sensor feeds, and aerial data into one shared operational view, helping departments maintain situational awareness in real time. Its features include mission planning, live tracking, and reporting, all designed to support fast, informed decision-making. Built for use on tablets and other mobile devices, Tablet Command delivers critical information directly to the field, improving coordination and effectiveness during complex or rapidly evolving operations.

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the Fire Chief to execute a new memorandum of understanding with the primary participating fire agencies and mobile only agencies regarding shared use of Tablet Command.

PM/ck
Attachments: 1. Resolution
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 4., Item Page 2, Packet Page 32 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

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

AUTHORIZING THE FIRE CHIEF TO EXECUTE A NEW MEMORANDUM OF

UNDERSTANDING WITH THE PRIMARY PARTICIPATING FIRE AGENCIES AND MOBILE

ONLY AGENCIES REGARDING SHARED USE OF TABLET COMMAND
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey is party to the 911 Emergency Communications Agreement with the County of Monterey;
WHEREAS, under the current 911 Emergency Communications Agreement, the Emergency Communications Executive Board approved an agreement with Tablet Command on behalf of the participating agencies;
WHEREAS, the Primary Participating Fire Agencies (City of Monterey, City of Marina, City of Salinas, City of Greenfield, City of Seaside, Monterey County Regional Fire District and North Monterey County Fire District) and the Mobile Only Agencies (Big Sur Volunteer Fire Brigade, Correctional Training Facility/Salinas Valley State Prison California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Fire Department, Gonzales Fire Department and Mid Coast Fire Brigade) wish to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding to establish guidelines for use of Tablet Command by existing and future fire agencies; and WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby authorizes the Fire Chief to execute a new Memorandum of Understanding with the Primary Participating Fire Agencies and Mobile Only Agencies Regarding Shared Use of Tablet Command.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 4., Item Page 3, Packet Page 33 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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 4., Item Page 4, Packet Page 34 Council
Agenda Report
№10/24
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Anastacia Wyatt, Housing Manager
SUBJECT: Amend Resolution 25-062 to Authorize the Allocation of $67,100 in Undistributed State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) Grant Funds awarded in FY 2025- 2026 to Gathering for Women - Monterey and Community Human Services to Assist Persons Experiencing Homelessness (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

Amend Resolution 25-062 to allocate $67,100 in
undistributed PLHA grant funding to Gathering for
Women and Community Human Services to assist
persons experiencing homelessness and authorize the
City Manager to amend those FY 2025-2026 PLHA
agreements.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The State of California Permanent Local Housing
Allocation (PLHA) program provides funding to local
governments for housing related projects and programs
that assist in addressing unmet housing needs of their
local communities. The grant funds will support the City Council goals regarding affordable housing and
supporting housing services for its residents, including the City Council value driver of “working to improve the quality of life of our residents…ensuring that Monterey remains a safe and welcoming place to live, work, and
visit.”
Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council plans to amend
Resolution 25-062 to reallocate
$67,100 in undistributed PLHA grant
funds to Gathering for Women and
Community Human Services for
homeless services.
• Downtown Streets, Inc. will not
receive its allocated funds due to its
closure, and the funds will be
redistributed to other grantees.
• Gathering for Women and
Community Human Services will
receive increased funding to support
programs assisting individuals
experiencing homelessness.
• The City must execute agreements
to expend FY 2021-2022 PLHA
funds ($199,132) by March 1, 2026,
in compliance with the Council’s
adopted five-year PLHA plan.
• PLHA funds aim to address
affordable housing and
homelessness through services like
rapid rehousing, rental assistance,
and shelter operations.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 5.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 5., Item Page 1, Packet Page 35 №10/24
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: Yes.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The City’s 5-Year PLHA Plan period is from Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 - FY 2024. The City expects to receive funds in the amount of $672,805 over the 5-year planning period. The City would expend funds that would be offset by grant funds. Funds are dependent on State finances and revenues received from a $75 recording fee per property collected from the sale of properties statewide. The City is allowed to apply 5% of the grant award for administrative costs. The grant funds are expenditures under the following PLHA Expenditure Account: 101-400-4305-0000- 4703.

The following are PLHA funds available to the City (Activity #6 refers to homeless services described in more detail in the discussion section below):

FY 2019-2020: $116,419 (Awarded to MidPen Housing for Predevelopment Costs) FY 2020-2021: $180,952 (Activity #6) – to be expended in FY 2024-2025 FY 2021-2022: $199,132 (Activity #6) – to be expended in FY 2024-2026 FY 2022-2023: $99,805 (Activity #6) – to be expended in FY 2025-2027 FY 2023-2024: $76,497 (Activity #6) – to be expended in FY 2026-2028 Total $672,805
Agreements to expend grant funds in the amount of $199,132 must be submitted to the state to meet the request for funds deadline of March 1, 2026 and are appropriated in the City’s FY 2025-2026 budget. Grant funds in the amount of $199,132 will be expended in the FY 2025- 2026 budget. The City awarded Downtown Streets, Inc. PLHA grant funds in the amount of $67,100 in FY 2025-2026. These funds reflect the PLHA program’s FY 2021-2022 funding year.

The table below shows the approved distribution of grant funds in Resolution 25-062 dated June 17, 2025 to local homeless services providers in accordance with the City’s adopted PLHA 5- Year Plan.

Downtown Streets, Inc. notified the City that they would be closing their doors in October 2025.

Downtown Streets, Inc. did not execute a grant agreement with the City and did not receive the funding from the City. The City is recommending to allocate the grant funds evenly to the awarded grantees to expend the funds in the FY 2025-2026 funding agreement and ensure the expenditure of PLHA funding. The City is recommending to allocate $33,550 to Community Human Services, increasing their total award in FY 2025-2026 to $122,625.40 and Gathering for Women increasing their total award to $66,550. The table below details the updated funding amounts.

Request for Funds
Deadline 4/30/25
Request for Funds
Deadline 4/30/26
PLHA
Subgrantee
Requested
Amount by
Subgrantee FY 20-21 FY 21-22
Downtown Streets Team Downtown Streets Team $ 67,090.00 $ - $ 67,100.00 Gathering for Woman Expanding Hope $ 32,170.00 $ 50,000 $ 33,000 Community Human Services Casa De Noche Buena & Shuman HeartHouse Homeless Shelter $ 100,000.00 $ 121,904.40 $ 89,075.40
City Admin $ 9,047.60 $ 9,956.60
Total $ 199,260.00 $ 180,952.00 $ 199,132.00
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 5., Item Page 2, Packet Page 36 №10/24
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

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

Because the proposed action does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. The appropriate level of CEQA review will be conducted on the future project prior to the City taking any action and on any future development of City property. No decision is considered by the City Council at this time that could be analyzed through the CEQA process.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

No alternatives are recommended as the City must provide executed agreements to expend FY 2021-2022 funds ($199,132) by March 1, 2026.

DISCUSSION:

The City Council is being asked to allocate undistributed funds for homeless services in compliance with the Council adopted five-year PLHA plan.

Background
With the adoption of Resolution 24-104, the City created a 5-Year Plan for Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) funding based on eligible activities under PLHA. The purpose of PLHA is to provide a permanent source of funding to all local governments in California to help cities and counties implement plans to increase the affordable housing stock.

Funds may be utilized to assist persons who are experiencing or at risk of homelessness, including, but not limited to, providing rapid rehousing, rental assistance, supportive/case management services that allow people to obtain and retain housing, operating and capital costs for navigation centers and emergency shelters, and the new construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of permanent and transitional housing.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 5., Item Page 3, Packet Page 37 №10/24
Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) for PLHA funds
The City released a NOFA for PLHA grant funding on October 9, 2024 with a deadline for December 13, 2024 deadline. The organizations that applied for funding included Downtown Streets Team, Gathering for Women, and Community Human Services. Resolution 25-062 awarded funds to the Downtown Streets Team ($67,100), Gathering for Women ($33,000), and Community Human Services ($89,075). The funding allotted to Downtown Streets Team is recommended to be allocated to Gathering for Women and Community Human Services given the closure of the Downtown Streets Team. These agencies will provide homeless services in the City.

Conclusion
Staff recommends that the Council amend Resolution 25-062 to allocate the undistributed funds ($67,100) for vital homeless programs and that the City Manager be authorized to enter into amended agreements with Community Human Services and Gathering for Women – Monterey.

KC/aw
Attachments: 1. Resolution
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 5., Item Page 4, Packet Page 38 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AMENDING RESOLUTION 25-062 TO AUTHORIZE THE ALLOCATION OF $67,100 IN

UNDISTRIBUTED STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (HCD) PERMANENT LOCAL HOUSING ALLOCATION (PLHA) PROGRAM GRANT FUNDS TO GATHERING FOR WOMEN - MONTEREY AND

COMMUNITY HUMAN SERVICES TO ASSIST PERSONS EXPERIENCING

HOMELESSNESS
WHERAS, the City passed Resolution 25-062 Distributing Awards of $199,132 in State, HCD PLHA Funds to Downtown Streets, Inc. ($67,100), Gathering for Women – Monterey ($33,000), Community Human Services ($89,075.40), and City Grant Administration in the amount of $9,956.60;
WHEREAS, Downtown Streets, Inc. announced the closure of the organization in October 2025 and did not enter into a contract as authorized by Resolution 25-062 and did not receive the $67,100 in funding;
WHEREAS, with this action, the City of Monterey will evenly reallocate the unexpended $67,100 in PLHA funds originally awarded to Downtown Streets, Inc. to Gathering for Women ($33,550) and Community Human Services ( $33,550). This action increases the allocation of funding from $33,000 to $66,550 for Gathering for Women – Monterey and increases the allocation of funding from $89,075.40 to $122,625.40 for Community Human Services; and WHEREAS, the City of Monterey Planning Division determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Article 5, Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.

Because the proposed action has no potential to cause any effect on the environment, this matter is not a project. Because the proposed action does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. The appropriate level of CEQA review will be conducted on the future project prior to the City taking any action and on any future development of City property. No decision is considered by the City Council at this time that could be analyzed through the CEQA process;

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

1. Amends Section 2 of Resolution 25-062 to read as follows (deletions shown in strike through and additions shown in red):

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 5., Item Page 5, Packet Page 39 “Awards $67,100 to Downtown Streets, Inc., $33,000 $67,550 to Gathering For Women - Monterey, and $89,075.40 $122,625.40 to Community Human Services for the provision of homeless services and $9,956.60 for City administration of the grant (administration is allowed at five percent of the grant);”

2. Amends Section 3 of Resolution 25-062 to read as follows deletions shown in strike through and additions shown in red):
“Authorizes the City Manager to enter into agreements with Downtown Streets Team, Gathering For Women, and Community Human Services for expenditure of the grant funds in FY 2025-2026.”

3. Adds a new Section 4 to Resolution 25-062 to read as follows:
“The City Manager is authorized to amend the agreement with Gathering for Women (AG-12744) to reflect the increase in the contract amount from $33,000 to $67,550 and to amend the agreement with Community Human Services (AG-12746) to reflect the increase in the contract amount from $89,075.40 to $122,625.40.”

4. All other provisions in Resolution 25-062 remain in full force and effect.

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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 5., Item Page 6, Packet Page 40 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
Prepared By: Angie Blake, Chief Information Officer
SUBJECT: Authorize Agreement with SHI International, Corp for Citywide Virtual Server and Data Storage Solution in the Amount of $445,582.06 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt a resolution to authorize the City Manager,
or designee, to enter into a contract with SHI
International, Corp for Citywide Virtual Server
and Data Storage Solution.

2. Authorize staff to expend up to $22,279.00 to
address unforeseen project costs with hardware,
software, or service needs.

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

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Monterey City Code section 28-15(c)(3) allows for an
exemption from formal bidding requirements in cases
where the contract or purchase is capable of being
performed through purchasing contracts negotiated by
another governmental agency that utilized acceptable
bidding procedures (“piggyback” agreements). This
Agenda Report Highlights
• The City of Monterey plans to
replace outdated virtual server and
data storage infrastructure to ensure
reliable and secure operations.
• SHI International Corp was selected
for the project at a cost of
$445,582.06, with an additional
$22,279 contingency allocation for
unforeseen expenses.
• The new solution consolidates
server, storage, and virtualization
technologies into a unified system
with cloud-based disaster recovery
capabilities.
• The project includes five years of
licensing, support, maintenance,
and professional implementation
services, with an anticipated useful
life of five to seven years.
• The procurement leverages a
"piggyback" agreement with the City
of Mesa, Arizona, to streamline the
purchasing process and reduce
costs.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 6.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 6., Item Page 1, Packet Page 41 №11/25
acquisition will be purchased from SHI International Corp by utilizing the City of Mesa, Arizona Omnia Contract #2024056-02. The Finance Director, or their designee, approved the piggyback request on February 3, 2026.

The total procurement cost is $445,582.06, which encompasses five years of licensing, support, and maintenance services. Following the initial five-year term, annual licensing and support fees will be subject to the vendor's prevailing market rates. Funding for this capital acquisition is allocated within the Information Services Technology Project fund account (30C1603).

The estimated expenditure for initial configuration, testing, and secure cloud storage of critical municipal data through Amazon Web Services (AWS) or Microsoft Azure for disaster recovery purposes is approximately $36,020 in year one, with ongoing annual costs projected at $16,020.

Funding for this service is allocated within the Information Services Contractual Services fund account (710-030-0340-0000-4220). In the event of a disaster necessitating system activation, operational costs to deploy the recovery solution are estimated at approximately $3,000 per day.

A contingency allocation of $22,279.00 (representing 5% of the project budget) is incorporated to address unanticipated project expenditures related to hardware, software, or service requirements. Should contingency funding be required, it will be drawn from the Information Services Technology Project Account (30C1603).

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

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

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

Council could choose not to replace the City’s existing virtual server and data storage infrastructure; however, this option is not recommended. The current systems have reached the end of their useful life and vendor support, increasing the risk of system downtime, higher maintenance costs, and operational disruptions. Continued use of unsupported infrastructure also creates compliance and security risks, including the inability to meet CJIS requirements for system security, patching, monitoring, and data protection.

DISCUSSION:

Staff recommend the replacement of the City's outdated server and data storage infrastructure to maintain reliable, secure, and cost-effective operations. Following a comprehensive evaluation of available infrastructure technology solutions, the recommended option provides the lowest total cost of ownership, seamless integration with existing City systems, and optimal long-term operational and financial value.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 6., Item Page 2, Packet Page 42 №11/25
Solution One $711,941.93
Solution Two $525,700.00
Solution Three – Chosen $445,582.06
This procurement will replace obsolete infrastructure hardware that currently supports the City's 82 virtual servers and 45 terabytes of centralized data storage, which house essential onpremises line-of-business applications and municipal data. The existing equipment, averaging six to nine years in age, has exceeded its recommended service life. Continued operation of this aging infrastructure is fiscally imprudent due to escalating support and maintenance costs, diminishing vendor support availability, and reduced system reliability. As the hardware continues to deteriorate, the City faces heightened risk of component failures, performance issues, and unexpected service interruptions, presenting significant operational and financial exposure.

The recommended solution is an enterprise-grade platform that consolidates server, storage, and virtualization technologies into a unified, centrally managed system for hosting and safeguarding the City's applications and data. The procurement encompasses hardware, software licensing, professional implementation services, migration of existing virtual servers, configuration of cloudbased disaster recovery capabilities, staff training, system validation and testing, and five years of 24/7 support and maintenance coverage, including software updates and security patches. This technological solution has an anticipated useful life of five to seven years. Through the consolidation of two existing on-premise systems into a single on-premise platform complemented by a cloud-based environment, the solution reduces future hardware requirements and related expenditures, decreases ongoing maintenance and support costs, and delivers enhanced scalability, resiliency, and operational flexibility for municipal applications and data.

Staff recommend the inclusion of a $22,279.00 contingency allocation to address potential unforeseen hardware, software, or service expenditures that may arise during implementation.

NR/ab
Attachments: 1. Resolution
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Purchase Details Cost
Hardware $90,065.30
Licensing, Support & Maintenance (5 years) $254,242.30
Installation, Cloud Disaster Recovery Setup & Data
Migration Services
$90,193.42
Shipping $2,750.00
Tax $8,331.04
SHI Purchase Total $445,582.06
Disaster Recovery Cloud Storage (5 years) $100,100.00
Contingency 5% $22,279.00
Project Total $567,961.06
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 6., Item Page 3, Packet Page 43 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

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

AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT WITH SHI INTERNATIONAL, CORP FOR CITYWIDE VIRTUAL SERVER AND DATA STORAGE SOLUTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $445,582.06 WHEREAS, this agreement is a proactive and cost-effective investment in infrastructure services and protection by replacing end-of-life equipment that supports the City’s 82 virtual servers and 45 terabytes of centralized data storage, which host critical on-premises line-ofbusiness applications and municipal data; WHEREAS, the cost proposal of $445,582.06 includes hardware, software licenses, professional implementation services, migration of existing virtual servers, configuration of cloud-based disaster recovery, staff training, system validation and testing, and five years of 24/7 support and maintenance, including software updates and security patches; and after year five, annual licensing, support, and maintenance costs will be subject to the vendor's prevailing market rates;
WHEREAS, a contingency of $22,279.00 (representing 5%) is included in the project budget to unforeseen project costs with hardware, software, or service needs; WHEREAS, funding will be expended from the Information Services Division Technology Project Account (30C1603);
WHEREAS, Monterey City Code section 28-15(c)(3) allows for an exemption from formal bidding requirements in cases where the contract or purchase is capable of being performed through purchasing contracts negotiated by another governmental agency that utilized acceptable bidding procedures (“piggyback” agreements). This acquisition will be purchased from SHI International Corp by utilizing the City of Mesa, Arizona Omnia Contract #2024056-02.

The Finance Director, or their designee, approved the piggyback request on February 3, 2026; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 6., Item Page 4, Packet Page 44

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

1. Authorizes the City Manager, or their designee, to enter into a contract with SHI International, Corp for Purchase of Citywide Virtual Server and Data Storage Solution.

2. Authorizes staff to expend up to an additional $22,279.00 for unforeseen project costs with hardware, software, or service necessary to support the new server and data storage solution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 6., Item Page 5, Packet Page 45 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Thys Norton, Park Operations Manager
Prepared By: Scott Connolly, Cemetery Coordinator
SUBJECT: Authorize the City of Monterey Cemetery El Encinal to Buy Back Cemetery Niche 39 in Wall Q Located in the Lakeside Columbarium for $3,974.48 Payable to Mr.

Armando Claude and Ms. Janice Atencio (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City of Monterey Cemetery El Encinal to buy back Cemetery Niche 39 in Wall Q located in the Lakeside Columbarium for
$3,974.48 payable to Mr. Armando Claude and Ms. Janice
Atencio.

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:

No new policy implications are associated with this
transaction.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT)
APPLIES: Yes.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The current policy is to buy back a niche for 50% of the current sales price or issue a full refund of the original purchase price less the deed fee, whichever is greater. Here, the current lot purchase price is $8,208.96 and 50% of that amount is $3,974.48 less the $130 deed fee.

By refunding the purchase amount, this niche would then be returned to inventory to be resold at the current market price including endowments and burial fees.

Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended
to authorize the buyback of
Cemetery Niche 39 in Wall Q for
$3,974.48 from Mr. Armando
Claude and Ms. Janice Atencio.
• The buyback aligns with the
policy to refund 50% of the
current sales price or the original
purchase price minus the deed
fee, whichever is greater.
• The niche will be returned to
inventory and resold at the
current market price, generating
additional revenue for the
Cemetery Fund.
• The City Council has the
alternative to not buy back the
niche, but this could result in lost
revenue and prolonged
unoccupancy.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 7.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 1, Packet Page 46 №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. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose not to buy back the one (1) cemetery niche located in the Lakeside Columbarium. This alternative is not recommended because the City could resell this one niche at the current market price including any burial costs for additional revenue to the City. Additionally, this niche could remain unoccupied for many years to come if not repurchased and resold, thus losing potential revenue for the Cemetery Fund.

DISCUSSION:

The Cemetery received a letter from Mr. Armando Claude and Ms. Janice Atencio requesting the City to buy back one (1) individual niche that is unoccupied. If approved by Council, this niche would be placed back into the inventory to be resold. Revenue from a future purchase of this niche would be then included into the Cemetery Fund at the current market rate.

Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City of Monterey Cemetery El Encinal to buy back Cemetery Niche 39 in Wall Q located in the Lakeside Columbarium for $3,974.48 payable to Mr. Armando Claude and Ms. Janice Atencio.

TN/sc
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Letter dated January 5, 2026 requesting buy back
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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 2, Packet Page 47 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

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

AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF MONTEREY CEMETERY EL ENCINAL TO BUY BACK CEMETERY NICHE 39 IN WALL Q LOCATED IN THE LAKESIDE COLUMBARIUM FOR $3,974.48 PAYABLE TO MR. ARMANDO CLAUDE AND MS. JANICE ATENCIO WHEREAS, the City received a request to repurchase one (1) cemetery niche that is no longer needed;
WHEREAS, the current policy is to buy back a niche for 50% of the current sales price or issue a full refund of the original purchase price less the deed fee, whichever is greater. Here, the current lot purchase price is $8,208.96 and 50% of that amount is $3,974.48 less the $130 deed fee;
WHEREAS, by refunding the purchase amount, this niche would then be returned to inventory to be resold at the current market price including endowments and burial fees; WHEREAS, this niche could remain unoccupied for many years to come if not repurchased and resold, thus losing potential revenue for the Cemetery Fund; and, WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby authorizes and directs the City of Monterey Cemetery El Encinal to buy back Cemetery Niche 39 in Wall Q located in the Lakeside Columbarium for $3,974.48 Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 3, Packet Page 48 payable to Mr. Armando Claude and Ms. Janice Atencio and authorizes the City Manager to execute any documents needs to effectuate this transaction.

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

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 4, Packet Page 49 Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 5, Packet Page 50 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Ted Terrasas, Sustainability Manager
SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution to Oppose New and Existing Offshore Oil and Gas Drilling and Deep Seabed Mining and Authorize Submittal to the Federal Register (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 oppose new
and existing offshore oil and gas drilling and deep seabed mining and authorize submittal to the Federal Register.

VALUE DRIVERS:

The City Council is dedicated to protecting and preserving our natural environment. The Council recognizes the
necessity of bold, pragmatic, and thoughtful solutions to protect our natural environment for future generations.

Community decisions on transportation, land use, sea
level rise, coastal protection, forestry, and city
government operations can have a positive impact on our environment locally, regionally, and globally.

The proposed efforts are intended to preserve our city
and state’s valuable natural resource – the ocean.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The federal government is considering leasing offshore oil drilling along the California coastline. The proposed staff resolution proposes to adopt a Resolution to oppose new and existing offshore oil and gas drilling and deep seabed mining.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The proposed action (public comments) does not require a fiscal allocation.

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 aims to adopt a
resolution opposing new and
existing offshore oil and gas drilling
and deep seabed mining.
• The resolution seeks to protect
California’s coastline and preserve
natural resources for future
generations.
• The federal government is
considering six offshore oil and gas
leases along the California coast,
with public comments open until
February 26, 2026.
• Alternatives include not approving
the resolution, but staff recommends
supporting the opposition and
submitting comments to the Federal
Register.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 8.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 1, Packet Page 51 №10/24
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 could choose not to approve the resolution.

DISCUSSION:

On November 24, 2025, the comment period opened on the 11th National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Draft Proposal Program, which proposes 6 leases for oil drilling and exploration off the coast of California; three in Southern California, two in Central California, and one in Northern California. The City of Monterey provided public comment on this program in January 2026 (Attachment 2).

The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) has now issued a call for information for oil and gas lease sales (link: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/01/27/2026- 01571/call-for-information-and-nominations-for-central-california-outer-continental-shelf-oil-andgas ). The comment submittal deadline is February 26, 2026. Specifically, BOEM seeks information on geological conditions, archaeological sites, potential use conflicts, areas of special concern, and other socioeconomic, biological, and environmental information. Staff recommends the attached resolution is approved to oppose the new and existing offshore oil and gas drilling and deep seabed mining and authorize submittal to the Federal Register.

KC/tt
Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution Opposing New and Existing Offshore Oil and Gas Drilling and Deep Seabed Mining

2. Resolution 26-007 Opposing the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Proposed Program for Offshore Oil and Gas Leases off the California Coast e: All neighborhood associations
All business associations
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 2, Packet Page 52 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

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

OPPOSING NEW AND EXISTING OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS DRILLING

AND DEEP SEABED MINING
WHEREAS, the ocean covers roughly 70% of the Earth’s surface, produces half the oxygen we breathe through its plant life, serves as a major highway for global trade, provides food, absorbs excess carbon from climate change, and plays a critical role in shaping weather patterns;
WHEREAS, offshore drilling carries countless negative effects including air pollution from toxic emissions known to cause asthma, lung cancer, and other diseases; the constant threat of oil spills that harm wildlife and their habitats; and damage to the fishing and tourism industries, which are vital to California’s coastal economy; WHEREAS, past oil spill disasters, such as the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico (2010), and the Refugio Spill off the coast of Santa Barbara, California (2015), have caused catastrophic impacts to human life, wildlife, coastal ecosystems, and local economies; WHEREAS, an analysis by Oceana found that protecting all unleased federal waters from offshore drilling in the United States could prevent over 19 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions—the equivalent of taking every car in the nation off the road for 15 years; WHEREAS, on January 20, 2025 President Trump signed the Unleashing American Energy executive order, which encourages energy exploration and production on Federal lands and waters, including on the Outer Continental Shelf;
WHEREAS, on April 24, 2025, President Trump signed the Unleashing America’s Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources executive order to permit deep seabed mining, which would have significant negative impacts on marine ecosystems, fisheries, and local coastal economies;
WHEREAS, California’s marine sanctuaries—including the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary, Greater Farallones National Marine Sanctuary and others along the coast—protect unique ecosystems and cultural resources, but significant areas of the Pacific remain vulnerable to offshore oil and gas development;
WHEREAS, the threat of future leasing proposals persists in the absence of a permanent nationwide prohibition on new offshore drilling; WHEREAS, protecting California’s coastlines from the impacts of oil and gas development is essential to safeguarding the environment, public health, Tribal cultural resources, climate resilience, and coastal economies; and Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 3, Packet Page 53 WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby opposes all new and existing offshore oil and gas drilling and deep seabed mining and authorizes submitted of this opposition to the Federal Register.

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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 4, Packet Page 54 RESOLUTION NO. 26-007 C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
OPPOSING THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR’S PROPOSED PROGRAM FOR

OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS LEASES OFF THE CALIFORNIA COAST
WHEREAS, on November 26, 2025, the United States Department of the Interior announced a Secretary’s Order directing the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management to take the necessary steps to terminate the 2024-2029 National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program and replace it with a new, expansive 11th National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program;
WHEREAS the program includes 34 potential offshore lease sales across the existing Outer Continental Shelf planning areas which covers over 1.27 billion acres, including six along the Pacific coastline;
WHEREAS, in 1981, Secretary of the Interior James Watt proposed a similar program to sell coastline of the continental shoreline of the United States for offshore drilling. ThenRepresentative Leon Panetta and Representative Don Clausen drafted a ‘moratorium amendment’ that was passed by the Senate continuously for 20 years and led to the formation of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary;
WHEREAS, the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary was established 34 years ago in 1992 through the collaborative effort of politicians on both sides of the aisle, marine researchers, business owners, fisheries, tourism professionals, community leaders, and concerned citizens; and
WHEREAS, offshore drilling poses a threat to our coastal recreation, tourism, and fishing industry, industries that depend on a clean and healthy ocean environment. The City of Monterey’s tourism is dependent on a pristine and healthy coastline; WHEREAS, the Monterey Bay is home to endangered species of marine mammals, birds, and fish - some of which are not found anywhere else in the world – all which would be heavily impact by the construction of new offshore drilling facilities and an inevitable oil spill; WHEREAS, the City of Monterey previously passed Resolution No. 13.133 (June 1978), Resolution No. 86-134 (November 1986), Resolution No. 186-197 (November 1986), Resolution No. 87-08 (January 1987), Resolution No. 87-14 (January 1987), and Resolution No. 88-189 (December 1988), all opposing leases for the purpose of offshore oil drilling along the California Central Coast Shoreline and the Outer Continental Shelf; WHEREAS, Measure G was approved as a ballot proposition on August 5, 1986 that proposed that “the people of the City of Monterey adopt an ordinance opposing offshore drilling for oil and gas off the Coast of Central and Northern California. . . [and] make certain findings relating to the potential adverse efforts thereof. . .[and to] defin(e) and prohibit onshore support facilities and requir(e) the City Council to urge State and Federal authorities to exclude said water from the OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program”. Measure G was passed in November 1986 with 76% of the vote;
Docusign Envelope ID: 8C4A6DC1-5BA8-4A3F-BC84-05083D964051 Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 5, Packet Page 55 WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby opposes the proposed 11th National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program, including any and all new or expanded offshore oil and gas off the California Coast.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this 20th day of January, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAIN: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Docusign Envelope ID: 8C4A6DC1-5BA8-4A3F-BC84-05083D964051 Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 6, Packet Page 56 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
Prepared By: Mark Ackermann, Management Analyst
SUBJECT: Designate the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, and Finance Director as Agents for the City of Monterey to Act on Behalf of the City for the Purpose of Obtaining Financial Disaster Assistance (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council designate the City Manager,
Assistant City Manager, and Finance Director as agents
for the City of Monterey to act on behalf of the City for the purpose of obtaining financial disaster assistance.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action is consistent with policy to seek City Council approval for staff to act as agents for the City to obtain financial disaster assistance.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Designating agents to act on behalf of the City to obtain financial assistance in the event of a disaster has no
direct fiscal implications. In the future, this action will enable the designated agents to file for disaster relief assistance from the State of California and the federal government that could result in recouping moneys
expended in disaster mitigation and recovery efforts.

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), Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
designate the City Manager,
Assistant City Manager, and
Finance Director as agents to obtain
financial disaster assistance.
• This designation is required by the
California Office of Emergency
Services and must be renewed
every three years.
• The action ensures the City can
apply for State and Federal disaster
relief funds to recover costs from
mitigation and recovery efforts.
• Not designating agents could result
in missed opportunities for financial
assistance in future disasters.
• A resolution is necessary due to
staff changes and the expiration of
the previous designation from
November 2019.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 9.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 9., Item Page 1, Packet Page 57 №11/25
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, №07/19this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City could choose not to designate agents for the City of Monterey to act on behalf of the City for the purpose of obtaining financial disaster assistance. This is not recommended as the City could miss out on significant future cost recoveries should a disaster occur.

DISCUSSION:

The California Office of Emergency Services requires cities to designate personnel to act on behalf of the city to apply for State and Federal financial assistance in the event of a disaster.

This action is required in the form of a resolution by the Council which is good for a period of three years. The City of Monterey last made such a designation in November 2019. Due to several changes in staff since that time, and it has been three years, a new resolution is appropriate.

Staff recommends that the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, and Finance Director are designated as agents for the City of Monterey to act on behalf of the City for the purpose of obtaining financial disaster assistance.

NR/ma
Attachments: 1. Resolution

2. Cal OES Form 130
e: 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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 9., Item Page 2, Packet Page 58 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

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

DESIGNATING THE CITY MANAGER, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER AND FINANCE

DIRECTOR AS AGENTS FOR THE CITY OF MONTEREY TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE

CITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING FINANCIAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE WHEREAS, in order to qualify and apply for State and Federal financial disaster assistance, the City of Monterey must designate agents for the City of Monterey to act on behalf of the City; and
WHEREAS, such designation must be made at least every three years and the last designation was made with the adoption of Resolution 22-156 in December 2022; and WHEREAS, California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) requires the submission of Cal OES Form 130 with the titles of the designated agents; and WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby authorizes the City Manager, the Assistant City Manager and the Finance Director to execute for, and on behalf of, the City of Monterey for the purposes of obtaining certain financial assistance under Public Law 93-288 as amended by the Robert T.

Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988 and/or State assistance under the California Disaster Assistance Act, as required by Cal OES Form 130, which is attached for the record.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 9., Item Page 3, Packet Page 59 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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 9., Item Page 4, Packet Page 60

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
Cal OES 130
Cal OES ID No: ______________________

DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION

FOR NON-STATE AGENCIES

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE OF THE
(Governing Body) (Name of Applicant)

THAT , OR
(Title of Authorized Agent)
, OR
(Title of Authorized Agent)
(Title of Authorized Agent)
is hereby authorized to execute for and on behalf of the , a public entity (Name of Applicant)
established under the laws of the State of California, this application and to file it with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services for the purpose of obtaining certain federal financial assistance under Public Law 93-288 as amended by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988, and/or state financial assistance under the California Disaster Assistance Act.

THAT the ________________________________________________, a public entity established under the laws of the State of California, (Name of Applicant)
hereby authorizes its agent(s) to provide to the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services for all matters pertaining to such state disaster assistance the assurances and agreements required.

Please check the appropriate box below:

This is a universal resolution and is effective for all open and future disasters up to three (3) years following the date of approval below.

This is a disaster specific resolution and is effective for only disaster number(s) ________________________ Passed and approved this day of , 20
(Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)
(Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)
(Name and Title of Governing Body Representative)

CERTIFICATION
I, , duly appointed and of
(Name) (Title)
, do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a (Name of Applicant)
Resolution passed and approved by the of the
(Governing Body) (Name of Applicant)
on the day of , 20 .
(Title)

Page 1 ends

(Signature)
Cal OES 130 (Rev.9/13)
26 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 9., Item Page 5, Packet Page 61

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES
Cal OES 130 - Instructions
Cal OES Form 130 Instructions
A Designation of Applicant’s Agent Resolution for Non-State Agencies is required of all Applicants to be eligible to receive funding. A new resolution must be submitted if a previously submitted Resolution is older than three (3) years from the last date of approval, is invalid or has not been submitted.

When completing the Cal OES Form 130, Applicants should fill in the blanks on page 1. The blanks are to be filled in as follows:

Resolution Section:

Governing Body: This is the group responsible for appointing and approving the Authorized Agents.

Examples include: Board of Directors, City Council, Board of Supervisors, Board of Education, etc.

Name of Applicant: The public entity established under the laws of the State of California. Examples include: School District, Office of Education, City, County or Non-profit agency that has applied for the grant, such as: City of San Diego, Sacramento County, Burbank Unified School District, Napa County Office of Education, University Southern California.

Authorized Agent: These are the individuals that are authorized by the Governing Body to engage with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services regarding grants applied for by the Applicant. There are two ways of completing this section:

1. Titles Only: If the Governing Body so chooses, the titles of the Authorized Agents would be entered here, not their names. This allows the document to remain valid (for 3 years) if an Authorized Agent leaves the position and is replaced by another individual in the same title. If “Titles Only” is the chosen method, this document must be accompanied by a cover letter naming the Authorized Agents by name and title. This cover letter can be completed by any authorized person within the agency and does not require the Governing Body’s signature.

2. Names and Titles: If the Governing Body so chooses, the names and titles of the Authorized Agents would be listed. A new Cal OES Form 130 will be required if any of the Authorized Agents are replaced, leave the position listed on the document or their title changes.

Governing Body Representative: These are the names and titles of the approving Board Members.

Examples include: Chairman of the Board, Director, Superintendent, etc. The names and titles cannot be one of the designated Authorized Agents, and a minimum of two or more approving board members need to be listed.

Certification Section:

Name and Title: This is the individual that was in attendance and recorded the Resolution creation and approval.

Examples include: City Clerk, Secretary to the Board of Directors, County Clerk, etc. This person cannot be one of the designated Authorized Agents or Approving Board Member (if a person holds two positions such as City Manager and Secretary to the Board and the City Manager is to be listed as an Authorized Agent, then the same person holding the Secretary position would sign the document as Secretary to the Board (not City Manager) to eliminate “Self Certification.”
Cal OES 130 (Rev.9/13) Page 2
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 9., Item Page 6, Packet Page 62 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Megan Beckman, Administrative Analyst
SUBJECT: Amend the Professional Services Agreement with ZFA Structural Engineers for the Fire Station 12 Renovation Geotechnical and Structural Analysis to Increase the Not-to-Exceed Amount from $74,950 to $122,145 Effective August 5, 2025***NCIP*** (Exempt from CEQA, Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt the attached resolution
authorizing the City Manager, or their designee, to
execute an amendment to the Professional Services
agreement with ZFA Structural Engineers for Fire
Station 12 Renovation Geotechnical and Structural
Analysis to increase the not-to-exceed amount from
$74,950 to $122,145, an increase to the contract of
$47,195 retroactive to August 5, 2025.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

This action is consistent with Chapter 28-Purchasing of the City Code, which requires amendments to
Professional Services contracts exceeding $74,999 to
be approved by City Council.

Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
approve an amendment to increase
the contract amount for ZFA
Structural Engineers from $74,950
to $122,145 for Fire Station 12
renovation.
• The amendment addresses an
administrative oversight where
additional work was authorized
before formal contract approval.
• The project includes a Tier II
Seismic Evaluation to ensure critical
structural considerations are
incorporated into the design.
• Sufficient funding is available in the
Fire Stations 12 & 13 Rehabilitation
project account, which has a
balance of $2,732,782.94 as of
February 4, 2026.
• Not approving the amendment
would delay the project and require
re-advertising the additional scope
of work.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 10.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 10., Item Page 1, Packet Page 63 №11/25
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The amendment increases the total contract amount by $47,195 from $74,950 to $122,145.

Sufficient funding is available in the Fire Stations 12 & 13 Rehabilitation project account (NCP2506). As of February 4, 2026, the account balance is $2,732,782.94.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey Planning Office determined that the following action is exempt from CEQA Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities) because the proposed action involves basic data collection, research, experimental management, and resource evaluation activities for the Storm Drain Master Plan and Rate Study, which do not result in a serious or major disturbance to an environmental resource (these may be strictly for information gathering purposes, or as part of a study leading to an action which a public agency has not yet approved, adopted, or funded).

Furthermore, the exempt projects do 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 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. The proposed action involves basic data collection; therefore, would not have any impacts 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. The proposed action is basic data collection; therefore, no cumulative impacts are anticipated.

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 to be found at the project sites. The proposed action would not have a significant effect due to their 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 proposed action would involve basic data collection; therefore, no impacts to scenic highways would occur.

Exception e - Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. None of these projects would be located on hazardous waste sites listed pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.

Exception f - Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. The Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 10., Item Page 2, Packet Page 64 №11/25
proposed action would involve basic data collection, which would not result in an impact to historic or cultural resources.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose not to approve this amendment, however that is not recommended. The work is necessary to complete the Fire Station 12 Renovation project. The consultant began a portion of the additional scope already without an approved amendment. As soon as staff became aware, work was stopped until the amendment becomes fully executed. If an amendment is not approved, the project will be delayed and staff will need to readvertise the additional scope.

DISCUSSION:

On December 3, 2024, the City Council awarded a Professional Services agreement to Ausonio, Inc. (“Ausonio”) for On-Call Project Management/Construction Management (Building Facilities). Ausonio serves as the City’s construction management consultant for both the Fire Station 12 Renovation and the Hilltop Center Renovation projects. On June 10, 2025, Ausonio solicited an informal request for proposals (“RFP”) on behalf of the City for structural engineering services for the Fire Station 12 Renovation project (“Project”). ZFA Structural Engineers (“ZFA”) was the only qualified firm to submit a proposal in response to the RFP, and on September 23, 2025, the City awarded an informal professional services agreement in an amount not to exceed $74,950.

On August 5, 2025, Council appropriated additional funding in the amount of $900,000 to the Fire Station 12 & 13 Renovation Project (NCP2506) and directed Staff to include a Tier II Seismic Evaluation in the Fire Station 12 Rehabilitation Project scope. Following Council’s direction, our consultant inadvertently authorized ZFA to proceed with the additional scope of work prior to execution of a formal contract amendment. As a result, a significant portion of the work has been completed. As soon as city staff became aware of this, all work stopped until corrective action could be taken. This action corrects the administrative oversight by formally amending the professional services agreement to reflect the Council-approved scope and associated costs.

As discussed at the August 5, 2025, Council meeting, this work is essential to complete the project and to ensure that critical structural considerations are incorporated into the design. The not to exceed amount of the additional scope is $47,195. When combined with the original contract amount, the total not-to-exceed amount exceeds the informal contract limit and therefore requires Council approval of an amendment.

AR/mb
Attachments: 1. Resolution
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 10., Item Page 3, Packet Page 65 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

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

AMENDING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ZFA STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS FOR THE FIRE STATION 12 RENOVATION GEOTECHNICAL AND STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS TO INCREASE THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT FROM $74,950 TO $122,145 EFFECTIVE AUGUST 5, 2025 ***NCIP***
WHEREAS, on December 3, 2024, the City Council awarded a Professional Services agreement to Ausonio, Inc. (“Ausonio”) for On-Call Project Management/Construction Management (Building Facilities). Ausonio serves as the City’s construction management consultant for both the Fire Station 12 Renovation and the Hilltop Center Renovation projects; WHEREAS, on June 10, 2025, Ausonio solicited an informal request for proposals (“RFP”) on behalf of the City for structural engineering services for the Fire Station 12 Renovation project (“Project”);
WHEREAS, ZFA Structural Engineers (“ZFA”) was the only qualified firm to submit a proposal in response to the RFP, and on September 23, 2025, the City awarded an informal professional services agreement in an amount not to exceed $74,950; WHEREAS, on August 5, 2025, Council appropriated additional funding in the amount of $900,000 to the Fire Station 12 & 13 Renovation Project (NCP2506) and directed Staff to include a Tier II Seismic Evaluation in the Fire Station 12 Rehabilitation Project scope; WHEREAS, following Council’s direction, Ausonio inadvertently authorized ZFA to proceed with the additional scope of work prior to execution of a formal contract amendment and as a result, a significant portion of the work has been completed; WHEREAS, this action corrects the administrative oversight by formally amending the professional services agreement to reflect the Council-approved scope and associated costs; WHEREAS, the not to exceed amount of the additional scope is $47,195. When combined with the original contract amount, the total not-to-exceed amount exceeds the informal contract limit and therefore requires Council approval of an amendment that is effective retroactively; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey Planning Office determined that the following action is exempt from CEQA Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities) because the proposed action involves basic data collection, research, experimental management, and resource evaluation activities for the Storm Drain Master Plan and Rate Study, which do not result in a serious or major disturbance to an environmental resource (these may be strictly for information gathering purposes, or as part of a study leading to an action which a public agency has not yet approved, adopted, or funded).

Furthermore, the exempt projects do not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 10., Item Page 4, Packet Page 66 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 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. The proposed action involves basic data collection; therefore, would not have any impacts on the environment.

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 proposed action would involve basic data collection, which would not result in an impact to historic or cultural resources.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby authorizes the City Manager, or their designee, to execute an amendment to the Professional Services agreement with ZFA Structural Engineers for Fire Station 12 Renovation Geotechnical and Structural Analysis (NCP2506) to increase the not-toexceed amount from $74,950 to $122,145, an increase to the contract of $47,195 effective August 5, 2025.

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

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 10., Item Page 5, Packet Page 67 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 10., Item Page 6, Packet Page 68 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
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: 798 Del Monte Avenue; Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Anthony Giammanco (El Estero Boating); 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
conference with real property negotiators pursuant to
Government Code Section 54956.8 to discuss and
provide confidential direction for terms and conditions for a lease amendment with Mr. Anthony Giammanco.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

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

The Surplus Land Act does not apply since there is no
disposition as defined under the Act.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: The Levine Act does not apply to the
appointment of agency negotiators. The Levine Act does
apply to the lease amendment negotiations.

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 to
discuss a lease amendment with Mr.

Anthony Giammanco for El Estero
Boating.
• El Estero Boating has been a familyrun business since 1985 and provides a popular recreational
activity at Lake El Estero.
• Excessive aquatic vegetation in
Lake El Estero has impacted the
business operations, leading to
closures during spring and summer
months.
• The current lease for El Estero
Boating is set to expire on
December 31, 2027, with a five-year
extension option available.
• Closed session discussions are
deemed appropriate for confidential
direction regarding the lease
amendment.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 11.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 11., Item Page 1, Packet Page 69 №11/25
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

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

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

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

DISCUSSION:

The premises have been leased to a member of the Giammanco family since at least 1967. El Estero Boating has been owned by Ms. Genevieve Giammanco since 1985 and has remained a family-run business.. The current lease, with Mr. Anthony Giammanco as the surviving lessee, commenced January 1, 2018 and is scheduled to expire on December 31, 2027. Mr.

Giammanco has one (1) 5-year option to extend the term of the lease.

El Estero Boating provides a desired use on Lake El Estero, creating an interdependent use with the adjacent Dennis the Menace Park, the City’s skatepark and the nearby fishing piers.

Families often spend time at Dennis the Menace Park, notice the paddleboats, and walk to El Estero Boating to experience this fun, family-friendly activity. Boat rentals include standard 4- person paddleboats, and five-person paddleboats with swan, duck and dragon characters.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 11., Item Page 2, Packet Page 70 №11/25
For the past two years, Lake El Estero has experienced excessive aquatic vegetation during the spring and summer months, dramatically reducing the ability of the paddleboats to navigate the lake. Mr. Giammanco had to significantly alter his business operations, often requiring the business to be closed due to the inability of customers to paddle through the vegetation.

Mr. Giammanco has requested a lease amendment. Closed session discussions are allowed and appropriate for confidential direction in real estate matters of this type.

KC/ja/ad
e: Anthony Giammanco, El Estero Boating
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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 11., Item Page 3, Packet Page 71 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
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: 177 Municipal Wharf #2; Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties:

Robbie Torrise (Robbie's Ocean Fresh Seafood, 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:

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

City Council approval is required for real estate
transactions. 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: The Levine Act does not apply to the
appointment of negotiators, however, it does apply to
the lease amendment negotiations.

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 to
discuss a lease amendment for
Robbie’s Ocean Fresh Seafood at
Municipal Wharf #2.
• Robbie’s Ocean Fresh Seafood has
operated at Wharf #2 for 22 years,
leasing and subleasing space for
seafood packaging and sales.
• The current lease agreement was
established in 2021 and amended in
2022 to increase the leased square
footage.
• Closed session discussions are
appropriate for confidential direction
on real estate matters related to the
lease amendment.
• The Surplus Land Act does not
apply to Tidelands property, and the
proposed action is not subject to
CEQA as it has no environmental
impact.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 12.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 1, Packet Page 72 №11/25
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

DISCUSSION:

Robbie’s Ocean Fresh Seafood (“Robbie’s”), owned by Mr. Robbie Torrise, leases approximately 768 square feet in the Municipal Wharf #2 warehouse. Mr. Torrise has both subleased and leased space in the warehouse for the past 22 years. Mr. Torrise’s business model includes purchasing fresh and frozen seafood, in addition to locally caught fish directly from boats, and packaging it for wholesale and retail sales.

Robbie’s is currently occupying space in the Wharf #2 warehouse under a lease agreement that was entered into in 2021 and amended in 2022 to increase the square footage. Closed session discussions are allowed and appropriate for confidential direction in real estate matters of this type.

KC/ja/ad
e: Mr. Robbie Torrise, Robbie’s Ocean Fresh Seafood
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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 2, Packet Page 73 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
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: 601 Wave Street, Suite 500; Agency Negotiators: Kimberly Cole and Janna Aldrete; Negotiating Parties: Adam Silverstein (Silverstein’s Deli Delights, LLC); Under Negotiation:

Price and Terms of Payment for New Lease Agreement (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

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

The Surplus Land Act does not apply since there is no
disposition as defined under the Act.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: Yes.

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 to
discuss terms for a new lease
agreement at 601 Wave Street,
Suite 500.
• The property has been vacant since
December 2023 and is proposed to
be leased to Silverstein’s Deli
Delights, LLC for use as a bagel
shop.
• Adam Silverstein has conducted
due diligence and inspections to
ensure the feasibility of the
proposed use.
• Closed session discussions are
appropriate for confidential real
estate negotiations.
• The Surplus Land Act does not
apply as there is no property
disposition involved.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 13.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 13., Item Page 1, Packet Page 74 №11/25
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

DISCUSSION:

The premises are located at 601 Wave Street, Suite 500 and consist of approximately 900 square feet. The space has been vacant since December 2023 and marketed since that time.

While there has been interest in the space over the past two years, Mr. Adam Silverstein has shown the most interest. He has performed his due diligence with the City’s Planning and Building divisions and other regulatory agencies. Mr. Silverstein’s designer and contractor have inspected the premises to ensure the proposed use as a bagel shop could be accomplished. 601 Wave Street, Suite 500
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 13., Item Page 2, Packet Page 75 №11/25
Closed session discussions are allowed and appropriate for confidential direction in real estate matters of this type.
e: Adam Silverstein, Silverstein Deli Delights, LLC
KC/ja/ad
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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 13., Item Page 3, Packet Page 76 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Levi Hill, AICP, Planning Manager
Prepared By: Christy Sabdo, AICP, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: Approve a General Plan Map Amendment at 5 Mandeville Court (APN: 259-031- 050-000) from Medium Density Residential to Employment to Correct a Clerical Error (CEQA: Certified Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2023080034), Article 11, Section 15168(c))
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council amend the General Plan Land Use
Element, Map 6: General Plan Land Use, at 5 Mandeville
Court from Medium Residential Density to Employment.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

Amending the General Plan land use designation for the
parcel at 5 Mandeville Court from Medium Residential to Employment would not result in any policy implications. The property is not included in the adopted Housing Element Sites Inventory from the Housing Element Update, which is part of the General Plan Update adopted by the City
Council on July 16, 2024, and certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development
(HCD) on October 4, 2024. The proposed General Plan
amendment would bring the site into alignment with the
surrounding Employment land use designations and is
consistent with the City’s vision for utilizing the property for job-producing uses. .

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

This General Plan Amendment is being initiated by staff and involves staff time only for preparation of public hearing reports and notices, attendance at public hearings, and completion Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
amend the General Plan Land Use
designation for 5 Mandeville Court
from Medium Density Residential to
Employment to correct a clerical
error.
• The amendment aligns the parcel
with surrounding Employment land
use designations and supports the
City’s vision for job-producing uses.
• The site, currently developed with
30,000 square feet of office space,
will not undergo physical changes.
• Senate Bill 18 tribal consultation
was completed with no requests for
consultation received by the
deadline.
• The Airport Land Use Commission
approved the proposed amendment,
confirming its consistency with the
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 14.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 1, Packet Page 77 №10/24
of follow up tasks, including updates to the General Plan Map if approved.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The City of Monterey Planning Office determined that there are no substantial changes proposed by the Project or under the circumstances in which the Proposed Project would be undertaken that would require major revisions of the Monterey 2031 General Plan Update EIR (SCH # 2023080034), certified July 16, 2024. The Proposed Project does not require preparation of a new subsequent or supplemental EIR due to either (1) the involvement of new significant environmental effects, (2) a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects, or (3) new information of substantial importance. No mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible. The Proposed Project is consistent with and within the scope of the Monterey 2031 General Plan EIR.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

That the City Council deny the General Plan map amendment at 5 Mandeville Court.

DISCUSSION:

Background/Proposed Amendment
The City of Monterey amended its General Plan on July 16, 2024, to address State requirements for housing, land use, safety, and circulation issues. The Land Use Element (Map 6: General Plan Land Use) identified 5 Mandeville Court as a Medium Density Residential use; however, the areas surrounding this parcel are designated Employment (Figure 1).

To align with the surrounding land use designation, remain consistent with the City’s vision of utilizing this property for job-producing uses and correct a clerical error, the proposed amendment would reclassify the parcel to Employment (Figure 2). The proposed project does not include any physical changes to the existing development on site. The site is currently developed with approximately 30,000 square feet of office space.

Figure 1. Existing Land Use Designation – Medium Density Residential Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 2, Packet Page 78 №10/24
Figure 2. Proposed Map Amendment – Employment
Senate Bill 18 Tribal Consultation
Senate Bill 18 requires local governments to consult with tribes prior to making certain planning decisions and to provide notice to tribes at certain key points in the planning process. These consultation and notice requirements apply to adoption and amendment of both general plans (defined in Government Code §65300 et seq.) and specific plans (defined in Government Code §65450 et seq.). The Planning Division sent SB 18 notification letters regarding the proposed General Plan map amendment on October 2, 2025. The tribes had 90 days to reply with a request for tribal consultation, or by December 31, 2025. No requests were received for tribal consultation by December 31, 2025; therefore, the City concluded the tribal consultation process.

Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) Approval
The site is located in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) Safety Zone 4, Outer Approach/Departure Zone. This zone allows offices at a non-residential intensity of 150 persons per acre; as such, the draft map amendment from Medium Density Residential to Employment would not conflict with the ALUCP.

On July 23, 2025, the City of Monterey submitted an application (ALUC File No. REF250032) to ALUC staff requesting consideration of a proposed reclassification of an existing land use designation from Medium Density Residential to Employment. On September 22, 2025, the ALUC adopted a resolution finding the proposed land use reclassification from Medium Density Residential to Employment consistent with the 2019 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for Monterey Regional Airport.

At their meeting on January 27, 2026, the Planning Commission supported staff by recommending, on consent and unanimously, that the City Council adopt an amendment to General Plan Land Use Element, Map 6: General Plan Land Use, at 5 Mandeville Court from Medium Residential Density to Employment.

KC/lh/cs
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 3, Packet Page 79 №10/24
Attachments: 1. Resolution with Exhibit

2. ALUC Resolution, September 22, 2025
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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 4, Packet Page 80 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

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

APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN MAP TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION AT 5 MANDEVILLE COURT (APN: 259-031-050-000) FROM MEDIUM

DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO EMPLOYMENT TO CORRECT A CLERICAL ERROR WHEREAS, a General Plan Map amendment is necessary to correct an inadvertent residential designation (clerical error) for a parcel that is surrounded by commercial uses. The Planning Division initiated the amendment to align the General Plan Map with existing land use patterns;
WHEREAS, the site at 5 Mandeville Court is 3.5 acres and is generally located north of Highway 68 in the Ryan Ranch Subdivision accessed from Lower Ragsdale Drive; WHEREAS, the City of Monterey amended its General Plan on July 16, 2024, to address State requirements for housing, land use, safety, and circulation issues; WHEREAS, the General Plan Land Use Element (Map 6: General Plan Land Use) identified 5 Mandeville Court as a Medium Density Residential use; however, the areas surrounding this parcel are designated Employment and the site has been historically utilized for commercial purposes;
WHEREAS, the Employment land use designation provides for business parks, office, and light industrial uses in the vicinity of the Monterey Regional Airport. It features a mix of lot sizes to accommodate small businesses as well as larger campus-style uses. Permitted uses include administrative and professional offices, light manufacturing, and research and development. Secondary and accessory uses such as restaurants, cafes, printers, and office supply stores to serve the needs of employees and businesses are encouraged. Allowable nonresidential floor area ratio is up to 0.8 FAR. Employment areas can also support multifamily housing to serve the local workforce;
WHEREAS, to align with the surrounding land use designation and to remain consistent with the City’s vision of utilizing this property for job-producing uses, the City is proposing a General Plan map amendment to reclassify the parcel to Employment. The proposed map amendment would not include any physical changes to the existing development on site. The site is currently developed with approximately 30,000 square feet of office space; WHEREAS, Senate Bill 18 requires local governments to consult with tribes prior to making certain planning decisions and to provide notice to tribes at certain key points in the planning process. These consultations and notice requirements apply to adoption and amendment of both general plans (defined in Government Code §65300 et seq.) and specific plans (defined in Government Code §65450 et seq.). The Planning Division sent SB 18 notification letters regarding the proposed General Plan map amendment on October 2, 2025.

The tribes had 90 days to reply with a request for tribal consultation, or by December 31, 2025.

No requests were received for tribal consultation by December 31, 2025; therefore, the City concluded the tribal consultation process;
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 5, Packet Page 81 WHEREAS, the site is located in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) Safety Zone 4, Outer Approach/Departure Zone. This zone allows offices at a non-residential intensity of 150 persons per acre; as such, the draft map amendment from Medium Density Residential to Employment would not conflict with the ALUCP; WHEREAS, on July 23, 2025, the City of Monterey submitted an application (ALUC File No. REF250032) to ALUC staff requesting consideration of a proposed reclassification of an existing land use designation from Medium Density Residential to Employment. On September 22, 2025, the ALUC adopted a resolution finding the proposed land use reclassification from Medium Density Residential to Employment consistent with the 2019 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for Monterey Regional Airport;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a property noticed hearing on January 27, 2026, carefully considered all of the information presented to it, including the agenda report and information submitted at the public hearing. The Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that they adopt the General Plan Map Amendment at 5 Mandeville Court from Medium Density Residential to Employment;
WHEREAS, the City Council, at a properly noticed public hearing on February 17, 2026, carefully considered all of the information presented to it, including the agenda report and information submitted at the public hearing, and adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey Planning Office determined that there are no substantial changes proposed by the Project or under the circumstances in which the Proposed Project would be undertaken that would require major revisions of the Monterey 2031 General Plan Update EIR (SCH # 2023080034), certified July 16, 2024. The Proposed Project does not require preparation of a new subsequent or supplemental EIR due to either (1) the involvement of new significant environmental effects, (2) a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects, or (3) new information of substantial importance. No mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible. The Proposed Project is consistent with and within the scope of the Monterey 2031 General Plan EIR;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby recommends the City Council adopt the General Plan Map Amendment at 5 Mandeville Court from Medium Density Residential to Employment (Exhibit A) based on the following findings:

1. On July 16, 2025, the City Council certified the Monterey 2031 General Plan Update EIR (SCH # 2023080034). The City of Monterey Planning Office determined that there are no substantial changes proposed by the Project or under the circumstances in which the Proposed Project would be undertaken that would require major revisions of the certified Monterey 2031 General Plan Update EIR. The proposed Project does not require Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 6, Packet Page 82 preparation of a new subsequent or supplemental EIR due to either (1) the involvement of new significant environmental effects, (2) a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects, or (3) new information of substantial importance.

No mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible. The proposed Project is consistent with and within the scope of the Monterey 2031 General Plan EIR;

2. The proposed General Plan amendment is in the public interest as the amendment would change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to Employment; therefore, avoiding one parcel from having a unique land use designation from other surrounding parcels; the subject parcel is surrounded by the Employment land use designation. The proposed amendment would update the parcel at 5 Mandeville Court to Employment consistent with the surrounding parcels in the Ryan Ranch area.

3. The proposed General Plan amendment is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare as the proposed Employment land use designation provides for business parks, office, and light industrial uses in the vicinity of the Monterey Regional Airport and on a variety of lot sizes to accommodate small businesses as well as larger campus-style uses. This land use is appropriate for the Ryan Ranch office park.

4. The proposed General Plan amendment is consistent and compatible with the General Plan and any implementation programs that may be affected because the amendment is designating the property at 5 Mandeville Court as Employment, consistent with future planned use, and all associated policies and programs will apply.

5. The proposed General Plan amendment is consistent with the existing zoning designation: Industrial, Administration, and Research District, Development Control Overlay District, Emergency Shelter (I-R-150-D2-ES), which supports the Employment General Plan designation.

6. The proposed General Plan amendment achieves consistency with Government Code Section 65860, which requires City zoning ordinances be consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan Amendment to Employment better achieves consistency with the existing zoning designation (I-R-150-D2-ES).

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this 17th day of February 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 7, Packet Page 83 ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 8, Packet Page 84 Exhibit A
Proposed General Plan Map Amendment
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 9, Packet Page 85 Attachment 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 10, Packet Page 86 Attachment 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 11, Packet Page 87 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Receive Public Testimony on the Proposal to Modify the Monterey County Tourism Improvement District (MCTID) Management District Plan 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)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council receive public testimony on the
proposal to modify the MCTID Management District
Plan.

VALUE DRIVER:

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

It is within the City Council’s purview to consider
modifying the MCTID boundary to include the City of
Sand City. The MCTID requested this change to the
Management District Plan to further the MCTID’s efforts to increase demand for overnight tourism and to
promote Monterey County as a tourist, meeting, and
event destination. The City of Monterey initiated the
formation of this district in 2018 with the adoption of Resolution 18-147 and is the designated lead agency in
the adopted Management District Plan.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

No immediate fiscal impact. The City will continue to receive one percent (1%) of the amount collected within the City of Monterey to cover its costs of administration. Because the MCTID programs are intended to increase visitation to the City, there may be an increase in transient occupancy tax and sales tax collections.

Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is considering
modifying the MCTID
Management District Plan to
include Sand City, aiming to boost
tourism and overnight visitation.
• The proposed modification would
allow assessments to begin in
Sand City on April 1, 2026.
• The MCTID supports marketing
and sales efforts for lodging
businesses to enhance economic
benefits for participating
jurisdictions.
• Public testimony on the
modification will be received at the
February 17, 2026 meeting, with a
public hearing scheduled for
March 17, 2026.
• The City of Monterey initiated the
MCTID in 2018 and serves as the
lead agency for its Management
District Plan.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 15.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 1, Packet Page 88 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose not to hold the public meeting. Staff does not recommend this option, since the MCTID has requested this change to the Management District Plan.

DISCUSSION:

Background
The MCTID is a benefit assessment district designed to fund marketing and sales promotion efforts for lodging businesses such as hotels and motels within the district’s participating jurisdictions. The success of lodging businesses is beneficial to the participating jurisdictions, both directly through the collection of business license and Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenues and indirectly through collection of sales tax generated by visitors. The current MCTID includes all lodging businesses located within the boundaries of the unincorporated areas of Monterey County and the cities of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Marina, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Salinas, and Seaside. The City of Monterey serves as the lead public agency for the MCTID pursuant to the Management District Plan.

On February 21, 2023, the Monterey City Council adopted a resolution declaring results of majority protest proceedings and renewed the Monterey County Tourism Improvement District (MCTID) for a 10-year term.

The Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994, Streets and Highways Code §36600 et seq., allows for the Owners’ Association to request the City to modify the Management District Plan (MDP). The MCTID Owners’ Association, the Monterey County Destination Marketing Organization, Inc. d.b.a. See Monterey (formerly the Monterey County Convention and Visitors Bureau) has provided a written request to the City Council to modify the MCTID to authorize the inclusion of the City of Sand City within the boundary of the MCTID. The MCTID requested this change to the MDP to advance its mission of increasing overnight visitation and promoting Monterey County as a leading destination for tourism, meetings, and events. The 215-room Sand City Courtyard and Residence Inn by Marriott opened in January 2026. The proposed modification would allow the MCTID to begin collecting assessments in the City of Sand City on April 1, 2026.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 2, Packet Page 89 MCTID Management District Plan Modification Process
January 28, 2026 RESOLUTION OF INTENTION HEARING (COMPLETED) Upon the written request by the MCTID, the Council may adopt a resolution of intention which states the proposed modification to the MCTID MDP. The MCTID provided a written request for the proposed modification to the Council dated October 15, 2025. Receipt of this written request allows the Council to initiate proceedings for MCTID MDP modification at the January 28, 2026 meeting.

January 30, 2026 NOTICE TO PROPOSED NEW LODGING BUSINESSES (COMPLETED)
The 1994 Law requires the City to mail written notice to the owners of all businesses proposed to be within the MCTID. Mailing the notice begins a mandatory forty-five (45) day period prior to the public hearing in which owners may protest MCTID modification. The notice is a joint notice of both the public meeting and the public hearing, and must be mailed at least 10 days before the public meeting. The City has mailed the notice to the business owners and will be reimbursed for this expense by See Monterey.

February 17, 2026 PUBLIC MEETING AND INTRODUCTION
Allow public testimony on the modification of the MCTID and levy of assessments. No City Council action is required.

No later than
March 6 & 10, 2026 NOTICE TO CURRENTLY ASSESSED LODGING BUSINESSES (COMPLETED)
The Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994 requires the City to mail a complete copy of the Resolution of Intention to each lodging business owner affected by the proposed modification at least ten (10) days before the public hearing (by Friday, March 6, 2026) and to publish the Resolution of Intention in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least seven (7) days before the public hearing (by March 10, 2026). The City has mailed the resolution to the business owners and published the resolution of intention in the Monterey Herald, and will be reimbursed for these expenses by See Monterey.

March 17, 2026 PUBLIC HEARING & RESOLUTION OF MODIFICATION The City Council shall hold a public hearing on the proposed MCTID MDP modifications. If the City Council, following the public hearing, decides to modify the MCTID MDP, the City Council shall adopt a Resolution of Modification.

Attachments: 1. Proposed Modified Management District Plan Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 3, Packet Page 90 c: Rob O’Keefe, MCTID Executive Director, c/o See Monterey City Administrator of Sand City
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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 4, Packet Page 91

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 5, Packet Page 92

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 6, Packet Page 93

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 7, Packet Page 94

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 8, Packet Page 95

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 9, Packet Page 96

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 10, Packet Page 97

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 11, Packet Page 98

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 12, Packet Page 99

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 13, Packet Page 100

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 14, Packet Page 101

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 15, Packet Page 102

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 16, Packet Page 103

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 17, Packet Page 104

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 18, Packet Page 105

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 19, Packet Page 106

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 20, Packet Page 107

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 21, Packet Page 108

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 22, Packet Page 109

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 23, Packet Page 110

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 24, Packet Page 111

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 25, Packet Page 112

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 26, Packet Page 113

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 27, Packet Page 114

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 28, Packet Page 115

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 29, Packet Page 116

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 30, Packet Page 117

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 31, Packet Page 118

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 32, Packet Page 119

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 33, Packet Page 120

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 34, Packet Page 121

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 35, Packet Page 122

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 36, Packet Page 123

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 37, Packet Page 124

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 38, Packet Page 125

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 39, Packet Page 126

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 40, Packet Page 127

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 41, Packet Page 128

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 42, Packet Page 129

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 43, Packet Page 130

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 44, Packet Page 131

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 45, Packet Page 132

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 46, Packet Page 133

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 47, Packet Page 134

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 48, Packet Page 135

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 49, Packet Page 136

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 50, Packet Page 137

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 51, Packet Page 138

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 52, Packet Page 139

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 53, Packet Page 140

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 54, Packet Page 141

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 55, Packet Page 142

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 56, Packet Page 143

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 57, Packet Page 144

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 58, Packet Page 145

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 59, Packet Page 146

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 60, Packet Page 147

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 61, Packet Page 148

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 62, Packet Page 149

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 63, Packet Page 150

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 64, Packet Page 151

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 65, Packet Page 152

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 66, Packet Page 153

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 67, Packet Page 154

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 68, Packet Page 155

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 69, Packet Page 156

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 70, Packet Page 157

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 71, Packet Page 158

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 72, Packet Page 159

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 73, Packet Page 160

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 74, Packet Page 161

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 75, Packet Page 162

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 76, Packet Page 163

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 77, Packet Page 164

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 78, Packet Page 165

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 79, Packet Page 166

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 80, Packet Page 167

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 81, Packet Page 168

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 82, Packet Page 169

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 83, Packet Page 170

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 84, Packet Page 171

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 85, Packet Page 172

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 86, Packet Page 173

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 87, Packet Page 174

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 88, Packet Page 175

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 89, Packet Page 176

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 90, Packet Page 177

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 91, Packet Page 178

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 92, Packet Page 179

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 93, Packet Page 180

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 94, Packet Page 181

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 95, Packet Page 182

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 96, Packet Page 183

ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 97, Packet Page 184 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Authorize Mayor to Sign Comment Letter on a Project Application Submitted to the County of Monterey for 711 Viejo Road (APN 103-011-015-000) that Proposes Construction of a 386,510 Square Foot Multi-Family Residential Building Consisting of 239 Dwelling Units - 191 Market Rate and 48 Low Income in the Unincorporated Area of the County of Monterey (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign a letter commenting on a project application submitted to the
County of Monterey for 711 Viejo Road, which is located outside of the City’s limits in the unincorporated County of Monterey.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

The proposed development will impact the City of
Monterey. Critical concerns include water supply, septic tanks, traffic/evacuation routes/scenic highway, biotic/tree, and public services. Without mitigation, these impacts will be significant.

The Council is committed to ensuring Monterey retains its special character, which derives from its heritage, size, and location. The Council also is committed to ensuring that Monterey is a safe, affordable, and inclusive place to live, work, and visit. Diversity, equity and inclusion, affordable housing, public safety, and community
collaboration are cornerstones contributing to Monterey’s quality of life.

As proposed, the development at 711 Viejo Road
jeopardizes the region’s safe environment.

Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is considering
authorizing the Mayor to sign a
comment letter addressing concerns
about a proposed 239-unit multifamily residential project at 711 Viejo Road in Monterey County.
• Key concerns include water supply
issues, inadequate wastewater
disposal plans, traffic impacts, and
potential harm to the biotic
environment and protected trees.
• The project is located in a high fire
hazard severity zone, raising
significant safety concerns
regarding fire and police services,
evacuations, and other impacts.
• The County of Monterey lacks a
certified Housing Element, and the
applicant is invoking the Builder’s
Remedy provision to contest the
County’s handling of the application.
• The City seeks to ensure that
health, safety, environmental, and
public service impacts are
thoroughly evaluated and mitigated.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 16.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 1, Packet Page 185 №10/24
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

If the County approves the project at 711 Viejo Road, the project will have significant impacts on City services. There will be increased mutual aid calls for public safety services such as police and fire. Residents of this development would also likely impact the City’s roads, parks, library, and other infrastructure, which are paid by the City of Monterey taxpayers. This impact needs to be quantified, studied and mitigated.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

That the City Council chose to amend the letter or not send the letter.

DISCUSSION:

The County of Monterey sent a public notice to the City of Monterey notifying the City of a proposed development project located at 711 Viejo Road (APN 103-011-015-000). The project requires a Use Permit and Design Approval to allow construction of a 386,510 square feet multifamily residential building consisting of 239 dwelling units (191 market rate and 48 low income).

The proposed building is approximately eleven stories with two additional stories of underground parking and a lower basement level. The project submittals can be accessed on the County’s Permit Portal at: https://aca-prod.accela.com/MONTEREY/Default.aspx - with the Planning Project number – PLN250005-DEP.

Background
The County of Monterey does not have a certified Housing Element. The “Builder’s Remedy” is a provision in state law that may prevent, in this case the County, from denying certain housing development projects if the County does not have a housing element in substantial compliance with state law.

In this case the applicant is invoking the Builder’s Remedy against the County of Monterey.

When processing Builder’s Remedy applications, the County is still required to adhere to, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (65589.5(e)).

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 2, Packet Page 186 №10/24
As of February 2, 2026, the County has received Builder’s Remedy applications for the following addresses:

PERMIT
NUMBER

PROJECT

ADDRESS PROJECT NAME AGENDA DESCRIPTION
PLN240092-
DEP
9999 TO BE

ASSIGNED, TO BE
ASSIGNED 99999

CARMEL ASSISTED

LIVING LLC AND

AZUSA HOUSING

PARTNERS L P ET
AL
Subdivision of four lots containing 4.15 acres into 56 lots, construction of nine residential structures containing 100 units, 20 of which will be affordable housing units, the removal of native trees, and rezoning the properties from Low-Density Residential to High-Density Residential. (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 009- 061-013-000, 009-061-014-000, 009-061-015-000, 009-061-016- 000, 009-061-019-000, 009-061-020-000, 009-061-021-000 and 009-061-022-000)
PLN240139 10196 OAKWOOD

CIR, CARMEL, CA
93923
MCDOUGALL AMY E Construction of a 9,793 square foot single family dwelling with an attached 972 square foot garage and 2,891 square feet of covered patios & decks, an attached 1,860 square foot accessory dwelling unit, an attached 503 square foot affordable junior accessory dwelling unit, and associated site improvements including the removal of five Coast Live Oak trees, development on slopes in excess of 25%, and a reduction of the required front, side and rear setbacks from 5 feet to 0 feet without seeking a Variance. (Assessor's Parcel Number 416-542-011-000)
PLN240268-
DEP
967 SALINAS RD,

ROYAL OAKS, CA
95076
PLP PAJARO LLC Demolition of existing clubhouse and construction of approximately 33,250 square foot two-story clubhouse and relocation of golf maintenance building (approximately 9,875 square feet) on "OR" district land, new uses including Vesting Tentative Map for subdivision of approximately 14.2 acres of HDR district land for 160 residential units (approximately 1,845 square feet per unit) in 1, 2, and 3 story structures; 88 approximately 710 square foot visitor-serving cabins and 58 Recreational Vehicle spaces, an approximately 3,955 square foot welcome center and an approximately 900 square foot comfort station on "OR" district land; an approximately 8,030 square foot sundries market, an approximately 1,570 square foot coffee shop and an
approximately 2,570 square foot sales center/tavern on "CGC" district land, and trail, frisbee golf and open air pavilion on "RC" district land; project includes new water system plant on "OR" district land. (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 117-072-006-000, 117- 072-008-000, 117-072-011-000, 117-072-012-000 & 117-072- 013-000)
PLN240322-
DEP
3705 RIO RD,
CARMEL, CA 93923

CARMEL CENTER

PLACE LLC
Subdivide a 3.77 acre property into 34 lot, construction of 34 multi-family residential units, five of which will be inclusionary housing units, and the removal of more than three protected trees (Assessor's Parcel Numbers 009-562-002-000, 009-562-015-000, and 009-562-016-000)
PLN240344-
DEP
711 VIEJO RD,
CARMEL, CA 93923

CARMEL HOUSING

GROUP LLC
Construction of a 275,000 square foot apartment building consisting of 96 market rate units and 24 low income units, a variance to the maximum allowable height, development on slopes in excess of 25%, and removal of protected trees. (Assessor's Parcel Number 103-011-015-000)
PLN250004-
DEP
711 VIEJO RD,
CARMEL, CA 93923

CARMEL HOUSING

GROUP LLC
Subdivide a 4.7 acre lot into 75 lots, construction of 75 single family dwellings (15 of which would be low income units), Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 3, Packet Page 187 №10/24
development on slopes in excess of 25%, and removal of
protected trees. (Assessor's Parcel Number 103-011-015-000) PLN250005-
DEP
711 VIEJO RD,
CARMEL, CA 93923

CARMEL HOUSING

GROUP LLC
Construction of a 330,000 square foot apartment building with 200 units, 40 of which are low income, a variance to the maximum allowable height, development on slopes in excess of 25%, and removal of protected trees. (Assessor's Parcel Number 103-011-015-000)
PLN250103 9999 PLACEHOLDER

ADDRESS,

PLACEHOLDER
ADDRESS, CA 99999
NICOLA ANTHONY Subdivide a 0.34 acre lot into 16 lots and construction of 16 townhomes (two 3-story 8 unit buildings), 4 of which will be very low income units (Assessor's Parcel Number 237-068-003-000) PLN250255-
DEP
10196 OAKWOOD

CIR, CARMEL, CA
93923
MCDOUGALL AMY E Construction of a eight story apartment building consisting of 24 low income units, the removal of more than three protected trees; and development on slopes in excess of 25% (Assessor's Parcel Number 416-542-011-000)
Source: https://www.countyofmonterey.gov/government/departments-a-h/housing-communitydevelopment/permit-center/sb330-builders-remedy-resources The Builder’s Remedy is a complex framework of State laws that are beyond the scope of this agenda item. The purpose of this agenda item is to ensure that the City of Monterey provides its objective concerns with the project that cannot be mitigated under reasonable circumstances.

Proposed Project
The project developer for 711 Viejo Road is Carmel Housing Group LLC. The Carmel Housing Group submitted three unique applications for the property (see descriptions above). The applicant is pursuing PLN250005-DEP that proposes construction of a 386,510 square feet multi-family residential building consisting of 239 dwelling units (191 market rate and 48 low income). The proposed building is approximately eleven stories with two additional stories of underground parking and a lower basement level.

The original application is dated June 24, 2025. The County has issued three incomplete letters to the applicant (July 23, 2025, November 19, 2025, and December 24, 2025) requesting additional information from the applicant. The applicant is now contesting the County’s handling of the application, and they are “invoking Government Code Section 65589.5(h)(6)(E) …”.

Analysis
It is important that the City identify health/safety and environmental impacts about the proposed project for the County’s consideration. The concerns/impacts that are summarized in the attached letter include:

1. Water Supply - California American Water (Cal-Am) has been subject to State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) orders to reduce its water diversions from the Carmel River for decades. Specifically, SWRCB Order No. WR 95-10 dated July 6, 1995, determined that Cal-Am did not have the right to divert as much water from the Carmel River system as it historically did. The SWRCB, through Order WR 2009-0060, authorized Cal-Am to continue these diversion levels until 2017, and then again through Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 4, Packet Page 188 №10/24
Order WR 2016-0016 to 2021, at which point alternative water supplies were required to avoid significant threats to the health, safety and welfare of residents, businesses, visitors and property owners on the Monterey Peninsula. The project has not identified a water supply. This is a significant public health and safety impact that is in violation of the SWRCB Orders.

2. Septic – The applicant proposes to install an onsite wastewater treatment center to handle wastewater. The County’s Environmental Health Staff has provided comments on the proposal that have not been addressed including:

County Comments on Proposal: Parcel is approximately 4.70 acres in size and is located outside of any identified FEMA Flood Zones and aquifer recharge areas.

Property is almost entirely covered in steep slopes > 25%. Butano Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. Geotechnical Report dated 6/24/19 received showing no groundwater was encountered to a deepest depth explored of 13.5 feet below grade.

The following items are required to evaluate an Onsite Wastewater Treatment System (OWTS) proposal for this site:
1) Site and soil evaluation completed by a Qualified OWTS Consultant in accordance with MCC, Section 15.20.080:
i. Soil profile analysis shall be completed for the primary, secondary, and future dispersal areas.
ii. Percolation testing shall be completed for the primary, secondary, and future dispersal areas to assess the absorptive characteristics of the soil in accordance with EHB-approved methods.
iii. A minimum of one deep groundwater monitoring boring or excavation to demonstrate vertical separation to groundwater, as required by Tables 4 and 5 (MCC, Section 15.20.310)
2) A Qualified Professional shall prepare an OWTS Feasibility Report that conforms with MCC, Section 15.20.060, including selection of a Soil Application Rate in accordance with Table 4.
3) A Qualified Professional shall prepare an OWTS design for review and approval. The design shall indicate that adequate area exists to accommodate the primary and secondary dispersal systems based on the soil application rate, and a 100% reserve area for a future dispersal system replacement (MCC, Section 15.20.110.G). 4) A site visit will be required for the Environmental Health Bureau (EHB) to determine that adequate area exists for onsite wastewater disposal for the proposed development.

To date, adequate wastewater disposal has not been determined. This is a significant health and safety impact.

3. Traffic/Scenic Highway – Access into and out of the Monterey Peninsula is constrained.

The project site is located in an undeveloped area adjacent to the City of Monterey without fully developed roadways. The City concurs with the county’s comments on a suggested scope of work for a traffic safety analysis with the addition of Soledad/Munras, Barnet Segal/Viejo Road, and Soledad/Highway 1 Southbound on ramp:

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 5, Packet Page 189 №10/24
County Comments on Proposal:
• Viejo Road / Project Access(s)
• Viejo Road / Valenzuela Road
• Valenzuela Road / Aguajito Road
• Aguajito Road / HWY 68 Northbound On-Off Ramps & Southbound On-Off Ramps
• Highway One / Carpenter Street
• Highway One / Ocean Avenue
• Highway One / Carmel Valley Road
• Highway One / Rio Road
• Highway 68 / Olmsted Road
• Olmsted Road / Via Malpaso
• Olmsted Road / Monhollan Rd / Jacks Peak Rd
• Monhollan Road / Aguajito Rd
City of Monterey Additional Request:
• Soledad and Munras
• Barnet Segal/Viejo Road
• Soledad/Highway 1
• Southbound on Ramp
A Vehicle Miles Traveled analysis also needs to be prepared and impacts mitigated.

Highway 1 is a scenic highway and impacts need to be evaluated and mitigated.

4. Tree and Biotic Impacts – The project site is in an undeveloped area of Monterey County that has high biotic value. An analysis of the project’s health and safety impacts to the biotic environment needs to be conducted and mitigated.

5. Public Services (Fire, Police, Other)
Fire Service: The project site is located adjacent to the City of Monterey and is served by the Cypress Fire Protection District. The District provides services through a contract with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). The site is classified as a very high Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ). The project’s impact to fire services and development in a very high Fire Hazard Severity Zone creates a significant public safety impact.

Due to the site’s location, auto aid and mutual aid to the project site would be provided by the City of Monterey’s Fire Department. The City of Monterey is concerned that due to the high density of the project and its location within a high fire severity zone, this development would increase the demand on the City without any commitment or plan to fund fire service needs in the area. This is a significant safety concern.

Additionally, an evacuation analysis must be conducted to identify if any improvements to evacuation routes are needed due to the project.

Police Services: The City also remains concerned about police response services for the project site. Increased development may also put increasing pressure and demands on the Monterey Police Department to provide automatic aid to emergency calls for the Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 6, Packet Page 190 №10/24
proposed housing units, since there may be limited resources available from the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office. A funding and police response plan should be developed.

Other Services: The proposed development, located directly adjacent to the City’s boundary, would increase demand on other City of Monterey resources, including library, parks, recreation, trails, and programs. The impact to City services is significant. The City is interested in exploring a discussion where a portion of the County’s property tax revenue in the area would fund the increased demand for services provided by the City of Monterey.

In summary, staff recommends that the Mayor is authorized to sign a letter commenting on the Monterey County Planning Application for a project located at 711 Viejo Road.

Attachments: 1. Draft Letter

2. Monterey County Notice of Housing Development Project Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65589.5 (h)(6)(D)

3. Letter from Assistant City Manager to Mayor and City Council e: All business associations
All neighborhood associations
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 7, Packet Page 191 ATTACHMENT 1
February 18, 2026
County of Monterey Housing and Community Development
Attn: Fionna Jensen
[email protected]
RE: HCD-Planning File No. PLN250005-DEP
Dear Ms. Jensen,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed project at 711 Viejo Road.

The City has significant health and safety concerns about the project. The City requests that the following issues are addressed:

1. Water Supply - California American Water (Cal-Am) has been subject to State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) orders to reduce its water diversions from the Carmel River for decades. Specifically, SWRCB Order No. WR 95-10 dated July 6, 1995, determined that Cal-Am did not have the right to divert as much water from the Carmel River system as it historically did. The SWRCB, through Order WR 2009-0060, authorized Cal-Am to continue these diversion levels until 2017, and then again through Order WR 2016-0016 to 2021, at which point alternative water supplies were required to avoid significant threats to the health, safety and welfare of residents, businesses, visitors and property owners on the Monterey Peninsula. The project has not identified a water supply. This is a significant public health and safety impact that is in violation of the SWRCB Orders.

2. Septic – The applicant proposes to install a onsite wastewater treatment center to handle wastewater. The County’s Environmental Health Staff has provided comments on the proposal that have not been addressed including:

County Comments on Proposal: Parcel is approximately 4.70 acres in size and is located outside of any identified FEMA Flood Zones and aquifer recharge areas. Property is almost entirely covered in steep slopes > 25%. Butano Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. Geotechnical Report dated 6/24/19 received showing no groundwater was encountered to a deepest depth explored of 13.5 feet below grade.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 8, Packet Page 192 ATTACHMENT 1
iii. A minimum of one deep groundwater monitoring boring or excavation to demonstrate vertical separation to groundwater, as required by Tables 4 and 5 (MCC, Section 15.20.310)
2) A Qualified Professional shall prepare an OWTS Feasibility Report that conforms with MCC, Section 15.20.060, including selection of a Soil Application Rate in accordance with Table 4.
3) A Qualified Professional shall prepare an OWTS design for review and approval. The design shall indicate that adequate area exists to accommodate the primary and secondary dispersal systems based on the soil application rate, and a 100% reserve area for a future dispersal system replacement (MCC, Section 15.20.110.G).
4) A site visit will be required for the Environmental Health Bureau (EHB) to determine that adequate area exists for onsite wastewater disposal for the proposed development.

To date, adequate wastewater disposal has not been determined. This is a significant health and safety impact.

3. Traffic/Scenic Highway – Access into and out of the Monterey Peninsula is constrained. The project site is located in an undeveloped area adjacent to the City of Monterey without fully developed roadways. The city concurs with the county’s comments on a suggested scope of work for a traffic safety analysis with the addition of Soledad/Munras, Barnet Segal/Viejo Road, and Soledad/Highway 1 Southbound on ramp:

County Comments on Proposal:
• Viejo Road / Project Access(s)
• Viejo Road / Valenzuela Road
• Valenzuela Road / Aguajito Road
• Aguajito Road / HWY 68 Northbound On-Off Ramps & Southbound On-Off Ramps
• Highway One / Carpenter Street
• Highway One / Ocean Avenue
• Highway One / Carmel Valley Road
• Highway One / Rio Road
• Highway 68 / Olmsted Road
• Olmsted Road / Via Malpaso
• Olmsted Road / Monhollan Rd / Jacks Peak Rd
• Monhollan Road / Aguajito Rd
City of Monterey Additional Request:
• Soledad and Munras
• Barnet Segal/Viejo Road
• Soledad/Highway 1
• Southbound on Ramp
A Vehicle Miles Traveled analysis also needs to be prepared and impacts mitigated.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 9, Packet Page 193 ATTACHMENT 1
Highway 1 is a scenic highway and impacts need to be evaluated and mitigated.

Additionally, an evacuation analysis must be conducted to identify if any improvements to evacuation routes are needed due to the project.

Police Services: The City also remains concerned about police response services for the project site. Increased development may also put increasing pressure and demands on the Monterey Police Department to provide automatic aid to emergency calls for the proposed housing units, since there may be limited resources available from the Monterey County Sheriff’s Office. A funding and police response plan should be developed.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. The City requests to be added to all notifications for this project.

Sincerely,
Tyller Williamson, Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 10, Packet Page 194 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 11, Packet Page 195 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 12, Packet Page 196 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 13, Packet Page 197 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 14, Packet Page 198 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 15, Packet Page 199 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 16, Packet Page 200 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 17, Packet Page 201 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 18, Packet Page 202 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 19, Packet Page 203 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 20, Packet Page 204 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 21, Packet Page 205 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 22, Packet Page 206 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 23, Packet Page 207 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 24, Packet Page 208 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 25, Packet Page 209 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 26, Packet Page 210 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 27, Packet Page 211 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 28, Packet Page 212 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 29, Packet Page 213 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 30, Packet Page 214

#$%
&'%(%)%*+,%
-&'%(%)%*+,%./(0,012,34
5 60
789:79878;
:;<=>
?@+/
A%,B0,
-B%,B0,./(0,012,34C
D+(
D%,E+%
-33%,E+%./(0,012,34C
F0%(
&%)E*
-,%)E*./(0,012,34C
GH
I/+*
-)/+*./(0,012,34C
610,
J++%/)(
-K++%/)(./(0,012,34

L0K
A%/%(
-B%/%(./(0,012,34C
M*,+)+(0
N%O+
-H%O+./(0,012,34C
@%,+(
@,%+
-,%+./(0,012,34C
@+/B0,1
M0
-E0./(0,012,34
PQRS
TRUVS
RWX
YVZW[\]^
_VZ
`RU
aQ
RbRSQ
Vc
deQ
f\gdR
YRS`Q]
hSVhVgQX
hSViQ[d
\W
ZW\W[VShVSRdQX
TVWdQSQU
YVZWdU
Rd
jkk
f\QiV
lVRXm

ne\g
hSViQ[do
gZa`\ddQX
dV
deQ
YVZWdU
Vc
TVWdQSQU
ZWXQS
deQ
pq
rrs
tqZ\]XQSug
lQ`QXUt
hSVhVgQg
R
rvwoxks
gyZRSQ
cQQd
`Z]d\zcR`\]U
SQg\XQWd\R]
aZ\]X\W{
[VWg\gd\W{
Vc
|r}
XbQ]]\W{
ZW\dg
~k}k
`RSQd
SRdQ
RWX
v
]Vb
\W[V`Qm
neQ
hSVhVgQX
aZ\]X\W{
\g
kk
gdVS\Qg
b\de
dbV
RXX\d\VWR]
gdVS\Qg
Vc
ZWXQS{SVZWX
hRS\W{
RWX
R
]VbQS
aRgQ`QWd
]QQ]m

PZS\W{
WQd
bQQug
YVZW[\]
`QQd\W{
VW
QaSZRSU
kjo
gdRcc
b\]]
aQ
aS\W{\W{
cVSde
RW
RcdQSWVVW
hZa]\[
RhhQRSRW[Q
\dQ`
SQ[V``QWX\W{
deRd
deQ
TRUVS
aQ
RZdeVS\
QX
dV
g\{W
R
[V``QWd
]QddQS
VW
deQ
hSViQ[d
Rhh]\[Rd\VW
QhSQgg\W{
[VW[QSWg
RaVZd
de\g
hSViQ[d
\`hR[dgo
\W[]ZX\W{
bRdQS
gZhh]Uo
gQhd\[o
dSQQgo
c\SQ
gQS\[Qo
hV]\[Q
gQS\[Qo
dSRcc\[o
RWX
VdeQS
gQS\[Qgm
pdRcc
eRg
aQQW
RgQX
dV
geRSQ
b\de
YVZW[\]`Q`aQSg
R
SQWXQS\W{
Vc
deQ
hSVhVgQX
XQQ]Vh`QWdm

W
Q]QRd\VW
\Qb
Vc
deQ
aZ\]X\W{
\g
geVbW
aQ]Vbm
neVgQ
\WdQSQgdQX
\W
\Qb\W{
deQ
cZ]]
hSViQ[d
gZa`\ddR]g
[RW
R[[Qgg
deQ
YVZWdUug
QS`\d
VSdR]
Rd
¡¢m

£W
deQ
ZhhQS
]Qcd
[VSWQSo
gQRS[e
cVS
deQ
]RWW\W{
SViQ[d
¤Z`aQS^
¥¤|xsssxzP¦m

neQWo
[]\[
VW
deQ
tlQ[VSX
£WcVt
hZ]]XVbW
`QWZo
RWX
[]\[
tddR[e`QWdgmt

|§ks§|wo
x^sr
Tf\gdR
YRS`Q]
§§
qZ\]XQSug
lQ`QXU
SViQ[d
Rd
jkk
f\QiV
lVRX
\W
¨W\W[VShVSRdQX
TVWdQSQU
YVZWdU
z
¤Rd
lViRWRgRde\SR
z
©Zd]VV
RaVZd^a]RW k§|
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 31, Packet Page 215

!"#$% &'()*+,-.+,/01203420356
-%%'% $ +' 7,$89(:;<=>?@A?B=CDC>
EFGHIJ<@<JK=DCC=LM??NO:,"$ 9(97)+P'QRSTSUV
D?WIBIXI=Y<DIZN?B=CDC>[\?]:^_`T_aUaTbaV
cdefdcg
hifjkl
m
ddn
op

q

reelq
p

s

k

m

p
q
t

u

iu cdc
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 32, Packet Page 216 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
FROM: Rafaela T. King, Finance Director
Prepared By: Kyle Olsen, Finance Analyst
SUBJECT: Amend Resolution 25-058 Authorizing Changes to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget to Increase Revenues and Expenditures in the General Fund and Other Funds, Designate Funds into the Economic Uncertainty Reserve, and Update the Position Control List (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 amending the
FY 2025-26 Budget and FY 2025-26 Position Control
List.

VALUE DRIVERS:

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

It is good fiscal and budget policy to regularly review the financial results of City operations. In addition,
governmental accounting standards require that the City Council be regularly updated as to the financial condition of the City. These updates are known as “Mid-Year
Budget Adjustments” and are typically conducted
annually in February.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

On June 3, 2025, Monterey City Council adopted a
balanced budget for the FY 2025-26 Fiscal Year.

Anticipated salary savings were utilized to present the balanced budget. The General Fund appropriated revenues and expenditures were $110M and $120M respectively. After reviewing the City’s operations at mid-year, City staff recommends amending the FY 2025-26 General Fund revenue by $418,272 and expenditures by $830,272 for a net increase of $412,500.

Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is recommended to
amend the FY 2025-26 budget to
increase revenues by $418,272 and
expenditures by $830,772, resulting
in a net increase of $412,500.
• An additional $925,453 is proposed
to be allocated to the Economic
Uncertainty Reserve to maintain a
balance equal to 20% of the
General Fund expenditure.
• The City’s FY 2024-25 year-end
financial summary showed revenues
exceeding projections by $4.3M and
expenditures under budget by
$10.1M.
• Mid-year adjustments include
funding for unplanned activities such
as public opinion polling, City
Manager recruitment, radio system
upgrades, mural repairs, and pool
maintenance.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 17.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 1, Packet Page 217 №11/25
When taking into consideration anticipated salary savings for the fiscal year the City’s current spending and revenue projections, the budget remains balanced for the year.

Additionally, City staff recommends allocating an additional $925,453 to the City’s Reserve for Economic Uncertainty to maintain a balance in that reserve equal to 20% of the City’s General Fund expenditure balance. This is consistent with the City’s reserve policy adopted by City Council in June 2023.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

City Council could choose not to receive this report or approve of the budget amendments included herein; however, that is not recommended. The suggested budget amendments have been reviewed carefully by the Finance Department and City leadership and reflect items needed by the City for the remainder of the fiscal year.

DISCUSSION:

Budgets are a compilation of estimates (i.e., about economics, programs, projects, service demands, emergencies, etc.) and such estimates are based upon information known at the time the budget is developed. The budget process consists of activities that encompass the development, implementation, and evaluation of a plan for the provision of services and capital assets. The process helps decision makers make informed choices about the provision of services and capital assets and to promote stakeholder participation in the process. Financial forecasting is a best practice recommended by Government Fiscal Officers Association (GFOA) because it evaluates current and future fiscal conditions to guide policy and programmatic decisions.

The City’s fiscal year spans July 1 to June 30 and currently uses the annual budget model. A critical feature of effective governance, transparency and financial management is budget monitoring and reporting. Below is an overview of the FY 2024-25 year-end summary as well as a year-to-date summary for the FY 2025-26 fiscal year.

In addition to the annual projections, the City also projects a 5-year forecast of the General Fund’s net operating surplus/deficit. A net operating surplus/deficit does not take into consideration any carryover amount from a prior year. It simply projects if the current year’s revenue is sufficient to cover the current year’s expenses, determining the fiscal health of the City in the form of a surplus or structural deficit. As noted in the re-produced 5-Year forecasts Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 2, Packet Page 218 №11/25
presented with the FY24-25 and FY25-26 budgets, the City projected operating budget deficits for each year as it has each year since the 2013-14 fiscal year. In prior years, the City has been able to absorb the deficits through multiple one-time sources including salary savings. Salary savings averaged 2% from FY 2015-16 to FY 2019-20 and 6% from FY 20-21 to FY 24-25. It is important to note the transfers out in the FY 24-25 forecast include contributions to CIP of $2 million in year one, $3 million in year two and $500 thousand for the last three years. In the FY25-26 forecast, there are no contributions to CIP. A recap can be seen in the tables below. 5-Year Forecasts Restated from FY24-25 and FY25-26 Adopted Budgets *Amounts will differ slightly from presented version to final adopted version below.

FY 2024-25 Five Year Forecast
(Adopted June 2024)
FY 2024-25
Adopted
FY 2025-26
Projected
FY 2026-27
Projected
FY 2027-28
Projected
FY 2028-29
Projected
Revenue $105,908,972 $106,386,792 $109,100,107 $112,229,033 $114,736,761 Expenditure $109,026,752 $112,932,626 $116,782,207 $117,359,835 $117,949,014 Revenue Over/(Under)
Expenditure ($3,117,780) ($6,545,834) ($7,682,100) ($5,130,802) ($3,212,253) Transfers In $778,715 $778,715 $737,715 $678,715 $678,715 Transfers Out $3,695,534 $1,186,936 $1,180,682 $1,182,316 $1,186,626 Net Transfers (Use) ($2,916,819) ($408,221) ($442,967) ($503,601) ($507,911) Operating Surplus/(Deficit) ($6,034,599) ($6,954,055) ($8,125,067) ($5,634,403) ($3,720,164) FY 2025-26 Five Year Forecast
(Adopted June 2025)
FY 2025-26
Adopted
FY 2026-27
Projected
FY 2027-28
Projected
FY 2028-29
Projected
FY 2029-30
Projected
Revenue $110,205,572 $115,715,852 $121,501,645 $127,576,727 $133,955,563 Expenditure $120,663,605 $124,975,040 $127,401,629 $132,327,105 $135,743,886 Revenue Over/(Under)
Expenditure ($10,458,033) ($9,259,188) ($5,899,984) ($4,750,378) ($1,788,323) Transfers In $1,365,423 $1,405,219 $1,446,402 $1,489,021 $1,533,128 Transfers Out* $1,471,936 $615,682 $619,941 $621,626 $618,437 Net Transfers (Use) ($106,513) $789,537 $826,461 $867,395 $914,691 Operating Surplus/(Deficit) ($10,564,546) ($8,469,651) ($5,073,523) ($3,882,983) ($873,632) *Does not include CIP or ISD
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 3, Packet Page 219 №11/25
FY 2024-25 Financial Summary
Table 1: FY 2024-25 General Fund Budget Summary
General Fund
FY 2024-25
Amended
Budget
FY 2024-25
Year-End Actual
(Audited)
Revenue $108,023,941 $112,299,706
Expenditure ($115,134,338) ($104,980,466)
Revenue Over/(Under)
Expenditure ($7,110,397) $7,319,240
Transfer In $778,715 $755,155
Transfer Out ($3,730,166) ($6,030,027)
Net Use ($2,951,451) ($5,274,872)
FY 2024-25 Surplus/(Deficit) ($10,061,848) $2,044,368
FY 2024-25 Revenue Highlights
Overall, the City’s revenue exceeded budget estimates in FY 2024-25. The General Fund (including the Facility Maintenance Fund) finished at 104% of budget, equaling $4.3M above projections. While some areas of the City’s revenues came in at or slightly below projections, the City’s five key revenue sources0F
1 met or exceeded expectations. Of note:
• Fees & Charges totaled 108%, equaling $1.6M above projected revenue. • Sales Tax totaled 102%, equaling $359K above projected revenue. • Property Taxes totaled 102%, equaling $319K above projected revenue. • Transient Occupancy Tax totaled 101%, equaling $336K above projected revenue.

Additionally, the City’s investment portfolio produced very strong returns. In FY 2024-25, the City exceeded projected investment income by 310%, equaling $3.4M above projected revenue.

FY 2024-25 Expenditure Highlights
As noted previously in this report, spending generally ended the year under budgeted projections. There are many reasons why the City may underspend from budget estimates – these reasons could include staffing vacancies, close monitoring/managing of expenditures, deferring cost, or identifying other solutions to best serve the City. Overall, the City finished the year at 91.2%, equaling $10.1M under the projected budget. Of note:
• Salaries and Benefits totaled 94%, equaling $4.9M under projected expenditures. • Services and Supplies totaled 83%, equaling $3.2M under projected expenditures. • Internal Service Charges totaled 95%, equaling $544K under projected expenditures.

This is largely due to savings from Vehicle Rental charges throughout the City as the City’s use of vehicles was less than anticipated.
1 Approximately 81% of the City’s General Fund Revenue comes from five key areas: 1) Transient Occupancy Tax; 2) Property Tax; 3) Utility users Tax; 4) Sales Tax; and 5) Fees & Charges Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 4, Packet Page 220 №11/25
The year-end status of the General Fund (revenues exceeding expectations, expenses less than projected) is a net positive for the City. However, the FY 2024-25 budget savings were anticipated by City Staff and integrated into the City’s FY 2025-26 financial plans.

FY 2025-26 Year-to-Date
The current fiscal year budget, adopted by Monterey City Council on June 3, 2025, appropriated a budget with $120.7M in projected expenses and $110.2M in projected revenue. To balance the FY 2025-26 budget, City staff relied on several strategies including freezing certain positions, decreasing Departments’ services/supplies budget requests, restructuring the City’s financial commitments, and reducing the amount contributed to the City’s reserves.

During the first six months of the fiscal year, City Council has appropriated additional funds to the General Fund and, as of December 31, 2025, the amended budget in the General Fund is $124M in expenditures and $112M in revenue.

As of December 31, 2025, the City has collected approximately 51% ($56.6M) of its expected annual revenue and has spent approximately 44% ($53.3M) of expected annual expenditures.

While the City is on track in relation to its annual budget, one can see that budgeted expenditures continue to outpace budgeted revenue. The City’s Finance Department monitors very closely the City’s overall spending and revenue collection FY 2025-26 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments Highlights
After careful review and consideration of the City’s financial position, operations, and needs, City Staff recommend adding $830,772 in expenses and $418,272 in revenue for a net increase to the General Fund’s Operating Budget of $412,500. Initially, departments throughout the City requested a net increase of $1.2 million; however, through working with Departments to identify areas of underspending or identify other solutions, City Staff have been able to drastically bring down the total request. These adjustments will impact the City’s General Fund topline and the deficit the City is currently facing. After taking into consideration all revenues, expenditures, transfers-in, transfers-out, and other uses, the amended estimated operating deficit is $12,460,246. This can be viewed in Table 2 below. Staff project that a combination of savings in the General Fund and current revenue projections will make up the gap between revenue and expenditures for this fiscal year.

There is adequate funding in the City’s unassigned fund balance and projected FY 2025-26 savings to absorb these costs through the rest of the fiscal year. There is also sufficient funds to transfer an additional $925,453 to the City’s Economic Uncertainty Reserve, bringing the reserve amount to the Council Policy standard of 20%. Fully funding the Economic Uncertainty Reserve takes place biannually, at budget adoption and at mid-year. This can be viewed in Table 3 below:

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 5, Packet Page 221 №11/25
Table 2: FY 2025-26 General Fund Budget Update (Detailed) General Fund
FY 2025-26
Adopted
Budget Amendments
FY 2025-26
Amended
Budget (as of
12/31/2025)
FY 2025-26
Proposed
Mid-Year
Adjustment
FY 2025-26
Amended
Budget
Revenue $110,205,572 $2,113,294 $112,318,866 $418,272 $112,737,138 Expenditure ($120,713,605) ($3,746,495) ($124,460,100) ($830,772) ($125,290,872) Revenue Over/(Under)
Expenditure ($10,508,033) ($1,633,201) ($12,141,233) ($412,500) ($12,553,733) Transfer In $1,365,423 $1,365,423 $1,365,423
Transfer Out ($1,271,936) ($1,271,936) ($1,271,936)
Net Use $93,487 $93,487 $93,487
FY 2025-26 Operational
Surplus/(Deficit) ($10,414,546) ($1,633,201) ($12,047,746) ($412,500) ($12,460,246) FY 2025-26 Estimated
Savings
of which, FY 2025-26
Projected Salary Savings $7,850,000
of which, FY 2025-26
Estimated Revenue
Surplus $1,000,000
of which, FY 2025-26
Estimated Other Savings $1,000,000
of which, FY 2025-26
Savings from Unfunded
Positions $1,050,000
FY 2025-26
Surplus/(Deficit) After
Yearly Savings ($1,560,246)
Table 3: Economic Uncertainty Fund
Total General Fund
Expenditures
Economic Uncertainty
Fund Balance
FY 2025-26 Adopted Expenditure Budget $120,713,605 $24,132,721 FY 2025-26 Proposed Amended Budget $125,290,872 $25,058,174 Total Added to Economic Uncertainty Fund $925,453
An overview of the requested adjustments can be found in Exhibit A and a description of each adjustment, by Department, is below:

City Manager’s Office
In the fall of 2025, the City contracted with Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin (FM3) to conduct a series of public opinion polls regarding the likelihood of certain tax measures or other revenue generating measures passing on a June or November ballot. In total, FM3 will conduct three different rounds of polling (fall 2025, winter 2026, and summer 2026). This activity was unplanned at the beginning of the fiscal year and while the City has been able to fund a majority Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 6, Packet Page 222 №11/25
of the project through existing appropriations, an increase of $31,500 is needed to ensure the City has sufficient funds to support this contract.

Human Resources Department
In the fall of 2025, the City Manager announced his retirement from the City effective in January 2026. As a result of this announcement, the City launched an exhaustive search for the next City Manager. To facilitate this search, the Human Resources department engaged the services of a professional executive search firm, Bob Murray & Associates, to conduct an exhaustive and comprehensive search for the right candidate to become City Manager. This activity was unplanned at the beginning of the fiscal year and to fully fund the recruitment efforts, an additional $10,000 is needed to ensure the City has sufficient funds.

Police Department
In 2026, the County radio system required each agency to upgrade their mobile and portable radios to simulcast, which the City’s current radio system does not have the capacity to do.

Compatibility with the County’s radio system is essential for public safety and while the City can offset a portion of the expected costs with existing appropriations, an additional $220,000 is needed to ensure the City has sufficient funds to meet this obligation.

Fire Department
Each year, the City coordinates with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) to provide emergency fire services throughout the state of California. At the beginning of the fiscal year, the Fire Department estimates the amount which will be received by CalOES; however, the eventual amount is driven by external factors beyond the City’s control and in some cases, the City receives a higher level of reimbursement than expected, necessitating a budget adjustment. In the first half FY 2025-26, this City received an additional $418,271.53 in revenue – this is offset by the same amount in expenditures related to providing these fire services. A detailed breakdown of the impacted revenue and expenditure accounts related to the Fire Department can be found in Exhibit A.

Additionally, the Fire Department has revitalized its training programs and, as a result, revenue to the City’s Public Safety Training & Services fund has increased above original projections and expenses from the fund have increased as well. To meet the needs of the Fire Department’s training service’s needs, City staff recommend a revenue adjustment of $10,000 and an expense adjustment of $40,000.

Public Works
In 1984, the City installed a mural on the entrance of the Monterey Conference Center, and it was removed in 2015 and reinstalled on the western wall of the Monterey Conference Center along Pacific Street in 2018 during the Conference Center remodel. The “Monterey Mural” by Guillermo Granizo has been a staple of the City’s downtown area attracting tourists and sharing the unique history of the City of Monterey for more than forty years. In early 2026, City Staff identified that several of the mural's tiles have fallen off, and a large section is loosening and may fall if corrective action is not taken. The area of the tile is the major artery for Hotel and Conference Center staff and has been temporarily stabilized for safety. It is appropriate to repair the historic, irreplaceable artwork as the mural is tied to the economic vitality of the revenueCouncil Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 7, Packet Page 223 №11/25
generating Monterey Conference Center. $120,000 from the City’s Building Maintenance budget is needed for these repairs, which were unplanned at the beginning of the fiscal year.

Note: The City is seeking several grant opportunities which may offset these costs. The City is still in the early stages of identifying alternative funding sources and when details are available they will be shared with City Council.

Additionally, the City’s Sports Center Maintenance division, managed by Public Works, requires an increase of $31,000 for additional chemical supplies for the Sports Center pool. In early 2025, the City re-tiled the pool to great success, repairing several leaks and ensuring the pool’s use for years to come. However, as the pool is no longer backfilled with clean water from the municipal water supply (from the leaks), the Building Maintenance team has observed that the City is using cleaning supplies for the pool at a higher rate. This budget adjustment will be supported by a transfer in the amount of $31,000 from the Facility Maintenance to the General Fund.

Position Control
Along with the budget adjustment listed above, City Staff also recommend adjusting the Position Control List (PCL) to reflect departmental needs by removing one (1) Assistant Urban Forester and adding one (1) Urban Forester position in the City’s Park’s Division. The Assistant Urban Forester position is currently vacant and this change will not impact any staff’s employment in the City. Overall, there is a net difference of $25,000 between the two positions; however, for the remainder of FY 2025-26 the City will utilize salary savings from the vacant Assistant Urban Forester position to make up the difference if the Urban Forester position is filled before the end of the Fiscal Year. The attached Exhibit B shows proposed PCL with this change.

RTK/kro
Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution

2. Exhibit A – Budget Adjustments

3. Exhibit B – Position Control List
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 8, Packet Page 224 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AMENDING RESOLUTION 25-058 AUTHORIZING CHANGES TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2025- 26 BUDGET TO INCREASE REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES IN THE GENERAL FUND

AND OTHER FUNDS, DESIGNATING FUNDS INTO THE ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY

RESERVE, AND UPDATING THE POSITION CONTROL LIST
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 25-058 on June 2, 2025 to establish the City’s Operating Budget and Position Control List, which has been amended and restated in resolution 25-065 and 26-006;
WHEREAS, FY 2024-25 and FY 2025-26 updates were summarized and presented to the Council;
WHEREAS, budget adjustments are proposed to reflect information known since the budget was adopted; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines”), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby authorizes the Finance Director to:

1. Amend Resolutions 25-058 authorizing changes to the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget as itemized in Exhibit A (attached hereto).

2. Designate $925,453 into the Economic Uncertainty Reserve

3. Transfer $31,500 from the Facility Maintenance Fund to the General Fund

4. Amend Resolution 25-058 authorizing changes to the Position Control List as reflected in Exhibit B (attached hereto).

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 9, Packet Page 225 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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 10, Packet Page 226 Exhibit A
Fund Department Account Name Account Number Revenue Amount Expense Amount 101 - General Fund City Manager's Office Professional Services 101-900-9110-0000-4240 $31,500 101 - General Fund Human Resources Professional Services 101-060-0600-0000-4240 $10,000 101 - General Fund Police Department Safety Equipment 101-210-2110-0000-4238 $220,000 101 - General Fund Fire Department State Reimbursement 101-250-2530-3490 $340,406 101 - General Fund Fire Department Fire Service Charges 101-250-2530-3640 $77,866 101 - General Fund Fire Department Overtime 101-250-2530-0000-4102 $309,729 101 - General Fund Fire Department
Equipment/Vehicle
Replacement 101-250-2530-0000-4601 $88,542
101 - General Fund Fire Department Special Supplies 101-250-2530-COMM-4253 $20,000 101 - General Fund Public Works Chemical Supplies 101-500-5189-0000-4210 $31,000 101 - General Fund Public Works Contractual Services 101-310-3152-0000-4220 $120,000 101 - General Fund Total $418,272 $830,772
291 - Public Safety Training & Services Fund Fire Department Training Classes 291-250-2540-3968 $10,000 291 - Public Safety Training & Services Fund Fire Department Operating Supplies 291-250-2540-TRNG-4205 $40,000 Special Revenue Funds Total $10,000 $40,000
Grand Total $428,272 $870,772
Table 1: Proposed Budget Adjustments by Department, Account, and Amount Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 11, Packet Page 227 Revenue Catetory
FY 2025-26 Amended
Budget
Proposed FY 2025-26 MidYear AdjustmentsFY 2025-26 Prposed Amended Budget
PROPERTY TAXES $17,074,474 $17,074,474
SALES TAX $16,113,000 $16,113,000
TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES $29,687,000 $29,687,000
BUSINESS LICENSE $5,300,000 $5,300,000
UTILITY USERS TAXES $5,247,080 $5,247,080
FRANCHISE FEES $2,765,500 $2,765,500
OTHER TAXES $528,214 $528,214
LICENSES & PERMITS $2,328,650 $2,328,650
FINES & FORFEITURES $259,000 $259,000
INTERGOVERNMENTAL $3,000,782 $340,406 $3,341,188
INTEREST $2,442,144 $2,442,144
RENTS $2,690,166 $2,690,166
FEES & CHARGES $24,328,755 $77,866 $24,406,621
OTHER REVENUES $554,101 $554,101
TOTAL REVENUE $112,318,866 $418,272 $112,737,138
Department
FY 2025-26 Amended
Budget
Proposed FY 2025-26 MidYear AdjustmentsFY 2025-26 Prposed Amended Budget
MAYOR/COUNCIL $262,323 $262,323
CITY MANAGER $2,509,359 $2,509,359
CITY ATTORNEY $1,533,667 $1,533,667
HUMAN RESOURCES $1,799,184 $10,000 $1,809,184
FINANCE $4,601,717 $4,601,717
POLICE $27,975,968 $220,000 $28,195,968
FIRE $35,123,957 $418,271 $35,542,228
PUBLIC WORKS $10,641,463 $151,000 $10,792,463
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT $11,340,010 $11,340,010
PARKS AND RECREATION $18,010,709 $18,010,709
LIBRARY $4,000,219 $4,000,219
CONFERENCE CENTER $6,251,609 $6,251,609
NON-DEPARTMENTAL $409,916 $31,500 $441,416
TOTAL EXPENDITURE $124,460,100 $830,771 $125,290,871
Table 2: General Fund Proposed Revenue Adjustments (by Revenue Category) Table 3: General Fund Proposed Expenditure Adjustments (by Department) Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 12, Packet Page 228 CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT Administration
Community
Resources/
Education City Clerk FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101 0210 0211 0321
Communications Manager 1.00 1.00
Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00 2.00
Assistant City Manager 0.83 0.83
City Manager 1.00 1.00
Management Analyst 1.00 1.00
City Clerk 1.00 1.00
Total City Manager Dept 3.83 1.00 2.00 6.83
Conference Center Administration Sales Event Operations Maintenance FY 2025-26 Adopted Fund 101 6210 6220 6231 6232
Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00
Conference Center General Mgr 1.00 1.00
Custodian 1.75 1.75
Sales Coordinator 1.00 1.00
Event Coordinator 2.00 2.00
Facility Attendant 2.50 2.50
Operations Coordinator 1.00 1.00
Operations Supervisor 1.00 1.00
Senior Facility Attendant 1.00 1.00
Senior Craftsworker 1.00 1.00
HVAC Senior Tech 1.00 1.00
Total Conference Center 2.00 1.00 9.25 2.00 14.25

INFORMATION RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
Information
Resources FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 710 0340
Chief Information Officer 1.00 1.00
Assistant City Manager 0.17 0.17
GEO Info System (GIS) Coordinator 1.00 1.00
Network Engineer II 1.00 1.00
Information Technology Specialist 2.00 2.00
Senior Information Tech Specialist 1.00 1.00
IT Application Engineer II 4.00 4.00
Systems & Network Administrator 1.00 1.00
Administrative Assistant 0.75 0.75
Total Information Services Dept 11.92 11.92

CITY ATTORNEY DEPARTMENT
City Attorney
Administration FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101 0500
Assistant City Attorney 1.00 1.00
City Attorney 1.00 1.00
Deputy City Attorney I | II 1.00 1.00
Legal Secretary 1.00 1.00
Total City Attorney Dept 4.00 4.00
HUMAN RESOURCES Administration (1)
Workers' Comp/
Employee
Benefits(2) FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101(1)/715(2) 0600 0612
Human Resources Analyst 1.00 1.00 2.00
Senior Human Resource Analyst 1.00 1.00
Human Resources Assistant 1.00 1.00
Assistant HR Director 0.50 0.50 1.00
Human Resources Director 0.75 0.25 1.00
Human Resources Specialist 2.00 2.00
Total Human Resources Dept 6.25 1.75 8.00
FINANCE DEPARTMENT Finance (1) Revenue Accounting Revenue(2) Risk Management
(3) FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101(1)/807(2)/716(3) 1110 1120 1130 1120 1143
Accountant/Auditor 1.00 3.50 4.50
Accounting Assistant 1.00 1.00
Accounting Specialist 1.70 2.00 0.30 4.00
Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00
Assistant Finance Director 1.00 1.00
Business License Inspector 1.00 1.00
Finance Analyst 0.00 1.00 1.00
Finance Director 0.75 0.25 1.00
Finance Manager 1.00 1.00 2.00
Purchasing Analyst 1.00 1.00
Risk Specialist 1.00 1.00
Risk Manager 1.00 1.00
Total Finance Dept 1.75 5.70 9.50 0.30 2.25 19.50

AMENDED POSITION CONTROL LIST
FISCAL YEAR 2025-26

EXHIBIT B
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 13, Packet Page 229 POLICE DEPARTMENT Administration Field Operations Support Investigations/
Community
Services FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101 2110 2120 2130 2140
Assistant Police Chief 1.00 1.00
Homeless Navigator 1.00 1.00
Police Chief 1.00 1.00
Police Officer 34.00 5.00 39.00
Police Sergeant 7.00 2.00 9.00
Police Lieutenant 2.00 1.00 3.00
Community Service Officer 2.00 2.00
Police Services Assistant 1.00 2.00 3.00
Police Services Technician 8.00 8.00
Police Records/Detention Supervisor 1.00 1.00
Senior Administrative Analyst 1.00 1.00
Senior Police Services Technician 3.00 3.00
Total Police Dept 5.00 45.00 14.00 8.00 72.00
FIRE DEPARTMENT Administration
Fire Prevention &
Emerg.

Preparedness Fire Operations Fire Training FY 2025-26 Adopted Fund 101 2510 2520 2530 2540
Assistant Fire Chief 2.00 2.00
Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00
Fire Chief 1.00 1.00
Fire Inspector II 1.00 1.00
Fire Prevention Technician 1.00 1.00
Deputy Fire Marshal 1.00 1.00
Division Chief 3.00 1.00 4.00
Fire Captain 21.00 21.00
Fire Engineer 24.00 24.00
Firefighter 39.00 39.00
Senior Adminstrative Analyst 1.00 1.00
Total Fire Dept 6.00 2.00 87.00 1.00 96.00
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Administration(1)
Neighborhood
Improvement
Fund Admin(2)
Presidio Maint.

Admin(3) FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101(1)/216(2)/650(3) 3110 3110 3110
Accounting Specialist 1.00 1.00
Accounting Assistant 1.00 1.00
Management Analyst 1.00 1.00
Deputy PW Director/Admin 0.50 0.10 0.60
Deputy PW Director/Engineer 0.10 0.10
Senior Engineer 1.00 1.00
Executive Assistant 1.00 1.00
Senior Administrative Analyst 1.00 1.00
Public Works Director 1.00 1.00
Total Administration 4.50 1.00 2.20 7.70
Engineering Engineering(1)
Sewer Line
MaintenanceEngineering(2)Storm Drain
Engineering(3)
Presidio Proj
Engineering &
Admin(4) FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101(1)/279(2)/280(3)/650(4) 3121 3121 3121 3159
Administrative Assistant 2.00 2.00
Associate Civil Engineer 2.85 0.15 2.00 5.00
City Traffic Engineer 1.00 1.00
Deputy PW Director/City Engineer 0.50 0.20 0.20 0.90
Engineering Assistant II 1.00 1.00
Engineering Technician 1.00 1.00
Engineering Programs Analyst 1.00 1.00
Engineering Project Manager 2.00 1.00 3.00
Public Works Inspector 1.00 1.00
Senior Engineer 2.40 0.30 0.30 3.00
Senior Project Manager 1.00 1.00 2.00
Senior Public Works Inspector 1.00 1.00
Environmental Reg. Analyst 1.00 0.42 0.58 2.00
Environmental Reg. Manager 0.14 0.86 1.00
Total Engineering 17.75 1.21 1.94 4.00 24.90
Vehicle Management -Mechanical Mechanical FY 2025-26 Adopted Fund 708 3154
Automotive Mechanic 5.00 5.00
Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00
Parts Clerk 1.00 1.00
Fleet Manager 1.00 1.00
Lead Mechanic 1.00 1.00
Total Vehicle Mgmt.-Mechanical 9.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.00 Building Maintenance
Building
Maintenance(1)
Presidio Maint.

Bldgs(2)
Presidio Camp
Roberts(2)
Presidio Naval
Research(2) FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101(1)/650(2) 3152 3152 3163 3164
Building Maintenance Craftsworker 1.00 13.00 1.00 1.00 16.00

EXHIBIT B
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 14, Packet Page 230 Electrician 1.00 3.00 4.00
General Srvc Superintendent 0.15 0.85 1.00
Admin Services Technician 0.25 0.75 1.00
Management Analyst 1.00 1.00
Administrative Assistant 4.00 1.00 5.00
Building Maintenance Supervisor 1.00 2.00 1.00 4.00
Building Maintenance Worker 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00
Facilities Maintenance Coordinator 1.00 1.00
General Srvc Field Oper Manager 0.25 0.75 1.00
Historic Facilities Sr. Craftsworker 1.00 1.00
HVAC Senior Technician 3.00 1.00 4.00
Senior Craftsworker 1.00 5.00 6.00
Senior Locksmith 1.00 1.00
Senior Parts Clerk 1.00 1.00
Building Maintenance 5.65 37.35 5.00 2.00 50.00
Streets/Sewer/Stormdrain Maintenance Maintenance(1)
Presidio Maint.

Streets(2)
Sewer
Maintenance(3)
Storm Drain
Maintenance(4)
Presidio Maint.

Streets(2) FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101(1)/650(2)/279(3)/280(4) 3151 3151 3153 3155 3155 Streets & Utilities Operations Manager 0.30 0.20 0.30 0.20 1.00 Administrative Assistant 0.49 0.40 0.11 1.00
Senior Street Maintenance Worker 1.00 2.00 1.00 4.00
Sign Craftsworker 1.00 1.00
Street Maintenance Leadworker 0.74 1.00 0.13 0.13 2.00
Street Maintenance Worker 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 6.00
Street & Utilities Supervisor 1.00 1.00 2.00
Total Streets 6.53 2.20 5.83 2.31 17.00
Custodial Services Custodial FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101 3172
Custodian 7.00 7.00
Lead Custodian 1.00 1.00
Senior Custodian 2.00 2.00
Total Custodial Services 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 Marina/Harbor Administration(1) Maintenance(1) Security(1) Administration(2) Maintenance(2) Security(2) FY 2025-26 Adopted Fund 600(1)/807(2) 3310 3320 3330 3410 3420/3440 3430
Harbormaster 0.50 0.50 1.00
Harbor Coordinator 1.00 1.00 2.00
Facility Attendant (RPT) 1.50 1.50
Deputy PW Director/Admin 0.10 0.10 0.20
Marina Harbor Assistant 0.80 0.20 1.00
Harbor Maintenance Craftsworker 1.50 1.50 3.00
Harbor Security Worker 2.77 0.98 3.75
Total Marina/Harbor 2.40 1.50 2.77 1.80 3.00 0.98 12.45 Parking Administration Enforcement Maintenance Parking Services FY 2025-26 Adopted Fund 625 3510 3520 3530 3540
Accounting Assistant 2.75 2.75
Accounting Specialist 1.00 1.00
Administrative Assistant 0.75 0.75
Assistant Parking Superintendent 1.00 1.00
Deputy PW Director/Admin 0.20 0.20
Parking Superintendent 1.00 1.00
Parking Enforcement Officer 8.00 8.00
Parking Enforcement Supervisor 1.00 1.00
Senior Parking Enforcement Off. 1.00 1.00
Parking Controls Technician 2.00 2.00
Parking Maintenance Supervisor 1.00 1.00
Parking Maintenance Leadworker 1.00 1.00
Parking Maintenance Worker 4.00 4.00
Parking Services Coordinator 0.50 0.50 1.00
Parking Services Representative 4.50 4.50
Parking Services Specialist 1.00 1.00
Senior Parking Controls Technician 1.00 1.00
Total Parking 7.20 10.00 9.00 6.00 32.20
Community Development Department Planning
Building Safety &
Inspection FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101 4400 4410
Administrative Assistant 2.00 1.75 3.75
Accountant/Auditor 0.50 0.50
Assistant Planner 1.00 1.00
Community Development Director 0.60 0.60
Economic Development Manager 1.00 1.00
Principal Planner 2.00 2.00
Senior Associate Planner 3.00 3.00
Code Compliance Coordinator 1.00 1.00
Sustainability Manager 1.00 1.00
Sustainability Assistant 1.00 1.00
Planning Manager 1.00 1.00
Plans Examiner 1.00 1.00
Building Technician 1.00 1.00

EXHIBIT B
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 15, Packet Page 231 Chief Of Inspct Srvc/Bldg Off. 2.00 2.00
Senior Building Inspector 1.00 1.00
Inspector 1.00 1.00
Total Community Development 14.10 7.75 21.85
Housing & Property Management Property Mgmt(1) Property Mgmt(2) Housing Admin(1) Housing Admin(3) Housing Admin(4) Housing Projects(4) FY 2025-26 Adopted Fund 101(1)/807(2)/268(3)/270(4)/274(5) 4300 4300 4305 4305 4305 4310 Administrative Assistant 0.15 0.85 0.50 0.25 0.25 2.00
Community Development Director 0.10 0.30 0.40
HCD Coordinator - Projects/Prgm. 3.00 3.00
Housing Manager 1.00 1.00
Property Technician 1.00 1.00
Property Manager 0.15 0.85 1.00
Total Housing & Property Mgmt 1.40 2.00 4.50 0.00 0.25 0.25 8.40 Parks & Recreation Department Administration FY 2025-26 Adopted Fund 101 5110
Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00
Management Analyst I 0.34 0.34
Parks & Rec Director 0.34 0.34
Recreation Manager 1.00 1.00
Recreation Supervisor 1.00 1.00
Total Recreation 3.68 3.68
Recreation Centers
El Estero Park
Center
Scholze Park
Center
Hilltop Park
Center
Special Programs
& Events Sports FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101 5121 5122 5124 5130 5160
Recreation Coordinator 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00
Sports Coordinator 1.00 1.00
Lead Preschool Instructor 0.75 0.75
Recreation Specialist 0.50 1.00 0.50 2.00
Total Centers 1.50 1.00 1.75 1.00 1.50 6.75
Monterey Sports Center Operations Maintenance FY 2025-26 Adopted Fund 101 5180 5189
Administrative Assistant 1.00 1.00
Aquatics Coordinator 1.00 1.00
Facility Coordinator 2.00 2.00
Fitness Supervisor 1.00 1.00
Guest Service Specialist 1.00 1.00
Management Analyst I 0.33 0.33
Parks & Rec Director 0.33 0.33
Sports Center Manager 1.00 1.00
Sports Coordinator 1.00 1.00
Building Maintenance Craftsworker 1.00 1.00
Senior Craftsworker 1.00 1.00
Total Sports Center 8.66 2.00 10.66
Parks Maintenance(1)
Presidio
Maintenance(2)
Street
Maintenance
District(3)
Vets Park / Urban
Forestry(1) Cemetery (4) Parking (5) FY 2025-26 Adopted Fund 101(1)/650(2)261-262(3)610(4)625(5) 5210 3210 5210 5220/5230 5240 5210 Admin Services Technician 0.70 0.25 0.05 1.00
Management Analyst I 0.33 0.33
Park Attendant 1.00 1.00
Park Maintenance Craftsworker 1.00 1.00
Park Maintenance Leadworker 2.00 2.00
Park Maintenance Supervisor 1.00 1.00
Park Maintenance Worker 10.10 0.40 0.50 1.00 12.00
Park Operations Manager 0.80 0.03 0.15 0.02 1.00
Parks & Rec Director 0.33 0.33
Senior Park Maintenance Worker 2.00 2.00
Assistant Urban Forester 0.50 0.50 1.00
Urban Forester 1.00 1.00
Greenbelt Coordinator 1.00 1.00
Cemetery Coordinator 1.00 1.00
Cemetery Maintenance Worker 1.00 1.00
Total Parks 18.26 0.53 0.40 3.90 2.57 1.00 26.66
Museum Administration FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101 5610
Artifact Specialist 1.00 1.00
Administrative Assistant 0.25 0.25
Total Museum 1.25 1.25
LIBRARY Administration (1)
Reference Services
(1) FY 2025-26 Adopted
Fund 101(1)/810(2) 5510 5530
Administrative Assistant 0.75 0.75
Assistant Library Director 1.00 1.00
Library Director 1.00 1.00
Library Assistant I 0.75 0.75

EXHIBIT B
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 16, Packet Page 232 Library Assistant II 4.50 4.50
Technology Services Mgr 1.00 1.00
Librarian 4.00 4.00
Library Manager 1.00 1.00
Total Library 2.75 11.25 14.00
GRAND TOTAL 155.38 134.24 155.14 32.31 9.57 2.23 489.00

EXHIBIT B
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 17, Packet Page 233 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
FROM: Andrea Renny, P.E., PTOE, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Reginald Paulding, P.E., Senior Engineer
SUBJECT: Receive a Presentation on the Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) Committee’s Priority Voting Results Identifying Between $3 Million to $4 Million of Prior Year Projects for Defunding Pursuant to the City Council’s Request (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council receive a presentation from City
staff on the NCIP Committee’s priority voting results on the prior year projects.

VALUE DRIVERS:

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

POLICY IMPLICATIONS:

At the October 13, 2025 Special Joint Meeting of City Council and NCIP Committee, City Council directed the NCIP Committee to review their program using a prioritization exercise similar to the Council’s process on September 2, 2025, and return to the City Council with a recommendation for $3 to $4 million worth of projects of the lowest priority to the Committee.

The City of Monterey Charter, Article 6. Fiscal Administration, Section 6.6 Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program Paragraph (c) states:

If the Council determines that there are insufficient funds available to provide for the ordinary and necessary services in any budget year, they may, by an Agenda Report Highlights
• The NCIP Committee prioritized 40
inactive or not-yet-started projects to
identify $3–$4 million for potential
defunding to address the City’s $10
million budget deficit.
• The backlog of NCIP projects has
been a recurring challenge,
exacerbated by staffing shortages in
the Engineering Division.
• The NCIP Committee proposed
reallocating up to $3.5 million from
FY 2027 NCIP funds to the General
Fund instead of defunding prior year
projects.
• City staff presented the NCIP
Committee’s priority voting results to
inform future decisions on
addressing the budget deficit.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 21.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 1, Packet Page 234 №11/25
affirmative vote of four (4) members of the City Council, reduce the amount to be appropriated for Neighborhood and Community Improvements.

Further Paragraph (e) states:

The determination of the projects, priorities and expenditures shall be within the sound discretion of the City Council.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

This agenda report and presentation does not directly impact the City’s finances; however, the NCIP priority vote results may help inform future decision-making surrounding the City’s deficit and the strategies adopted by City Council that impact the City’s finances.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The City Council could choose not to receive the presentation; however, this is not recommended because staff worked with NCIP committee to rank projects per City Council direction.

DISCUSSION:

At the September 16th, 2025, City Council meeting, various revenue-generating strategies were discussed to address the City’s $10 million structural budget deficit. While the City Council identified potential solutions, it was acknowledged that most solutions are longer-term. Council discussed that reappropriation of NCIP funds would likely be necessary to address the budget deficit, specifically in the upcoming fiscal year to pay for ordinary and necessary expenses of the City. A Special Meeting with the NCIP Committee was held on October 13, 2025.

During the October 13th meeting, City Council directed the NCIP Committee to review their program using a prioritization exercise similar to the Council's process on September 2, 2025, and return to the City Council with a recommendation for $3 million to $4 million worth of projects of the lowest priority to the Committee.

Following City Council, City staff identified 38 prior year NCIP projects within the portfolio of approved and funded projects that either had not been started or were inactive as of October Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 2, Packet Page 235 №11/25
2025. Projects in the “Not Yet Started” category were for the most part pending staff availability to work on the project. Projects in the “Inactive” category were on hold pending additional direction or input from outside agencies to move forward. In February 2026, the available budget balance on these projects is approximately $8.4 million.

Current NCIP status (February 2, 2026):
• Over the past 3 years, 105 projects were funded ($22 million)* • 43 projects completed in the last three years
• Average completion rate: 14 per year
• Average new projects added: 35 per year
• New projects for fiscal year (FY) 25/26 cycle: 14 projects • 78 current approved NCIP projects ($17.1 million)
o 40 Projects in progress ($8.7M)
o 33 Projects that have not been started and 4 that are inactive ($8.4M) o 1 Projects nearing close out ($0M)
*On 4/21/2020, NCIP projects were defunded with the exception of projects that were in progress. All of these projects approved prior to 2020 have been completed.

The backlog of NCIP projects is not a new trend, and it is something that has been a challenge over the course of the program. The current staffing shortage experienced by the Engineering Division has also diminished the capacity to deliver projects. Staff has procured consultants, interns, and advertised extensively to fill vacant positions.

The NCIP Committee reviewed the 40 prior year projects identified as inactive or not yet started at two meetings: January 14th and January 21st, 2026. The NCIP Committee also received written and oral comments from the public at these two meetings.

At the January 28th priority voting meeting, the NCIP Committee received written and oral comments from the public on the 40 prior year projects up for Committee ranking that evening (Attachment 1). Following public comment, the NCIP Committee voted to rank prior year projects from lowest to highest priority for the City Council to consider defunding and reappropriation to the General Fund to address the City’s structural deficit. The voting scale was from 1 to 10 with “1” being a low priority and “10” being high priority to keep the project funded. The project voting cards, which are similar to the Council’s budget deficit exercise, are included as Attachment 2.

The NCIP Committee’s ranking of projects is included in Attachment 3. The spreadsheet shows the ranking, as voted by NCIP Committee based on total score. The lowest priority projects are at the top of the spreadsheet with a running total of the projects shown on the green column. This ranking is the result of the Council request of the NCIP Committee.

The NCIP Chair and the Committee requested that Council consider appropriating up to $3.5 million in future funding, from FY 2027 NCIP, to the General Fund in lieu of defunding prior year projects in order to address the budget deficit.

Staff is presenting the results of the prioritizing exercise. The reappropriation of NCIP funds to the General Fund will require separate actions from Council that will be brought forward in a future meeting in advance of the FY 2026-27 Budget Adoption.

AR/rp
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 3, Packet Page 236 №11/25
Attachments: 1. List of Prior Year NCIP Projects Not Yet Started or Inactive

2. Prior Year NCIP Project Information Cards

3. NCIP Committee Vote Ranking of Projects by Lowest Priority c: Rafaela King, Finance Director
Kim Cole, Community Development Director
Nicole Banks, Parks and Recreation Director
Chinyere Ogbonna, NCIP Chair/Spokesperson
Dennis Duke, NCIP Chair/Alternate Spokesperson
NCIP Committee Neighborhood Representatives
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, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 4, Packet Page 237 Prior year NCIP Projects that have not yet started or are inactive that may total to the City Council directed goal of $3 to $4 million and support the City’s strategy to fill the $10 million structural budget deficit.

Project
Number
Votes Project Title Available
Budget
Balance
Vote to
Defund
(1-10)
1 nip2302 117 Del Monte Beach – Boardwalk Repair $38,727 InProgress 2 nip2307 104 Skyline – Upper Wyndemere Log Drop
Repair
$673,625
3 nip2308 100 Downtown – Lighted Crosswalk
(Webster/ El Camino)
$119,996
4 nip2319 86 New Monterey – Devisadero 700
Block Drainage Swale
$92,372
5 nip2323 84 Skyline – Forest Dr/Holman Highway
Bridge Restoration
$21,127
6 nip2324 82 Public Restroom Study $123,410
7 nip2325 81 Old Town – Larkin Park Swings
Installation
$0 Closed
8 nip2326 79 Villa Del Monte – Casa Verde
Way/Hwy 1 Underpass Hardscape
and Mural
$548,238
9 ncp2403 120 Ryan Ranch Park 8-Court Pickleball
Design
$100,000
10 ncp2406 114 Villa Del Monte – Ferrante Park
Playground Improvement
$20,000
11 ncp2411 109 Downtown – Monterey Bay Park
Shower Station
$30,000
12 ncp2414 105 Del Monte Grove – Casanova Ave, 500
Block Streetlight
$30,000
13 ncp2421 99 Alta Mesa – Don Dahvee Creek Path
Construction
$249,283
14 ncp2423 93 Old Town – Old Town Neighborhood
Signs
$25,000
15 ncp2426 82 Skyline – Wyndemere Lower Canyon
Drainage
$149,711
16 ncp2434 73 Del Monte Beach – Beach Way
Boardwalk Extension
$125,000
17 ncp2436 71 Del Monte Beach – Tide Ave
Boardwalk Replacement
$117,058 InProgress
18 ncp2440 63 New Monterey – Lower Presidio Sloat
Monument Restoration
$150,000
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 5, Packet Page 238 Project
Number
Votes Project Title Available
Budget
Balance
Vote to
Defund
(1-10)
19 ncp2444 61 New Monterey – Shoreline Park Fish
Hopper Restoration
$60,000
20 ncp2502 142 *Underground Utilities Program $2,248,573 21 ncp2503 141 Del Monte Grove – Elder-Focused
Exercise Equipment
$60,000
22 ncp2508 130 Casanova Oak Knoll – Ramona Ave
Sidewalk Infill
$21,689
23 ncp2510 129 Casanova Oak Knoll – 801 Casanova
Ave Sidewalk Infill
$14,000
24 ncp2511 129 Del Monte Beach – Native Plant Dune
Ecosystem Restoration
$22,756 In
Progress
25 ncp2513 125 *Casanova Oak Knoll – N Fremont
Gap Bike/Ped Path Matching Funds
$250,000
26 ncp2514 124 Casanova Oak Knoll – 57 Melway
Circle Sidewalk Infill
$1,000
27 ncp2520 111 New Monterey – Cannery Row
Workers Housing Restoration
$49,130 In
Progress
28 ncp2522 108 Monterey Vista – San Bernabe Road
Widening & Sidewalk Installation
$1,671,875
29 ncp2524 98 New Monterey – David Ave/Terry St
Crosswalk & Island Installation
$298,629
30 ncp2525 94 Villa Del Monte – Villa Del Monte
Traffic Calming Phase II
$174,969
31 ncp2526 92 Del Monte Beach – Install Bike Rack in
Parking Lot
$20,000
32 ncp2527 91 Del Monte Beach – Install Beach
Boardwalk Lighting
$20,000
33 ncp2531 88 New Monterey – 600 Lobos St
Drainline Improvements
$100,000
34 ncp2532 88 Villa Del Monte – Villa Del Monte
Traffic Calming Phase I
$359,755
35 ncp2533 87 New Monterey – Lower Presidio
Walkway Phase II
$78,000
36 ncp2535 85 Downtown – Install Pickleball Courts
at Monterey Tennis Center
$55,000
37 ncp2601 82 Opportunity Property Purchasing
Project
$250,000
38 ncp2602 82 Recreation Trail Bike Repair Station $297 Complete 39 31ncont N/A NCIP Contingency $0 Closed
40 31nunap N/A NCIP Ending Balance $0 Closed
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 6, Packet Page 239 Project
Number
Votes Project Title Available
Budget
Balance
Vote to
Defund
(1-10)
Total $8,369,166
Notes:

20. ncp2502 – Underground Utilities Program funding is needed to qualify for PG&E Rule 20A Undergrounding Conversion.

25. ncp2513 – N Fremont Matching Funds required for potential grant funding match.

Project Category Number of
Projects
Oct 2025
Budget Balance
Feb 2026
Budget Balance
Contingency &
Unappropriated Funds 2 $701,782 $0
In-Progress Projects 38 $7,737,258 $8,698,649
Projects Not Started 33 $7,390,965 $7,347,517
Inactive Projects 5 $1,080,051 $1,021,649
Projects in Close-Out
Phase 11 $205,716 $1,815
Totals 89 $17,115,772 $17,069,630
Note: Project Numbers and Budget Balances as of Oct 13, 2025 and Feb 2, 2026 ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 7, Packet Page 240 As the City of Monterey looks to the FY 2026-27 budget and beyond, the City is faced with a structural deficit of more than $10 million annually.

At the October 13, 2025 Special meeting, City Council directed the NCIP Committee to review their program using a prioritization exercise similar to the Council's process on September 2, 2025, and return to the City Council with a recommendation for $3-4 million worth of projects of the lowest priority to the Committee.

These index cards are grouped by fiscal year in chronological order (i.e. 2023, 2024, and 2025) and then sorted with the highest ranked projects from the NCIP Voting Night of that respective fiscal year being listed first.

Within the indicated box, please write on each card a value between 1 and 10, with 10 meaning most in favor of a project and 1 meaning least in favor of a project. City Staff will tally the votes for each project to determine its ranking. The projects will then be ordered to indicate the lowest priority by the NCIP Committee (by lowest total score) and how the Committee may recommend the $3-4 million worth of projects.

Prior Year NCIP Project Information Cards
Overview
Intro Card #01
Project Title describes project name and corresponding
project account name in parentheses.

Value identifies the dollar value by which the strategy addresses the $3-4M goal.

Fiscal Year identifies the year it was approved for funding by the City Council.
# of Votes/ Vote Ranking describes how the NCIP
Committee ranked the projects at the respective Voting Night.

Complexity. Higher complexity means may be harder to
complete due to feasibility, support, and other factors.

Neighborhood identifies which NCIP Neighborhood voted.

Prior Year NCIP Project Information Cards
How to Read Each Card
VALUE
$831,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2023
# OF VOTES
/ VOTE RANKING
120 (#1)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
(for City Staff
Use)
Intro Card #02
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 8, Packet Page 241

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Repair existing log drop structures to minimize erosion and sedimentation in Upper Wyndemere Creek. Stabilize
eroded areas adjacent to structures between Skyline
Drive and Scenic Road.

Status: Permitting Requirements, etc.

Defunded in 2020

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Repair / replace damaged or missing boards in the
various beach boardwalks at Del Monte Beach. Allow the
Parks Department to replace the most damaged boards,
as well as build-out the end of the walkway near the West parking lot at Beach and Tide.

Note: One of four Del Monte Beach Boardwalk Projects;
see projects ncp2434, ncp2436, and ncp2527.

Del Monte Beach – Boardwalk Repair
(nip2302)

VALUE UP TO
$41,747
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2023
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
117 (#2)

COMPLEXITY
Low

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #01
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
Skyline – Upper Wyndemere Log Drop
Repair (nip2307)

VALUE UP TO
$673,625
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2023
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
104 (#7)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #02
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 9, Packet Page 242

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Upgrade existing Camino El Estero crosswalk at Webster
Street with button-activated RRFBs. Curb extensions may also be proposed.

Status: Project planned to be included in Downtown Curb Ramp RFP (Feb 2026).

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Reconstruct drainage swale along the existing roadway
edge, maintaining the current asphalt street width.

Status: Pair w/street project in New Monterey.

Defunded in 2020
Downtown – Lighted Crosswalk (Webster/
El Camino) (nip2308)

VALUE UP TO
$120,661
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2023
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
100 (#8)

COMPLEXITY
Low

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #03
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
New Monterey – Devisadero 700 Block
Drainage Swale (nip2319)

VALUE UP TO
$92,371
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2023
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
86 (#19)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #04
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 10, Packet Page 243

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Repair spalling concrete and resurface the bridge parapet to attain a uniform appearance with a graffiti resistant finish. Remove graffiti under the bridge, resurface and apply graffiti-resistant finish.

Status: Seeking Viable Products to Treat Bridge
Structure.

Defunded in 2020
Skyline – Forest Dr/Holman Highway Bridge
Restoration (nip2323)

VALUE UP TO
$21,126
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2023
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
84 (#23)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #05
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
Multi-Neighborhood – Public Restroom
Study (nip2324)

VALUE UP TO
$123,410
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2023
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
82 (#24)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #06
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Prepare a study of existing public restrooms City-wide to determine where additional restrooms are needed, if
existing hours of operation are adequate, and total
maintenance costs.

Status: Rescope Project.

Defunded in 2020
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 11, Packet Page 244

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Phase 1 of improvements to the Highway 1 underpass at
Casa Verde Way. Widen sidewalks and harden the
existing slopes beneath the bridge, install new lighting; Phase 2 to include mosaic tile murals and 2 new VDM
neighborhood towers.

Defunded in 2020
Old Town – Larkin Park Swings Installation
(nip2325)

VALUE UP TO
$0
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2023
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
81 (#25)

COMPLEXITY
N/A

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #07

PROJECT CLOSED
Villa Del Monte – Casa Verde Way/Hwy 1
Underpass Hardscape and Mural (nip2326)

VALUE UP TO
$548,238
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2023
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
79 (#26)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #08
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
NCIP Committee recommended swing installation project
for close-out and defunding. City Council approved
closure request at Nov 4, 2025 Council meeting.
$58,400 in project funds went to NCIP Fund 216.

Defunded in 2020
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 12, Packet Page 245

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Design an 8-court pickleball complex at Monterey's Ryan Ranch Park or other suitable site. Site should include
regulation courts, shaded viewing, sitting and stretching areas, parking for 80 vehicles, restrooms, drinking
fountain, and an equipment storage shed. Site should
support future expansion as player demand grows.

Ryan Ranch Park 8-Court Pickleball Design
(ncp2403)

VALUE UP TO
$100,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2024
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
120 (#3)

COMPLEXITY
Low

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #09
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Add at least one square picnic table and two benches in the DG area of the playground at the southeast corner of the park along Del Robles Ave.

Villa Del Monte – Ferrante Park Playground
Improvement (ncp2406)

VALUE UP TO
$20,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2024
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
114 (#5 tied)

COMPLEXITY
Low

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #10
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 13, Packet Page 246

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Install a streetlight on Casanova Ave between Sequoia
Ave and Toyon Ave. Signatures of property owners
located within 250 feet of each proposed streetlight will be submitted, indicating their acceptance of this project.

Status: NCIP Rep provided signatures of support.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Install a shower station for beach users on the outside of the existing restroom at the foot of the Commercial Wharf on Figueroa Street.

Defunded in 2020
Downtown – Monterey Bay Park Shower
Station (ncp2411)

VALUE UP TO
$30,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2024
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
109 (#11)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #11
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
Del Monte Grove – Casanova Ave, 500
Block Streetlight (ncp2414)

VALUE UP TO
$30,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2024
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
105 (#14)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #12
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 14, Packet Page 247

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Construction of trail designed in previous NCIP project for trail head and segment 4.

Status: Design complete.

Defunded in 2020
Alta Mesa – Don Dahvee Creek Path
Construction (ncp2421)

VALUE UP TO
$249,283
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2024
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
99 (#21)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #13
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
Old Town – Old Town Neighborhood Signs
(ncp2423)

VALUE UP TO
$25,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2024
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
93 (#23)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #14
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Signs to designate neighborhood area will be simple
metal signs to let people know they are entering a
neighborhood.

Defunded in 2020
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 15, Packet Page 248

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Extend the existing beach boardwalk west of Beach Way
near Tide Ave from its current end down to the hard sand of the beach.

Status: Prior boardwalk section in this area washed-out in winter storms. Staff reluctant to replace.

Note: One of four Del Monte Beach Boardwalk Projects;
see projects nip2302, ncp2436, and ncp2527.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Design for the lower portion of Wyndemere Canyon
below Skyline Ridge Road in the Wyndemere drainage
area. The upper portion above Skyline Drive has been
completed and can be seen from Skyline Ridge Road.

Status: Permitting Requirements, etc.

Defunded in 2020
Skyline – Wyndemere Lower Canyon
Drainage (ncp2426)

VALUE UP TO
$149,711
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2024
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
82 (#25 tied)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #15
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
Del Monte Beach – Beach Way Boardwalk
Extension (ncp2434)

VALUE UP TO
$125,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2024
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
73 (#33 tied)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #16
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 16, Packet Page 249

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Repair and restore Sloat Monument following the specific recommendations of the City's Consultant who made
specific recommendations to restore the stone monument
to withstand decades of weathering.

Status: Project requires expertise. Lower Presidio Park Developments.

Defunded in 2020

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Replace some or all of the wooden walkway along Tide
Avenue. This project proposes to replace all areas in
need of repair to a consistent uniform surface.

Defunded in 2020
Note: One of four Del Monte Beach Boardwalk Projects;
see projects nip2302, ncp2434, and ncp2527.

Del Monte Beach – Tide Ave Boardwalk
Replacement (ncp2436)

VALUE UP TO
$125,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2024
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
71 (#36)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #17
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
New Monterey – Lower Presidio Sloat
Monument Restoration (ncp2440)

VALUE UP TO
$150,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2024
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
63 (#40)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #18
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 17, Packet Page 250

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Restore failing 1930's redwood sardine hopper at
Shoreline Park. Include interpretive signage describing the use of fish hoppers in the sardine canning industry.

Defunded in 2020
New Monterey – Shoreline Park Fish
Hopper Restoration (ncp2444)

VALUE UP TO
$60,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2024
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
61 (#44)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #19
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
Multi-Neighborhood – Underground Utilities
Program (ncp2502)

VALUE UP TO
$2,248,573
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
142 (#2)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #20
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Underground Utilities Program.

Note: Funding is needed to qualify for PG&E Rule 20A
Undergrounding Conversion.

Defunded in 2020
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 18, Packet Page 251

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Installation of elder-focused exercise equipment at
Laguna Grande Park.

Status: Project proponent is seeking additional funding sources.

Del Monte Grove – Elder-Focused Exercise
Equipment (ncp2503)

VALUE UP TO
$60,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
141 (#3)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #21
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Infill sidewalk along Ramona Ave to connect Edinburgh
Ave to Stuart Ave
Casanova Oak Knoll – Ramona Ave
Sidewalk Infill (ncp2508)

VALUE UP TO
$21,688
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
130 (#8)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #22
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 19, Packet Page 252

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Review existing plant communities and replant as needed on open dune space north of wide and/or west of Beach.

Status: Parks Department has started first phase of the project.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Infill sidewalk from southeast side of 801 Casanova to
complete sidewalk
Casanova Oak Knoll – 801 Casanova Ave
Sidewalk Infill (ncp2510)

VALUE UP TO
$14,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
129 (#10)

COMPLEXITY
Low

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #23
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
Del Monte Beach – Native Plant Dune
Ecosystem Restoration (ncp2511)

VALUE UP TO
$22,755
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
129 (#10tied)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #24
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 20, Packet Page 253

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Provide matching funds for installation of Class I facility on N. Fremont St between Casanova Ave and Canyon
Del Rey Blvd/SR 218
Status: City to seek TAMC grant w/Seaside in 2026.

Casanova Oak Knoll – N Fremont Gap
Bike/Ped Path Matching Funds (ncp2513)

VALUE UP TO
$250,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
125 (#13)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #25
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Infill sidewalk section between 57 and 49 Melway Circle to complete sidewalk
Casanova Oak Knoll – 57 Melway Circle
Sidewalk Infill (ncp2514)

VALUE UP TO
$1,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
124 (#14)

COMPLEXITY
Low

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #26
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 21, Packet Page 254

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Road widening and sidewalk installation at San Bernabe
Drive between Via Ventura and Bartolome Way.

Status: Design and Permitting Complete.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Cannery Row workers housing - Restore & repair
damaged floors, walls, and ceilings of three historic
cannery row worker cabins. Replace handrails and add
metal stair nosing at wood steps.

Status: Awarded contracts for preliminary work.

Defunded in 2020
New Monterey – Cannery Row Workers
Housing Restoration (ncp2520)

VALUE UP TO
$49,130
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
111 (#20)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #27
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
Monterey Vista – San Bernabe Road
Widening & Sidewalk Installation (ncp2522)

VALUE UP TO
$1,671,875
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
108 (#22)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #28
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 22, Packet Page 255

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Curb extension and pavement treatment at Casa Verde
and Encina.

Defunded in 2020

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Completed Traffic Calming Study identified David/Terry as best location for crosswalk for pedestrians and MST bus riders above Pine Street.

Status: Crosswalk does not meet the volume
requirements of crosswalk policy.

Defunded in 2020
New Monterey – David Ave/Terry St
Crosswalk & Island Installation (ncp2524)

VALUE UP TO
$299,293
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
98 (#24)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #29
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
Villa Del Monte – Villa Del Monte Traffic
Calming Phase II (ncp2525)

VALUE UP TO
$174,969
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
94 (#25)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #30
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 23, Packet Page 256

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Install bike rack near parking lot at corner of Beach and Tide.

Status: Project proponent declined installation of bike rack in recommended location.

Del Monte Beach – Install Bike Rack in
Parking Lot (ncp2526)

VALUE UP TO
$20,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
92 (#26)

COMPLEXITY
Low

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #31
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Install lighting for beach boardwalk walkway along Tide Avenue.

Note: Project complexity is high due to Coastal
Commission involvement. One of four Del Monte Beach
Boardwalk Projects; see projects nip2302, ncp2434, and
ncp2436.

Del Monte Beach – Install Beach Boardwalk
Lighting (ncp2527)

VALUE UP TO
$20,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
91 (#27)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #32
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 24, Packet Page 257

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This is a partial median on Garden at Palo Verde and
partial median at Encina at Palo Verde. The project also includes pavement treatment at Casa Verde and Monte
Vista.

Defunded in 2020

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Drainline along 'westerly" (uphill) side of 600 block of Lobos St is unimproved and trip hazard
New Monterey – 600 Lobos St Drainline
Improvements (ncp2531)

VALUE UP TO
$100,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
88 (#31)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #33
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
Villa Del Monte – Villa Del Monte Traffic
Calming Phase I (ncp2532)

VALUE UP TO
$359,754
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
88 (#32)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #34
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 25, Packet Page 258

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Reconstruct the crosswalk at Lighthouse / Private Bolio and connect the proposed walkway with phase I walkway.

Pedestrians will be able to traverse the area without
walking around the Lighthouse Curve roadway.

Status: Project requires expertise. Lower Presidio Park Developments.

Defunded in 2020
New Monterey – Lower Presidio Walkway
Phase II (ncp2533)

VALUE UP TO
$78,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
87 (#33)

COMPLEXITY
High

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #35
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project involves converting tennis courts 1 and 2 into six pickleball courts, new fencing, and resurfacing of courts.

Status: Additional Funding Required
Downtown – Install Pickleball Courts at
Monterey Tennis Center (ncp2535)

VALUE UP TO
$55,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
85 (#35)

COMPLEXITY
Medium

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #36
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 26, Packet Page 259

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Fund available to purchase property that becomes
available for community use.

Defunded in 2020
Multi-Neighborhood – Opportunity Property
Purchasing Project (ncp2601)

VALUE UP TO
$250,000
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
82 (#38)

COMPLEXITY
Low

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #37
VOTE (1-10) FOR PROJECT

PRIORITY
Multi-Neighborhood – Recreation Trail Bike
Repair Station (ncp2602)

VALUE UP TO
$421
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
82 (#38 tied)

COMPLEXITY
Low

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #38

PROJECT COMPLETE

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Purchase and Install a Bike Repair Station within Window on the Bay Park.

Status: Bike repair station installed 12/22/25.

ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 27, Packet Page 260 Multi-Neighborhood – NCIP Contingency
(31ncont)

VALUE UP TO
$0
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
N/A

COMPLEXITY
N/A

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #39
CLOSED
Multi-Neighborhood – NCIP Unappropriated
Funds (31nunap)

VALUE UP TO
$0
OUT OF $4M NEEDED

FISCAL YEAR
2025
# OF VOTES/

VOTE RANKING
N/A

COMPLEXITY
N/A

NEIGHBORHOOD
Project Card #40
CLOSED

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
NIP Contingency account for all fiscal years.

Note: $39,514 absorbed into NCIP Fund 216.

Defunded in 2020

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Balances from projects closed-out or de-appropriated.

Funds are re-appropriated by council action.

Note: $690,669 absorbed into NCIP Fund 216.

Defunded in 2020
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 28, Packet Page 261 Rank Project No. Project Title
Available
Budget
Balance

AO AM COK DF DMB DMG DT FF GW MV NM OG OT SK VDM VOTE
TOAL
VOTE %

OF TOTAL
Budget Balance
(Running Total)
37 nip2325 *Old Town – Larkin Park Swings
Installation $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% $0
37 31ncont NCIP Contingency $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% $0 37 31nunap NCIP Ending Balance $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% $0 37 ncp2602 Recreation Trail Bike Repair
Station $421 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% $421
36 ncp2526 Del Monte Beach – Install Bike
Rack in Parking Lot $20,000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 18 12% $20,421 35 ncp2601 Opportunity Property Purchasing
Project $250,000 1 1 1 5 1 1 2 5 1 1 1 5 1 5 1 31 21% $270,421 34 ncp2535 Downtown – Install Pickleball
Courts at Monterey Tennis Center $55,000 10 1 5 10 1 6 10 7 8 6 1 5 1 5 1 67 45% $325,421 33 ncp2440 New Monterey – Lower Presidio
Sloat Monument Restoration $150,000 4 1 2 5 7 1 1 10 3 2 10 5 10 10 10 77 51% $475,421 32 ncp2403 Ryan Ranch Park 8-Court Pickleball
Design $100,000 1 2 5 10 8 1 1 10 5 5 1 5 10 7 10 80 53% $575,421 30 nip2324 Public Restroom Study $123,410 2 1 2 10 1 5 1 7 3 6 10 6 10 10 10 82 55% $698,831 30 nip2326 Villa Del Monte – Casa Verde
Way/Hwy 1 Underpass Hardscape $548,238 8 2 5 10 8 3 1 10 2 8 10 5 10 8 0 82 59% $1,247,069 28 ncp2423 Old Town – Old Town
Neighborhood Signs $25,000 6 1 2 10 8 5 8 10 3 6 10 7 10 10 1 91 61% $1,272,069 29 ncp2503 Del Monte Grove – Elder-Focused
Exercise Equipment $60,000 4 1 6 10 8 0 10 5 5 4 1 8 10 8 10 86 61% $1,332,069 27 ncp2444 New Monterey – Shoreline Park
Fish Hopper Restoration $60,000 6 1 7 10 8 4 8 7 4 2 10 5 10 9 8 93 62% $1,392,069 26 ncp2527 Del Monte Beach – Install Beach
Boardwalk Lighting $20,000 2 1 9 10 10 4 8 10 2 4 10 6 10 9 1 94 63% $1,412,069 25 ncp2414 Del Monte Grove – Casanova Ave,
500 Block Streetlight $30,000 10 6 8 5 1 5 10 8 8 8 1 8 10 10 10 98 65% $1,442,069 24 nip2323 Skyline – Forest Dr/Holman
Highway Bridge Restoration $21,126 4 2 7 10 8 4 10 5 5 4 10 7 10 10 10 102 68% $1,463,195 23 ncp2533 New Monterey – Lower Presidio
Walkway Phase II $78,000 4 1 9 10 8 5 3 10 7 4 10 6 10 10 10 103 69% $1,541,195 22 ncp2522 Monterey Vista – San Bernabe
Road Widening & Sidewalk $1,671,875 10 1 4 10 1 5 10 10 7 10 10 7 10 10 10 105 70% $3,213,070 19 nip2319 New Monterey – Devisadero 700
Block Drainage Swale $92,371 10 5 5 10 8 4 10 10 6 6 10 6 10 10 10 110 73% $3,305,441 19 ncp2411 Downtown – Monterey Bay Park
Shower Station $30,000 10 4 7 10 8 2 9 10 3 10 10 7 10 10 10 110 73% $3,335,441 17 ncp2520 New Monterey – Cannery Row
Workers Housing Restoration $49,130 10 2 5 10 8 9 10 8 6 8 10 8 10 10 7 111 74% $3,384,571 17 ncp2531 New Monterey – 600 Lobos St
Drainline Improvements $100,000 8 2 7 10 8 7 10 10 8 6 10 7 10 10 6 111 74% $3,484,571 16 ncp2426 Skyline – Wyndemere Lower
Canyon Drainage $149,711 4 6 5 10 8 5 10 10 5 8 10 7 10 10 8 112 75% $3,634,282 13 ncp2532 Villa Del Monte – Villa Del Monte
Traffic Calming Phase I $359,754 8 7 9 10 8 3 8 10 8 4 10 6 10 10 10 113 75% $3,994,036 13 ncp2421 Alta Mesa – Don Dahvee Creek
Path Construction $249,283 8 10 5 10 8 4 10 8 3 8 10 7 10 10 10 113 75% $4,243,319 13 ncp2406 Villa Del Monte – Ferrante Park
Playground Improvement $20,000 10 6 5 10 8 6 10 10 6 6 10 8 10 8 10 113 75% $4,263,319 21 ncp2525 Villa Del Monte – Villa Del Monte
Traffic Calming Phase II $174,969 10 4 9 10 8 4 10 10 8 8 10 6 10 10 0 107 76% $4,438,288 12 ncp2502 Underground Utilities Program $2,248,573 10 2 5 10 1 10 10 10 10 10 10 7 10 10 10 115 77% $6,686,861 ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 29, Packet Page 262 11 ncp2434 Del Monte Beach – Beach Way
Boardwalk Extension $125,000 4 9 9 10 10 6 10 7 8 4 10 8 10 10 10 121 81% $6,811,861 10 nip2307 Skyline – Upper Wyndemere Log
Drop Repair $673,625 10 6 7 10 8 8 10 10 5 10 10 8 10 10 10 122 81% $7,485,486 9 ncp2524 New Monterey – David Ave/Terry
St Crosswalk & Island Installation $299,293 8 5 9 10 8 10 10 10 8 10 10 8 10 10 5 123 82% $7,784,779 8 ncp2511 Del Monte Beach – Native Plant
Dune Ecosystem Restoration $22,755 8 9 9 10 8 10 10 10 6 6 10 8 10 10 8 124 83% $7,807,534 6 ncp2436 Del Monte Beach – Tide Ave
Boardwalk Replacement $125,000 10 8 8 10 10 7 10 10 8 8 10 8 10 8 10 125 83% $7,932,534 6 nip2308 Downtown – Lighted Crosswalk
(Webster/ El Camino) $120,661 10 8 7 10 8 10 10 10 8 6 10 8 10 10 10 125 83% $8,053,195 3 ncp2513 Casanova Oak Knoll – N Fremont
Gap Bike/Ped Path Matching $250,000 10 8 9 10 8 10 10 10 5 10 10 7 10 10 10 127 85% $8,303,195 3 ncp2514 Casanova Oak Knoll – 57 Melway
Circle Sidewalk Infill $1,000 10 6 10 10 8 10 10 10 8 8 10 7 10 10 10 127 85% $8,304,195 3 ncp2510 Casanova Oak Knoll – 801
Casanova Ave Sidewalk Infill $14,000 10 7 10 10 8 10 10 10 8 8 10 6 10 10 10 127 85% $8,318,195 2 ncp2508 Casanova Oak Knoll – Ramona Ave
Sidewalk Infill $21,688 10 7 10 10 8 10 10 10 8 8 10 7 10 10 10 128 85% $8,339,883 1 nip2302 Del Monte Beach – Boardwalk
Repair $41,747 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 8 10 10 7 10 10 10 135 90% $8,381,630 Total $8,381,630
Legend
No Vote Received for Committe Member, due to Conflict of Interest. Totals were calculated accordingly.

ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 21., Item Page 30, Packet Page 263 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Rafaela T. King, CPA, Finance Director
SUBJECT: Declare a Fiscal Emergency Pursuant to California Constitution, Article XIIIC, Section 2(b) to Submit General Tax Measures to the Voters at the June 2, 2026 Election to Address Imminent Financial Risks (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution, by unanimous
vote, to declare a fiscal emergency to hold a special
election to submit general tax ballot measures to the
voters at the June 2, 2026 election to address imminent financial risks.

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:

Timely election and maintaining long-term financial
stability for the City supports Council’s Value Driver of “Working to improve the quality of life of our residents.

The Council is committed to ensuring that Monterey
retains its special character, which derives from its
heritage, size and location. The Council also is
committed to ensuring that Monterey remains a safe and
welcoming place to live, work and visit.”

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no direct fiscal impact from receiving Council direction.

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), Agenda Report Highlights
• The City of Monterey faces a
projected $12 million budget deficit
for FY 26/27, requiring urgent
financial solutions.
• A fiscal emergency declaration is
necessary to hold a special election
in June 2026 for a general tax
measure to address the deficit.
• Delaying the tax measure to
November 2026 would result in
delayed revenue collection and
potential drastic service cuts.
• Rising costs for staffing, utilities,
insurance, and other expenses
continue to outpace revenue
growth, threatening long-term
financial stability.
• The proposed tax measure aims to
prevent service reductions and
ensure reliable delivery of critical
city services.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 22.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 22., Item Page 1, Packet Page 264 №11/25
Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The Council could decide not to declare a fiscal emergency, but that is not advised.

DISCUSSION:

At the June 2, 2025 Council meeting, the City Council adopted the budget for the 2025-26 Fiscal Year (FY). The FY 25-26 budget had a structural deficit of $10.5 million. The budget was balanced with several one-time solutions including reductions to services and supplies, not funding positions, salary savings, decreases to reserve contributions and restructuring prior financing commitments. As part of the budget presentation, the City Council received a presentation on the City’s immediate financial challenges as well as a high-level recap on the five-year forecast that includes a continued annual forecasted structural deficit and the need for timely attention and solutions.

Dating as far back as the 2013-14 Adopted Budget, each year the General Fund five-year forecast has projected a net operating deficit for at least three of the five years projected in the respective adopted budgets. The five-year forecasts showed operating deficits that have continued to increase in magnitude over time. Specifically, the estimated budget deficits included in FY 13/14 show a low of ($0.3) million in that five-year period to a high of ($10.5) million for FY 25/26 presented in the latest adopted budget, with an updated estimate of ($12) million for FY 26/27.

The five-year forecast presented in the adopted FY25/26 budget included a structural operating deficit for FY 25/26 of ($10.5) million, FY 26/27 of ($8.4) million, FY27/28 of ($5.1) million, FY 28/29 of ($3.8) million and FY 29/30 ($0.9) million. It is important to note that the assumptions included modest growth in revenue and operation expenses, but did not include the contributions to the Capital Improvement Program (typically a minimum of $2.5 million per year), Reserves (typically at $5 million per year), deferred maintenance, or salary adjustments for the years not under current contract with the employee bargaining units (FY 28 and beyond), which would significantly increase the deficit amounts.

Projected costs continue to outpace projected revenues. There are various reasons including rising costs for staffing (salaries, benefits and pension obligations), utility, insurance, contract services, equipment and vehicles. Staying on the existing course without a new revenue source will erode City reserves and services. The City will need to continue to balance the City’s checkbook by aligning its income with expenses.

The City provides critical city services, including public safety (Police and Fire); maintenance of parks, libraries and community centers; and programs such as recreation for the youth and seniors. Importantly, these services need to be provided in a reliable, continuous manner with Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 22., Item Page 2, Packet Page 265 №11/25
long-term financial stability. With the projected FY 26/27 budget deficit of ($12) million, the City is faced with urgency for generating new ongoing revenues or implementing substantial service reductions.

If City Council declares a “fiscal emergency,” it will allow the City to hold a special election in June 2026 and place a general tax measure on the ballot – a move that could ensure the City avoids making drastic service cuts due to insufficient General Fund revenues. Pursuant to the California Constitution, a declaration of a fiscal emergency is a prerequisite to submitting a general tax measure to the voters at a special election.

Specifically, findings to support a fiscal emergency are evident as significant cuts to City services will need to be made if a general sales tax measure is placed on the ballot in November 2026 rather than in June 2026. If a general tax measure was to be submitted to and approved by the voters in the General Municipal Election held in November 2026, actual receipt of the revenue would be delayed until June 2027, which is too late. By May/June 2026, the Council would need to make decisions to eliminate the ($12) million deficit for FY26/27 and that could include drastic service cuts. Alternatively, having a general tax on a June 2026 ballot, if approved by a majority of the voters, would allow collection of General Fund revenues in a manner that avoids cuts to critical City services.

The City is facing significant deficits despite optimistic revenue projections. Should the projections not hold true, the magnitude of the deficits will be much worse. Given the challenges summarized above, long-term financial stability remains a significant challenge for the City.

Putting a general tax on the June 2026 ballot would be part of a viable strategy to a solution and responsive to our residents’ top priority to maintain the long-term financial stability of the City.

Due to the negative impacts of service cuts to the City residents, businesses, and visitors, Staff recommend that the Council unanimously declare a fiscal emergency to place general taxes on the June 2026 ballot.

RTK
Attachments: 1. Resolution
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 22., Item Page 3, Packet Page 266 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.

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

DECLARING A FISCAL EMERGENCY PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE XIIIC, SECTION 2(B) TO SUBMIT GENERAL TAX MEASURES TO THE VOTERS AT THE JUNE 2, 2026 ELECTION TO ADDRESS IMMINENT FINANCIAL RISKS WHEREAS, Article XIIIC, section 2 of the California Constitution requires the election for a tax measure to be consolidated with a regularly scheduled general election for members of the City Council, except in cases of fiscal emergency declared by unanimous vote of the City Council;
WHEREAS, the City faced a structural deficit of $10 million in Fiscal Year 2025/26 that was balanced with one-time solutions;
WHEREAS, the City faces an estimated structural budget deficit of $12 million in Fiscal Year 2026-2027;
WHEREAS, the City is projecting an annual structural operating budget deficit for each of the next five years;
WHEREAS, the next regularly scheduled general election at which City Councilmembers are to be elected is not until November 3, 2026;
WHEREAS, the City has evaluated the impacts of financial constraints on the City’s ability to provide vital services to the public, has implemented measures to reduce costs, and has evaluated measures to increase revenue;
WHEREAS, the City cannot wait until the November general election to seek voter approval for general taxes because any deferred income stream necessarily means lost income; WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the financial circumstances of the City require the immediate and urgent enactment of general tax measures to increase revenue to the City and to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare, and to mitigate service and program reductions; 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 that may be funded using sales tax revenue received from the referenced special transactions and use tax resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 22., Item Page 4, Packet Page 267 applicability. Lastly, CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 (b) (4) specifically states that the creation of government funding mechanisms or other government fiscal activities which do not involve any commitment to any specific project as ‘not a project.’;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby unanimously declares a fiscal emergency.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:

ATTEST:

Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 22., Item Page 5, Packet Page 268 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Rafaela T. King, CPA, Finance Director
SUBJECT: Call a Special Election to Ask the Voters to Approve a Supplemental Transactions and Use Tax at the Rate of 0.375% for Nine Years and Request that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Monterey Consolidate the Election with the Election to be Held on June 2, 2026 and to Conduct the Election on the City’s Behalf (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a resolution calling a special election to ask the voters to approve a supplemental
transaction and use (“sales”) tax measure at the rate of

0.375% for nine years, request that the Board of
Supervisors of the County of Monterey consolidate the
election with the established election to be held on June 2, 2026 and to conduct the election on the City’s behalf.

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:

Timely election and maintaining long-term financial
stability for the City supports Council’s Value Driver of “Working to improve the quality of life of our residents.

CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The Monterey County Elections Department estimates
the City’s election cost for the June 2, 2026 election to range between $96,768 to $161,280, Agenda Report Highlights
• The City of Monterey faces a
projected $12 million budget deficit
for FY 2026/27, requiring urgent
action to ensure long-term financial
stability.
• A proposed 0.375% supplemental
sales tax for nine years could
generate $4.5 million annually to
address the structural deficit.
• Delaying the tax measure to
November 2026 would result in
significant service cuts due to
delayed revenue collection until
June 2027.
• The City Council is urged to call a
special election for June 2026 to
avoid drastic service reductions and
maintain critical city services.
• Sustainable solutions to the deficit
require either increasing ongoing
revenue or reducing ongoing
expenditures by $10 million
annually.

Date: 2/17/2026
Item No.: 23.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 23., Item Page 1, Packet Page 269 №11/25
which will be budgeted for and paid for in FY 2026-27 along with the cost of the November 2026 election. However, should the voters of the City of Monterey approve the 0.375% sales tax, the estimated annual revenue is $4,500,000.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

The adoption of this Resolution is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq. and California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15000 et seq. (CEQA Guidelines). The calling of a municipal election is not a project within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines section 15378. Further, the general tax proposed by this Resolution is a government funding mechanism that does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment, and thus adopting this Resolution is not a project under CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4).

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:

The Council could decide not to call for a special election to ask the voters to approve the sales tax measure, but that is not advised.

DISCUSSION:

Five-Year Forecast Operating Deficit
At the June 2, 2025 Council meeting, the City Council adopted the budget for the 2025-26 Fiscal Year (FY). The FY 25-26 budget had a structural deficit of $10.5 million. The budget was balanced with several one-time solutions including reductions to services and supplies, not funding positions, salary savings, decreases to reserve contributions and restructuring prior financing commitments. As part of the budget presentation, the City Council received a presentation on the City’s immediate financial challenges as well as a high-level recap on the five-year forecast that includes a continued annual forecasted structural deficit and the need for timely attention and solutions.

Dating as far back as the 2013-14 Adopted Budget, each year the General Fund five-year forecast has projected a net operating deficit for at least three of the five years projected in the respective adopted budgets. The five-year forecasts showed operating deficits that have and continues to increase in magnitude over time. Specifically, the estimated budget deficits included in FY 13/14 show a low of ($0.3) million in that five year period to a high of ($10.5) million for FY 25/26 presented in the latest adopted budget, with an updated estimate of ($12) million for FY 26/27.

The 5-year forecast presented in the adopted FY25/26 budget included a structural operating deficit for FY 25/26 of ($10.5) million, FY26/27 of ($8.4) million, FY 27/28 of ($5.1) million, FY 28/29 of ($3.8) million and FY29/30 ($0.9) million. It is important to note that the assumptions included modest growth in revenue and operation expenses, but did not include the contributions to Capital Improvement Program (typically a minimum of $2.5 million per year), Reserves (typically at $5 million per year), deferred maintenance, nor did it take into consideration salary adjustments for the years not under current contract (FY 28 and beyond), which would significantly increase the deficit amounts.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 23., Item Page 2, Packet Page 270 №11/25
Challenges
Projected costs continue to outpace projected revenues. There are various reasons including rising costs for staffing (salaries, benefits and pension obligations), utility, insurance, contract services, equipment and vehicles. Staying on the existing course without a new revenue source will erode City reserves and services. The City will need to continue to balance the City’s checkbook by aligning its income with expenses.

The City provides critical city services, including public safety (Police and Fire); maintenance of parks, libraries and community centers; and programs such as recreation for the youth and seniors. Importantly, these services need to be provided in a reliable, continuous manner with long-term financial stability. With the projected FY26/27 budget deficit of ($12) million, the City is faced with urgency for new on-going revenues or implement substantial service reductions.

Despite optimistic revenue projections, the City is facing significant deficits. Should the projections not hold true, the magnitude of the deficits will be much worse. Given the challenges summarized above, long-term financial stability remains a significant challenge for the City.

Strategies for a Solution
This $10M structural deficit cannot be solved with one-time solutions; it is by definition a structural deficit because, without action by Council and City staff, the deficit will continue to grow in future fiscal years. Any solution must be sustainable and able to continue year-overyear. A one-time $10M fix, such as the sale of properties and/or other assets or the utilization of the City’s Economic Reserve Fund will only delay the problem to the future. The only true options are as follows:
a) increase ongoing revenue, and/or
b) reduce ongoing expenditures
Collectively, the combined revenue increases and/or expenditure reductions must add up to $10 million annually to balance the budget.

In May 2025, City staff alerted the City Council to the $10 million budget deficit, and as part of the FY 2025/26 budget process, emphasized the need for the City to address the long-term budget challenges in the months ahead. From August through October 2025, the Monterey City Council received staff presentations about the current budget situation and strategies to offset the structural deficit.

In November 2025, FM3 Research Firm conducted Part 1 of a citywide survey/public polling for potential revenue generating ballot measure. In January 2026, Part 2 of public polling for potential revenue generating ballot measure was conducted. Also, in January 2026, the City Council meet to review the updated polling questions and results where council agreed a tax measure was part of a viable long-term solution as there is the potential to generate $4.5 million in sales tax annually.

In a preceding agenda item, the City Council was asked to declare a “fiscal emergency,” to allow the City to hold a special election in June 2026 and place a general tax measure on the ballot – a move that could ensure the City avoids making drastic service cuts due to insufficient General Fund revenues. Pursuant to the California Constitution, a declaration of a fiscal Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 23., Item Page 3, Packet Page 271 №11/25
emergency is a prerequisite to submitting a general tax measure to the voters at a special election.

The urgency in this matter is evident as significant cuts to City services will need to be made if a general sales tax measure is placed on the ballot in November 2026 rather than in June 2026. If a general tax measure was to be submitted to and approved by the voters in the General Municipal Election held in November 2026, actual receipt of the revenue would be delayed until June 2027, which is too late. By May/June 2026, the Council would need to make decisions to eliminate the ($12) million deficit for FY26/27 and that could include service cuts.

Alternatively, having a general tax on a June 2026 ballot, if approved by a majority of the voters, would allow collection of General Fund revenues in a manner that avoids drastic cuts to critical city services.

Recommendation
Due to the negative impacts of service cuts to the City residents, businesses, and visitors, Staff asks the Council to adopt a resolution calling an election to ask the voters to approve a general sales tax measure of 0.375% for nine years and request that the County consolidate the election with the established election to be held on June 2, 2026 ballot and conduct the election on behalf of the City.

RTK
Attachments: 1. Resolution
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 23., Item Page 4, Packet Page 272 1 RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY

CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION FOR A PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL
TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX AT THE RATE OF 0.375% FOR NINE YEARS AND

REQUESTING THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR THE COUNTY OF MONTEREY CONSOLIDATE THE SPECIAL ELECTION WITH THE ELECTION TO BE HELD ON JUNE 2, 2026 AND TO CONDUCT THE ELECTION ON THE CITY’S BEHALF
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to submit the transactions and use tax ordinance attached hereto as Exhibit A (the “Ordinance”) to the City’s voters for their approval; WHEREAS, the Ordinance imposes a general tax, the revenues from which may fund public safety, parks, street maintenance, or any other lawful purpose; WHEREAS, the City Council has declared a fiscal emergency by unanimously adopting Resolution No. ______, and it may therefore submit the Ordinance to the voters in a special election consolidated with the statewide election set for June 2, 2026 (Cal. Const., art. XIII C, § 2, subd. (b));
WHEREAS, under Article II of the Monterey City Charter, the election contemplated by this Resolution is governed by the general laws of the State of California; WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to receive the services of the Monterey County Elections Department to conduct the election on the Ordinance; and WHEREAS, because the Ordinance concerns a transactions and use tax, this Resolution must be approved by two-thirds of the City Council (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 7285.9).

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

SECTION 1. RECITALS. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby adopted by the City Council.

SECTION 2. CALL OF SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION. Pursuant to the Monterey City Charter and the laws of the State of California, the City Council of the City of Monterey hereby calls and notices a special municipal election to be held on Tuesday, June 2, 2026 (“Special Municipal Election”), to consider the following measure.

Preserve Essential City Services Measure. Shall the measure to protect the City of Monterey’s financial stability / quality of life by maintaining services such as police; fire; 9-1-1 emergency response / preparedness; and other unrestricted general fund expenditures, by enacting a 0.375 percent sales tax that expires in nine years, with all funds locally controlled, with public reports / independent audits, providing approximately $4,500,000
annually, be adopted?
Yes ___
No ___
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 23., Item Page 5, Packet Page 273 2 The Ordinance imposing this measure is attached hereto as Exhibit A and is incorporated into this Resolution by this reference. The Ordinance requires the approval of a simple majority (50% plus one) of those voting in the Special Municipal Election.

SECTION 3. REQUEST TO CONDUCT ELECTION AND CANVAS RETURNS.

The City Council hereby asks the County of Monterey Board of Supervisors to authorize the County of Monterey Elections Department to render services necessary for the conduct of the Special Municipal Election. Pursuant to Elections Code section 10402, the City Council hereby requests that the County of Monterey Board of Supervisors consolidate the Special Municipal Election with any other election the Elections Department is to administer on June 2, 2026, and order the Special Municipal Election to be conducted by the County of Monterey Elections Department. The City Council acknowledges and requests that the consolidated election be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in Elections Code section 10418. The ballots to be used in the election shall be in form and content as required by law.

The City Clerk is authorized and directed to work with the County of Monterey Elections Department and to procure and furnish any and all official ballots, notices, printed matter and all supplies, equipment and paraphernalia as needed to properly and lawfully conduct the election.

In all particulars not recited in this Resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections. Pursuant to Elections Code section 10002, the City will reimburse Monterey County for the actual cost incurred in conducting the election upon receipt of a bill stating the amount due.

The notice of the time and place of holding the election is hereby given, and the City Clerk and the County of Monterey Elections Department are authorized to give further notice of the election, as required by law, and the City Clerk shall forward a certified copy of this resolution to the Clerk of the County of Monterey Board of Supervisors not later than 88 days before June 2, 2026.

SECTION 4. IMPLEMENTATION. The City Clerk is directed to file certified copies of this Resolution with the Monterey County Board of Supervisors, with a copy to the County of Monterey Elections Department, pursuant to Elections Code section 10402. The City Clerk is further authorized and directed to perform all other acts necessary or required by law to implement this Resolution and related to the Special Municipal Election.

The City Clerk is hereby authorized to cause notice of the Ordinance to be published once in the Monterey Herald in accordance with Elections Code section 12111 and Government Code section 6061. The City Clerk is authorized to request that the Monterey County Elections Department prepare and publish the required notice. The full text of the measure can be found online at https://monterey.gov/elections. If you desire a copy of the measure, please call the election official’s office at 831-646-3935 and a copy will be mailed at no cost to you.” SECTION 5. IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS. The City Clerk is directed to transmit a copy of the Ordinance to the City Attorney, who shall prepare an impartial analysis of the Ordinance in accordance with applicable law. The impartial analysis shall indicate the measure was placed on the ballot by the City Council.

SECTION 6. BALLOT ARGUMENTS. The City Clerk shall set the deadline for submission of arguments in favor of or against the Ordinance and provide notice of that deadline. The City Clerk may do this in coordination with the County of Monterey Elections Department, as necessary. In all respects, the process to choose these arguments shall accord with Elections Code sections 9280 et seq. and 9600 et seq.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 23., Item Page 6, Packet Page 274 3 The City Council hereby authorizes the Mayor to prepare and file the primary written argument on behalf of the City Council in support of the Ordinance. At the discretion of the Mayor, the argument may also be signed by other members of the City Council, bona fide associations of citizens, or by individual voters who are eligible to vote on the measure (Elec.

Code, § 9282(b).)
Further, the City Council hereby adopts the provisions of Elections Code section 9285(a) authorizing rebuttal arguments only as to arguments for the Special Municipal Election. This adoption is repealed, and the provisions of section 9285(a) shall not apply, thereafter.

SECTION 7. CEQA. The adoption of this Resolution is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq. and California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15000 et seq. (CEQA Guidelines). The calling of a municipal election is not a project within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines section 15378.

Further, the general tax proposed by this Resolution is a government funding mechanism that does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment, and thus adopting this Resolution is not a project under CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(4).

SECTION 8. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Resolution or its application to any person or circumstance 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 this Resolution or its application to other persons and circumstances. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional and, to that end, the provisions hereof are hereby declared to be severable.

SECTION 9. EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution, which shall be effective upon its adoption, and shall give notice of the measure to be voted on in the manner provided by law.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this ___ day of ____________, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
City Clerk
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 23., Item Page 7, Packet Page 275 1 ORDINANCE NO._________

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY

IMPOSING A SUPPLEMENTAL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX TO BE

ADMINISTERED BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND FEE

ADMINISTRATION
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY DO HEREBY ORDAIN as follows:

SECTION 1: AMENDMENT TO CODE. Article 9 is hereby added to Chapter 35 of the Monterey Municipal Code to read in its entirety as follows.

ARTICLE 9.

SUPPLEMENTAL GENERAL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX
35-100. Title. This ordinance shall be known as the Monterey Supplemental General Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance. The city of Monterey hereinafter shall be called “City.” This ordinance shall be applicable in the incorporated territory of the City. 35-101. Operative Date. “Operative Date” means the first day of the first calendar quarter commencing more than 110 days after the adoption of this ordinance. 35-102. Purpose. This ordinance is adopted to achieve the following, among other purposes, and directs that the provisions hereof be interpreted in order to accomplish those purposes:

A. To impose a retail transactions and use tax in accordance with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and Section 7285.9 of Part 1.7 of Division 2 which authorizes the City to adopt this tax ordinance which shall be operative if a majority of the electors voting on the measure vote to approve the imposition of the tax at an election called for that purpose.

B. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that incorporates provisions identical to those of the Sales and Use Tax Law of the State of California insofar as those provisions are not inconsistent with the requirements and limitations contained in Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

C. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that imposes a tax and provides a measure therefore that can be administered and collected by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration in a manner that adapts itself as fully as practicable to, and requires the least possible deviation from, the existing statutory and administrative procedures followed by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration in administering and collecting the California State Sales and Use Taxes.

D. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that can be administered in a manner that will be, to the greatest degree possible, consistent with the provisions of Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, minimize the cost of collecting the transactions and use taxes, and at the same time, minimize the burden of record keeping upon persons subject to taxation under the provisions of this Article. 35-103. Contract with State. Prior to the operative date, the City shall contract with the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to perform all functions incident to the administration and operation of this transactions and use tax ordinance; provided, that if the City shall not have contracted with the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration prior to Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 23., Item Page 8, Packet Page 276 2 the operative date, it shall nevertheless so contract and in such a case the operative date shall be the first day of the first calendar quarter following the execution of such a contract. 35-104. Transactions Tax Rate. For the privilege of selling tangible personal property at retail, a tax is hereby imposed upon all retailers in the incorporated territory of the City at the rate of 0.375% of the gross receipts of any retailer from the sale of all tangible personal property sold at retail in said territory on and after the operative date of this ordinance. 35-105. Place of Sale. For the purposes of this Article, all retail sales are consummated at the place of business of the retailer unless the tangible personal property sold is delivered by the retailer or his agent to an out-of-state destination or to a common carrier for delivery to an out-of-state destination. The gross receipts from such sales shall include delivery charges, when such charges are subject to the state sales and use tax, regardless of the place to which delivery is made. In the event a retailer has no permanent place of business in the State or has more than one place of business, the place or places at which the retail sales are consummated shall be determined under rules and regulations to be prescribed and adopted by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration.
35-106. Use Tax Rate. An excise tax is hereby imposed on the storage, use or other consumption in the City of tangible personal property purchased from any retailer on and after the operative date of this ordinance for storage, use or other consumption in said territory at the rate of 0.375% of the sales price of the property. The sales price shall include delivery charges when such charges are subject to state sales or use tax regardless of the place to which delivery is made.
35-107. Adoption of Provisions of State Law. Except as otherwise provided in this Article and except insofar as they are inconsistent with the provisions of Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, all of the provisions of Part 1 (commencing with Section 6001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code are hereby adopted and made a part of this Article as though fully set forth herein.
35-108. Limitations on Adoption of State Law and Collection of Use Taxes. In adopting the provisions of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code:

A. Wherever the State of California is named or referred to as the taxing agency, the name of this City shall be substituted therefor. However, the substitution shall not be made when:

1. The word “State” is used as a part of the title of the State Controller, State Treasurer, State Treasury, or the Constitution of the State of California;

2. The result of that substitution would require action to be taken by or against this City or any agency, officer, or employee thereof rather than by or against the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, in performing the functions incident to the administration or operation of this Article.

3. In those sections, including, but not necessarily limited to sections referring to the exterior boundaries of the State of California, where the result of the substitution would be to:
a. Provide an exemption from this tax with respect to certain sales, storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property which would not otherwise be exempt from this tax while such sales, storage, use or other consumption remain subject to tax by the State under the provisions of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or;
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 23., Item Page 9, Packet Page 277 3 b. Impose this tax with respect to certain sales, storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property which would not be subject to tax by the state under the said provision of that code.

4. In Sections 6701, 6702 (except in the last sentence thereof), 6711, 6715, 6737, 6797 or 6828 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

B. The word “City” shall be substituted for the word “State” in the phrase “retailer engaged in business in this State” in Section 6203 and in the definition of that phrase in Section 6203. “A retailer engaged in business in the District” shall also include any retailer that, in the preceding calendar year or the current calendar year, has total combined sales of tangible personal property in this state or for delivery in the State by the retailer and all persons related to the retailer that exceeds five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000).

For purposes of this section, a person is related to another person if both persons are related to each other pursuant to Section 267(b) of Title 26 of the United States Code and the regulations thereunder.
35-109. Permit Not Required. If a seller’s permit has been issued to a retailer under Section 6067 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, an additional transactor’s permit shall not be required by this Article.
35-110. Exemptions and Exclusions.

A. There shall be excluded from the measure of the transactions tax and the use tax the amount of any sales tax or use tax imposed by the State of California or by any city, city and county, or county pursuant to the Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law or the amount of any state-administered transactions or use tax.

B. There are exempted from the computation of the amount of transactions tax the gross receipts from:

1. Sales of tangible personal property, other than fuel or petroleum products, to operators of aircraft to be used or consumed principally outside the county in which the sale is made and directly and exclusively in the use of such aircraft as common carriers of persons or property under the authority of the laws of this State, the United States, or any foreign government.

2. Sales of property to be used outside the City which is shipped to a point outside the City, pursuant to the contract of sale, by delivery to such point by the retailer or his agent, or by delivery by the retailer to a carrier for shipment to a consignee at such point. For the purposes of this paragraph, delivery to a point outside the City shall be satisfied:
a. With respect to vehicles (other than commercial vehicles) subject to registration pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 3 of the Vehicle Code, aircraft licensed in compliance with Section 21411 of the Public Utilities Code, and undocumented vessels registered under Division 3.5 (commencing with Section 9840) of the Vehicle Code by registration to an out-ofCity address and by a declaration under penalty of perjury, signed by the buyer, stating that such address is, in fact, his or her principal place of residence; and b. With respect to commercial vehicles, by registration to a place of business out-ofCity and declaration under penalty of perjury, signed by the buyer, that the vehicle will be operated from that address.

Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 23., Item Page 10, Packet Page 278 4 3. The sale of tangible personal property if the seller is obligated to furnish the property for a fixed price pursuant to a contract entered into prior to the operative date of this ordinance.

4. A lease of tangible personal property which is a continuing sale of such property, for any period of time for which the lessor is obligated to lease the property for an amount fixed by the lease prior to the operative date of this ordinance.

5. For the purposes of subparagraphs (B)(3) and (B)(4) of this section, the sale or lease of tangible personal property shall be deemed not to be obligated pursuant to a contract or lease for any period of time for which any party to the contract or lease has the unconditional right to terminate the contract or lease upon notice, whether or not such right is exercised.

C. There are exempted from the use tax imposed by this Article, the storage, use or other consumption in this City of tangible personal property:

1. The gross receipts from the sale of which have been subject to a transactions tax under any state-administered transactions and use tax ordinance.

2. Other than fuel or petroleum products purchased by operators of aircraft and used or consumed by such operators directly and exclusively in the use of such aircraft as common carriers of persons or property for hire or compensation under a certificate of public convenience and necessity issued pursuant to the laws of this State, the United States, or any foreign government. This exemption is in addition to the exemptions provided in Sections 6366 and 6366.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California.

3. If the purchaser is obligated to purchase the property for a fixed price pursuant to a contract entered into prior to the operative date of this ordinance.

4. If the possession of, or the exercise of any right or power over, the tangible personal property arises under a lease which is a continuing purchase of such property for any period of time for which the lessee is obligated to lease the property for an amount fixed by a lease prior to the operative date of this ordinance.

5. For the purposes of subparagraphs (C)(3) and (C)(4) of this section, storage, use, or other consumption, or possession of, or exercise of any right or power over, tangible personal property shall be deemed not to be obligated pursuant to a contract or lease for any period of time for which any party to the contract or lease has the unconditional right to terminate the contract or lease upon notice, whether or not such right is exercised.

6. Except as provided in subparagraph (C)(7), a retailer engaged in business in the City shall not be required to collect use tax from the purchaser of tangible personal property, unless the retailer ships or delivers the property into the City or participates within the City in making the sale of the property, including, but not limited to, soliciting or receiving the order, either directly or indirectly, at a place of business of the retailer in the City or through any representative, agent, canvasser, solicitor, subsidiary, or person in the City under the authority of the retailer.

7. “A retailer engaged in business in the City” shall also include any retailer of any of the following: vehicles subject to registration pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 3 of the Vehicle Code, aircraft licensed in compliance with Section 21411 of the Public Utilities Code, or undocumented vessels registered Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 23., Item Page 11, Packet Page 279 5 under Division 3.5 (commencing with Section 9840) of the Vehicle Code. That retailer shall be required to collect use tax from any purchaser who registers or licenses the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft at an address in the City.

D. Any person subject to use tax under this Article may credit against that tax any transactions tax or reimbursement for transactions tax paid to a district imposing, or retailer liable for a transactions tax pursuant to Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code with respect to the sale to the person of the property the storage, use or other consumption of which is subject to the use tax.
35-111. Termination Date. The taxes imposed by this Article shall expire on September 30, 2035, unless they are extended by a majority of the City’s electors voting in an election.

SECTION 2: AMENDMENTS. All amendments subsequent to the effective date of this ordinance to Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code relating to sales and use taxes and which are not inconsistent with Part 1.6 and Part 1.7 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, and all amendments to Part 1.6 and Part 1.7 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, shall automatically become a part of this ordinance, provided however, that no such amendment shall operate so as to affect the rate of tax imposed by this ordinance.

SECTION 3: ENJOINING COLLECTION FORBIDDEN. No injunction or writ of mandate or other legal or equitable process shall issue in any suit, action or proceeding in any court against the State or the City, or against any officer of the State or the City, to prevent or enjoin the collection under this ordinance, or Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, of any tax or any amount of tax required to be collected.

SECTION 4: SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

SECTION 5: EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance relates to the levying and collecting of the City’s transactions and use taxes and shall take effect immediately if it is approved by a simple majority of the City’s voters in the election to be held June 2, 2026.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this ___ day of ____________, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
City Clerk
Council Regular Meeting, 2/17/2026, Item No. 23., Item Page 12, Packet Page 280

Monterey City CouncilFebruary 17, 2026

Monterey City Council
February 17, 2026