Council Chamber,
580 Pacific St.
Monterey, California
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Council Regular Meeting
Tuesday, April 7, 2026
4:00 PM
Mayor
Tyller Williamson
Councilmembers
Kim Barber, District 1
Ed Smith, District 2
Jean Rasch, District 3
Gino Garcia, District 4
City Manager
Dante G. Hall
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.
April 7, 2026 4:00 PM
2 Call to Order
AFTERNOON SESSION: 4:00 p.m.
Presentations (Afternoon)
1. Welcome and Introduce Dante G. Hall as the New City Manager for the City of Monterey (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
2. Recognize April 2026 as Fair Housing Month (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) General Public Comments
The public may speak to any item that is not on the agenda and that is in the City of Monterey’s subject matter jurisdiction.
Consent Agenda
All matters listed under Consent Agenda are routine and will be adopted by one motion unless a member of the City Council or the public requests discussion or a separate vote.
Consent: Approval of Minutes
3. February 17, 2026 Regular Meeting (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
4. March 17, 2026 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Consent: Award of Construction Contracts
5. Award Construction Contract for the Rehabilitation of a City Owned Inclusionary Unit under the Purchase & Resale Program (CDBG P&R Rehabilitation (585-1)) in an Amount Not to Exceed $87,000 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061, and Categorically Excluded per 24 CFR 58.34(a)(12), 24 CFR 58.35(a)(5), 24 CFR 58.35(a)(3)(ii)) Consent: Resolutions
A resolution is an expression of opinion or evidence of a decision made by the City Council and often relates to administrative business of the City. Resolutions generally become effective immediately upon adoption.
6. Authorize Agreement with Dell, Inc. for Microsoft Server Licensing in the amount of $114,638.08 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
7. Award Two (2) Professional Services Agreements with a Not-to-Exceed Annual Limit of $1,000,000 Each for Traffic Signal Maintenance Services to: 1) Bear Electrical Solutions, LLC. and 2) St Francis Electric, LLC. ***CIP/NCIP*** (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
8. Amend Resolution 25-071 and Approve a New Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Between the Monterey Regional Waste Management District (ReGen Monterey) and Member Agencies Regarding Compliance with Organic Waste Recycling and Food Recovery Laws (SB 1383) for $43,178 for these Services for Fiscal Year 2025-26 (Not April 7, 2026 4:00 PM
3 a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
9. Authorize the City of Monterey Cemetery El Encinal to Buy Back Cemetery Lot 2A in Block 97 for $4,963 Payable to Mr. Jim Sleeper and Mrs. Jill Sleeper (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
10. Authorize the City Manager to Sign an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement Extension with MidPen Housing for Development of Affordable Housing at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street, 424 and 450 Madison Street (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Consent: Other
11. Proclamation Recognizing the 50th Anniversary of the Laguna Grande Regional Joint Powers Agency (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
End of Consent Agenda
Adjourn to City Council Meeting
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.)
12. Application AP-25-0236 and Use Permit Application UP-25-0013; Appellant Henry Ruhnke, Wald, Ruhnke and Dost Architects LLP; Property Owner W R MONT LLC; Industrial, Administration, and Research, Religious Assembly Overlay, Emergency Shelter Overlay, Multi-Family Residential Overlay (I-R-130-RA-ES-MF1) Zoning District; Employment General Plan Designation (Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1 and Section 15303, Class 3)
1. Adopt Findings to Overrule the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission’s Consistency Determination for a Day Care, General, Use at 2400 Garden Road, and
2. Grant Appeal and Overturn the Planning Commission’s Decision and Approve Use Permit UP-25-0013 for a Day Care, General, Use at 2400 Garden Road Public Appearance (Afternoon)
Public Appearance items are on non-routine issues that might stimulate public interest and comments.
13. Receive Update from the Housing Authority of the County of Monterey (HACM) on Status of Displaced Tenants Resulting from the Fire at 800 Casanova Avenue and Authorize the City Manager to Donate From the Available Balance from the FY 25-26 Budget for the Rental Assistance Program to HACM and/or Other Organizations to Continue Support of the Displaced Tenants as Needed (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) April 7, 2026 4:00 PM
4 Requests from Councilmembers to Agendize New Matters
Councilmembers may request to agendize a matter of business on a future agenda. The sole issue to be determined is whether the substantive issue warrants being heard at a future date.
A majority vote is not required, instead, the motion will pass with two “yes” votes.
14. Councilmember Rasch’s Request to Agendize a Discussion Regarding Council Expenses and Benefits (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
15. Councilmember Rasch’s Request to Agendize a Discussion Regarding ADA Parking in Public Lots (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.
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.
Evening Session Items
Public Appearance (Evening)
Public Appearance items are on non-routine issues that might stimulate public interest and comments.
16. Receive Police Department Annual Report - 2025 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
17. Receive Annual Report of the Police Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) System (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15376 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
18. Receive Annual Report and Renew the Military Equipment Purchase and Use Ordinance – Monterey City Code, Chapter 27, Article 3, Section 27-10 (Not a Project under CEQA 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).)
April 7, 2026 4:00 PM
5 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.
INTERPRETATION: The Monterey City Council invites and encourages public participation at its meetings.
Requests for language interpretation may be made by contacting the City Clerk at [email protected] or 831-646-3935. The City Clerk will make every effort to accommodate requests for interpreter assistance.
Requests should be made as soon as possible in advance of any meeting of the City Council. The City is committed to addressing language interpretation requests swiftly in order to maximize public participation.
ACCESSIBILITY: The City of Monterey is committed to including people with disabilities in all of its services, programs and activities. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, including to coordinate the use of a hearing device, please contact [email protected] or (831) 646-3935. Notification 30+ hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting [28 CFR 35.102-
35.104 ADA Title II]. Later requests will be accommodated to the extent feasible. For communication-related assistance, dial 711 to use the California Relay Service (CRS) to speak to City offices. CRS offers free text-tospeech, speech-to-speech, and Spanish-language services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
CITY OF MONTEREY 24-HOUR SUGGESTION HOTLINES: (831) 646-3799 or [email protected] Upcoming city meetings are listed at monterey.gov/agendas For more information, call (831) 646-3935 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Welcome and Introduce Dante G. Hall as the New City Manager for the City of Monterey (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council welcome and introduce Dante G. Hall, the new City Manager for the City of Monterey.
VALUE DRIVERS:
Develop and Retain a Quality Workforce - Provide sufficient resources and support to develop, retain, and recruit a high quality city workforce.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The City Manager serves at the pleasure of the City Council pursuant to Section 5.1 of the City Charter. It is appropriate and within the City Council’s purview to introduce and
welcome the new City Manager.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There is no fiscal implication associated with welcoming Mr.
Hall to the community.
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, Agenda Report Highlights
• Dante G. Hall was appointed as
Monterey's City Manager following
a nationwide recruitment process.
• Mr. Hall has over 17 years of
municipal government experience,
including leadership roles in
various cities.
• Mr. Hall comes to Monterey
having most recently served as
City Manager of the City of
Hercules, California.
• Mr. Hall holds advanced degrees
and certifications in public
administration and policy.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 1.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 1., Item Page 1, Packet Page 6 №11/25
this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
This recommendation follows previous closed session direction and decisions.
DISCUSSION:
Mr. Hall brings to the City of Monterey more than 17 years of experience working for full-service cities. He most recently served as City Manager in the City of Hercules.
Prior to his employment with the City of Hercules, he held a variety of positions in other cities such as Assistant City Manager, Interim City Manager, Acting Public Works Director, Acting Parks and Recreation Director, Community Development Director, Redevelopment and Housing Administrator, Deputy City Manager for Community Development, Assistant Director of Community Development, Housing and Grant Manager, and Community Development Block Grant Program Manager.
Throughout Mr. Hall’s career in municipal government, he has led diverse teams, managed complex budgets, and built strong partnerships across departments, agencies, and community organizations. Mr. Hall has advanced infrastructure projects, enhanced public safety, and promoted economic development while maintaining transparency and fiscal responsibility.
He holds a Master of Public Administration degree from Marxe School of Public and International Affairs at City University of New York - Baruch, in New York, New York, and a Bachelor of Arts degree in Social Work from Azusa Pacific University, in Azuza, California.
Mr. Hall is an International City/County Management Association (ICMA) Credentialed Manager.
Additionally, he holds a public policy program certificate from Harvard Kennedy School of Public Policy, and a Davenport Institute for Public Engagement Certificate from Pepperdine School of Public Policy.
Mr. Hall’s selection as Monterey’s City Manager was the result of a rigorous nationwide recruitment process with many qualified candidates.
The City of Monterey is very pleased to welcome Mr. Hall and introduce him to the Monterey community.
NR
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 1., Item Page 2, Packet Page 7 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Mahnoor Abbasi, HCD Coordinator
SUBJECT: Recognize April 2026 as Fair Housing Month (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council recognize April 2026 as Fair
Housing Month.
VALUE DRIVERS:
In collaboration with our community partners, work to
support efforts and policies that provide equitable
access to affordable housing in Monterey and the
region.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The City of Monterey Housing Element states, “Housing
Goal #3. Provide for fair and equal housing opportunities for all persons, regardless of protected characteristics such as age, sex, family status, race, creed, color, or national origin, etc.”
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The City of Monterey determined that the proposed
action is not a project as defined by the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14,
Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section
15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061
includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to
activities that 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 Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is
recommended to recognize April
2026 as Fair Housing Month to
honor the 58th anniversary of the
Fair Housing Act.
• The City of Monterey actively
supports fair housing initiatives,
including workshops and
education for tenants and
landlords.
• Community Development Block
Grant funds are allocated to
ECHO Housing for fair housing
services such as counseling,
investigation, and education.
• From 2019 to 2026, ECHO
Housing assisted 434 individuals
and families in Monterey with fair
housing services.
• The City is committed to ensuring
equitable access to safe, decent,
and affordable housing for all
residents.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 2.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 1, Packet Page 8 №12/25
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:
City Council could choose not to recognize April 2026 as Fair Housing Month; however, that is not recommended.
DISCUSSION:
This proclamation honors the Fair Housing Act. On April 11, 1968, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act, known as the Federal Fair Housing Act, was passed. April 2026 marks the 58th anniversary of the passage of the Fair Housing Act which prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of housing based on race, gender, disability, familial status, religion, and national origin.
The City believes that all individuals deserve access to safe, decent, and affordable housing. To commemorate the Fair Housing Act, the City of Monterey celebrates April as Fair Housing Month.
The City of Monterey actively supports initiatives that support fair housing through education such as hosting fair housing workshops for tenants and landlords. The City will host two workshops in April 2026 and previously hosted workshops for tenants and landlords on April 17, 2025, and April 24, 2025, respectively. The City also held an AB-1482 (Tenants Protection Act) Workshop on September 25, 2025, in partnership with ECHO Housing.
The City allocates Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds received by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the City’s General Fund to support Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity (also known as ECHO housing) to provide fair housing activities including counseling, investigation and/or testing of fair housing violations, mediation, enforcement of fair housing requirements, addressing discrimination complaints and providing education and outreach on fair housing. From 2019 to 2026, Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity assisted 434 individuals and families residing in the City of Monterey, by providing them with fair housing services.
The City of Monterey is proud to recognize and celebrate the month of April as Fair Housing Month. The City of Monterey is committed to ensuring safe, decent and affordable housing for all.
KC/ma
Attachments: 1. Proclamation
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 2, Packet Page 9 ATTACHMENT 1
Proclamation Declaring
April 2026
FAIR HOUSING MONTH
WHEREAS, April 2026 marks the 58th Anniversary of the passage of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, known as the Federal Fair Housing Act. The City of Monterey celebrates April as Fair Housing Month. This Act outlines a national policy of fair housing for all individuals who live in the United States; and,
WHEREAS, the Federal Fair Housing Act protects individuals from discrimination based on race, color, sex, disability, religion, familial status, and national origin; and, WHEREAS, discrimination based on race, color, national origin, gender, disability, familial status, religion, marital status, source of income, or any arbitrary reason is illegal in California; and,
WHEREAS, as a community we understand that economic progress is best served by promoting opportunities for all communities, with equal access to good jobs, schools, health care, transportation, and housing; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey actively supports initiatives that support fair housing through education and partners with organizations such as Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity (ECHO Housing) to host fair housing workshops for tenants and landlords; and, WHEREAS, the Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity has assisted more than 434 households, ensuring residents of Monterey have the knowledge and resources to secure stable housing and contribute to a thriving, inclusive community NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT I, Tyller Williamson Mayor of the City of Monterey, on behalf of the City Council and citizens, hereby proclaim the month of April 2026 as Fair Housing Month.
CELEBRATING FAIR HOUSING MONTH
in the City of Monterey and urging all residents of our community to personally adopt the spirit of equal housing opportunity and adhere to the letter and character of Fair Housing Laws.
Dated: April 2026 _____________________
Tyller Williamson, Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 2., Item Page 3, Packet Page 10
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
CITY OF MONTEREY
Tuesday, February 17, 2026
4:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 580 PACIFIC ST.
MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers
Present: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith (arrived at 6:15 p.m.), Williamson
Absent: None
City Staff
Present:
Interim City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Finance Director, Community Development Director, Police Chief, Fire Chief, Public Works Director, Property Manager, Housing Manager, Recording Secretary Call to Order
Mayor Williamson called the meeting to order at 4:01 p.m. Recording Secretary Barrera called the roll with all members except for Councilmember Smith present.
AFTERNOON SESSION
General Public Comments
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from: Dan Turner, Charley Chell, Rafael Zenizo, Athena Zenizo, Nova, Eli, and Justin.
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 except Item #5 and Item #10:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
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)
Action: Approved (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
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)
Action: Adopted Resolution Nos. 26-018, 26-019, and 26-020 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 3.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 1, Packet Page 11 City Council Minutes February 17, 2026
2 Consent: Resolutions
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)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-021 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
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)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-022 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
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)
Action: Pulled from Consent; Adopted Resolution No. 26-023 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
Housing Manager Wyatt answered Councilmembers’ questions.
On a motion by Councilmember Rasch, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-023 C.S.:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
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) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-024 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
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)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-025 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
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) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-026 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
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)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-027 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent) Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 2, Packet Page 12 City Council Minutes February 17, 2026
3 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) Action: Removed from Consent; Adopted Resolution No. 26-028 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer Easterling answered Councilmembers’ questions.
Public comment was received from Tom Reeves, who asked for clarification about how the matter would be funded.
On question from the Council, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer Easterling said that the funds were already within the existing Capital Improvement Program budget.
On a motion by Councilmember Barber, seconded by Councilmember Garcia, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-028 C.S.:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
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)
Action: Appointed Negotiators Cole and Aldrete (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
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)
Action: Appointed Negotiators Cole and Aldrete (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
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)
Action: Appointed Negotiators Cole and Aldrete (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
End of Consent Agenda
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 3, Packet Page 13 City Council Minutes February 17, 2026
4 Afternoon Session Items
Public Hearing (Afternoon)
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))
Action: Held public hearing, Adopted Resolution No. 26-029 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
Planning Manager Hill gave the staff presentation. Public comment was solicited but not received.
On a motion by Councilmember Barber, seconded by Councilmember Garcia, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-029 C.S.:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
Public Appearance (Afternoon)
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)
Action: Received public testimony
Public comment was received from Mr. O’Keefe, who thanked City staff for doing their due diligence and making sure that the process to modify the district plan was accomplished correctly.
On a motion by Councilmember Barber, seconded by Councilmember Rasch, and carried by the following vote, the City Council received the public testimony presented:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
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)
Action: Authorized letter as amended to add additional information on concerns around economic impact, wildlife corridors, evacuation routes, earthquakes, and Native American artifacts, and to reorder items 3-5 in the draft letter to be items 1-3 (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
Community Development Director Cole gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.
Due to the number of individuals expressing their desire to speak, comment was limited to two minutes. Public comment in strong opposition to the project application at 711 Viejo Road was Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 4, Packet Page 14 City Council Minutes February 17, 2026
5 received from: Tom Reeves, Luis Osorio, Marta Kraftzeck, an unnamed resident of Viejo Road and member of the Aguajito Property Owners Association (APOA), Amy Treadwell (APOA), Denver Dale (APOA), an unnamed member of APOA, Nelson Vega, Esther Malkin, Lori Mazzuca, Nina Beety, Rick Heuer, Peter Kaiser, Charles “Chip” Bates of APOA, Monterey County Supervisor Kate Daniels, and Nicole. Reasons for opposition cited by commenters included stating that the proposed project was too large and tall and did not fit into the character of Monterey; public safety concerns including relating to storm drain system, fire risks, seismic dangers, septic issues, and infrastructure overload; concerns about potential traffic; concerns about the impact on available water supply; environmental concerns including impact on endangered species, the need for a hydrogeologic report; economic concerns including jobshousing impacts and the potential that units would be used for short-term rentals; impact on community’s character; concerns about the project’s feasibility; criticism of Monterey County for not completing its housing element, leaving the area vulnerable; and criticism of the developer for matters including engaging in litigation strategies and proposing out-of-the-ordinary projects, the developer's disbarment, and the concern that the project may be a strong-arm ploy to settle for a smaller development or a buyout of the land; and concerns about incomplete application requirements. Daniel Alvarez, representing carpenters, stressed the need to have strong labor standards and responsible contracting on every project.
The Council discussed the proposed development and the draft comment letter. Concerns were raised regarding the scale and height of the project, water availability, wastewater and septic capacity, fire risk, environmental constraints, slopes, wildlife corridors, and overall site feasibility.
Discussion included the applicability of the “builder’s remedy,” the County’s jurisdiction and authority, and the City’s ability to influence the outcome through its comment letter. The Council noted the importance of clearly articulating the City’s concerns related to infrastructure, public safety, environmental impacts, and service capacity, while acknowledging the constraints of state housing law. It was stated that the letter should assist the County by documenting potential impacts to the City and adjacent areas. The need to avoid speculation regarding the developer’s intentions was also expressed.
Mayor Williamson requested that items one through five in the letter be reordered and that additional language be included emphasizing the City’s support for housing while clearly outlining its concerns.
A motion was introduced by Councilmember Barber and seconded by Councilmember Rasch to authorize the Mayor to sign the comment letter, as amended to add additional information on concerns around economic impact, wildlife corridors, evacuation routes, earthquakes, and Native American artifacts.
A friendly amendment was introduced by Mayor Williamson to reorder items 3-5 in the draft letter to be items 1-3, in order to improve the flow of the letter and focus on matters specific to the City of Monterey.
The mover and seconder approved the friendly amendment. The amended motion passed by the following vote:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
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 Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 5, Packet Page 15 City Council Minutes February 17, 2026
6 a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-032 C.S. (3-2, Councilmember Garcia and Mayor Williamson voting no)
This item was heard in the evening session, as the last item presented. Finance Director King provided the staff presentation and responded to Council questions regarding budget adjustments, reserves, projections, and specific departmental requests.
Public comment was received from: Lori Mazzuca, who spoke in favor of the proposed changes except allocation to the Economic Uncertainty Reserve; Tom Reeves, who spoke about how the City could improve the public’s understanding of the fiscal deficit and asked why the Urban Forester could not be a contracted employee; and Esther Malkin, who said that the Police Department should receive the funding needed for the required upgrade to its radios.
Discussion included clarification of reserve levels, including the economic uncertainty reserve and related calculations. Questions were raised regarding the source of specific reserve amounts, investment portfolio performance, and assumptions used in the five-year forecast. Staff explained that projections include baseline assumptions and that certain transfers, including contributions to the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), vary by fiscal year and are not directly comparable year to year. A request was made for a detailed list of forecast assumptions.
The Council discussed the timing of the budget process, expenditure freezes, and whether the item should be approved or delayed for further review. It was noted that some items could be brought back at a later meeting; however, staff indicated that the list had already been significantly to essential and time-sensitive requests. Specific discussion addressed police radio replacements, forestry staffing, public works needs, training reimbursements, and other departmental adjustments. The importance of public safety communications equipment was emphasized, including the operational necessity of functioning radios. The Council also discussed contract approval thresholds, mid-year budget adjustments, and the role of reserves in addressing infrastructure and operational needs.
A motion was introduced by Councilmember Smith, and seconded by Councilmember Rasch, that the Council approve the staff recommendation and adopt Resolution No. 26-030 C.S.
The Council expressed differing views on whether to approve all requested adjustments, defer certain items, reduce the total amount, or remove specific line items.
A substitute motion was made by Mayor Williamson, and seconded by Councilmember Garcia, to approve the budget adjustments excluding the City Manager’s Office’s request for $31,500 and Human Resources Department’s request for $10,000. The substitute motion failed, with Councilmembers Barber, Rasch, and Smith voting no.
The original motion to approve the staff-recommended budget adjustments was then considered. The Council discussed fiscal responsibility, transparency, public perception, and the need to balance deficit concerns with operational requirements. It was stated that the requests represented essential, minimal, and urgent needs.
The original motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Rasch, Smith
NOES: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Garcia, Williamson
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 6, Packet Page 16 City Council Minutes February 17, 2026
7 Adjourn to Closed Session
Public comment on the closed session was received from Robbie Torrise, who thanked staff.
Closed Session (Afternoon)
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)
Action: On a unanimous roll call vote, confidential direction was given to property negotiators
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)
Action: No reportable action taken
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) Action: On a unanimous roll call vote, confidential direction was given to legal counsel
The Council recessed at 6:15 p.m. and reconvened at 7:00 p.m. with Councilmember Smith present.
EVENING SESSION AGENDA
Pledge of Allegiance
Councilmember Garcia led the Pledge.
General Public Comments, Continued
Continued public comment on non-agendized matters was solicited but not received.
Announcements from Closed Session
Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira reported out from the closed session as indicated in the actions recorded for closed session items 18, 19, and 20, above.
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 Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 7, Packet Page 17 City Council Minutes February 17, 2026
8 Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Received presentation
Senior Engineer Paulding provided the staff presentation and responded to Council questions.
Additional clarification was provided by Public Works Director Renny regarding matching funds and related program details.
Public comment agreeing with the NCIP Committee’s recommendation that the 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, was received from: Rick Heuer, Pat Venza, Marta Kraftzeck, Chinyere Ogbonna, Hans Jannasch, Dennis Duke, Esther Malkin, Curt Tipton, Gina L. Sessions, Tom Reeves, and Lori Mazzuca. Public comment stressing the need to underground utilities was received from Ray Meyers.
The Council discussed the NCIP priority list and broader budget considerations. It was stated that while there may be no operational challenges to reallocating future fiscal year funds, no action could be taken at this meeting because the item was agendized solely as a presentation.
Discussion included the fiscal implications of freezing projects versus reallocating future funds, the importance of maintaining a structurally balanced budget, and the potential impacts of drawing down reserves. It was noted that reliance on reserves is not considered sound budget policy and may affect staffing levels and infrastructure funding.
The Council expressed appreciation for the work of the NCIP Committee and acknowledged the difficulty of the budget situation. Discussion also addressed the need for clearer expectations regarding project commitments, long-term fiscal sustainability, prioritization of capital improvements, and alignment of resources with infrastructure and engineering needs. It was stated that difficult decisions have been made and will continue to be necessary to address the City’s structural deficit.
The presentation was received, and staff indicated that Council comments would be considered in the development of a structurally balanced budget to be brought forward at a future meeting.
Public Appearance (Evening)
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)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-030 C.S.
Finance Director King provided the staff presentation and responded to Council questions, with additional input from executive staff and the City Attorney regarding legal standards and ballot procedures.
Public comment was received from Rick Heuer of the Monterey Peninsula Taxpayers Association, who said he would campaign against a sales tax measure because the City should instead cut its spending; Uwe Grobecker, who spoke against the fiscal emergency declaration and said the City should evaluate its spending; and Lori Mazzuca, who expressed concern that a declaration of fiscal emergency could lead to redirection of NCIP funds.
The Council discussed the purpose and legal definition of declaring a fiscal emergency, clarifying that the action enables placement of a proposed general tax measure on the ballot and does not itself impose a tax. Discussion included ballot timing requirements and the need to act in advance Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 8, Packet Page 18 City Council Minutes February 17, 2026
9 of statutory deadlines. It was noted that the declaration is intended to provide voters the opportunity to consider a proposed 0.375% general tax measure and would not commit the Council to additional measures at this time. Councilmember Rasch asked that it be included in the record that the vote for the fiscal emergency was only within the context of this discussion.
The Council acknowledged the City’s structural deficit and rising costs, including pensions, insurance, utilities, and other operational expenses, emphasizing that these pressures have developed over time and are not unique to Monterey. It was stated that difficult fiscal decisions lie ahead and that further budget actions will be required. Discussion also referenced the Council’s discretion regarding fund reallocations, the importance of public transparency and trust, and interest in continued in-depth review of City finances.
On a motion by Mayor Williamson seconded by Councilmember Smith and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-030 C.S.:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
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) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-031 C.S.
Interim City Manager Bauman introduced the item and thanked staff for their work. The Finance Director provided the staff presentation and responded to Council questions regarding review by an outside consultant, timing for transmittal of materials to the County, applicable election deadlines, opportunities for public education and community engagement, and projected revenue sources, including the proportion of sales tax generated by visitors.
Public comment was solicited but not received except as combined with Item 22, above.
The Council discussed the proposed tax measure, including election timing, consolidation with the County election, anticipated revenue generation, and the role of consultants in reviewing ballot language and financial projections. It was stated that placing the measure before voters would provide the community the opportunity to address the City’s structural fiscal challenges.
On a motion by Mayor Williamson seconded by Councilmember Smith and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-032 C.S.:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Council Comments
Councilmember Rasch commented on potential cost savings related to Council pensions and stated she does not support subsidizing medical benefits. She emphasized the importance of the tree ordinance item, urging the Council to take sufficient time, listen to the entire community, and develop the best possible ideas. She expressed concern about being presented with only one draft and feeling rushed in the decision-making process.
Councilmember Garcia announced the April 19th Laguna Grande JPA 50th Anniversary event and noted it as a good opportunity to educate the public on how the JPA is structured.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 9, Packet Page 19 City Council Minutes February 17, 2026
10 Mayor Williamson shared that the 21st Annual Chocolate and Wine event will take place over the weekend and acknowledged the Monterey Public Library and Friends Foundations (MPLFF) for their involvement.
City Manager Reports
Interim City Manager Bauman updated the Council on the City’s storm response.
Adjournment
The Council adjourned at 11:00 p.m. in memory of Dennis Copeland, former Museums, Arts and Archives Manager.
Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Erica Barrera Tyller Williamson
Recording Secretary Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 3., Item Page 10, Packet Page 20
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
CITY OF MONTEREY
Tuesday, March 17, 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, Community Development Director, Library & Museums Director, Public Works Director, Parks and Recreation Director, City Clerk, Property Manager, Assistant Police Chief, Assistant Fire Chief, Planning Manager, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer, Recreation Manager, General Services Superintendent, Sustainability Manager, Harbormaster, Harbor Coordinator, Principal Planner, Senior Associate Planner, Housing and Community Development Coordinator, Environmental Regulations Analyst, Recreation Supervisor, Division Chief, Acting Division Chief, Senior Administrative Analyst (Fire), Fire Captains (x4), Fire Engineers (x5), Firefighters (x6)
Call to Order
Mayor Williamson called the meeting to order at 4:01 p.m. City Clerk Klein called the roll with the Council present as indicated above.
Pledge of Allegiance
Councilmember Rasch led the Pledge.
AFTERNOON SESSION
Presentations (Afternoon)
1. Recognize March 2026 as Women’s History Month (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Recognized March 2026 as Women's History Month
Councilmember Rasch read the proclamation, and City Clerk Klein gave a brief presentation.
Public comment was solicited but not received.
2. Receive Presentation from Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Received presentation
Sustainability Manager Terrasas introduced Sophia Schwirzke, of Central Coast Community Energy (3CE), who gave the presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.
Public comment was received from Bob Faulis, who expressed concern about the safety and environmental impacts of batteries.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 4.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 4., Item Page 1, Packet Page 21 City Council Minutes March 17, 2026
2 3. Recognition of March 2026 as American Red Cross Month (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Recognized March 2026 as American Red Cross Month Councilmember Smith read the proclamation. Michele Averill and Patsy Gasca, of American Red Cross, made brief remarks. Fire Chief Moore spoke about the involvement of the American Red Cross, many staff members across multiple City departments, Community Emergency Response Team (CERT), and non-profit All In Monterey in the response to the recent structure fire emergency at 800 Casanova Avenue, and about the incident generally. The Council thanked everyone who jumped in to assist with the response.
Public comment was received from: Esther Malkin, who thanked CERT members, SPCA staff, Monterey County Supervisor Daniels' staff, and Hyatt staff for their assistance to the fire victims.
General Public Comments
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from: Tom Rowley, Bob Faulis, Nelson Vega, Daniel Armendariz, and Justin Loza. Councilmember Rasch left the Chamber from 5:15 p.m. to 5:17 p.m.
Consent Agenda
Public comment on the Consent Items was solicited but not received.
On a motion by Councilmember Smith, 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
4. March 3, 2026 Regular Meeting (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Approved
Consent: Resolutions
5. Authorize Purchase of 25 Motorola Solutions Mobile Radios for Police Patrol Vehicle Fleet for $271,323.77 (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-038 C.S.
6. Adopt Guidelines for Mailed Ballot Elections Pursuant to Article XIII D, Section 6, Subdivision (c) of the California Constitution and Authorize the City Manager to Vote Yes on the Ballots for City Owned Parcels (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-039 C.S.
7. Authorize the City to Enter a Memorandum of Understanding to Formalize the Working Relationship for a Monterey Bay Regional Climate Project Working Group (RCPWG) and Authorizing $5,000 from Planning Office Professional Services Budget to Support the Work Effort (Not a project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-040 C.S.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 4., Item Page 2, Packet Page 22 City Council Minutes March 17, 2026
3 Consent: Other
8. Recognize Monterey Peninsula College’s Dress for Success Program (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Recognized the MPC Dress for Success program
End of Consent Agenda
Public Hearing (Afternoon)
9. Resolution 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) Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-041 C.S.
Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira gave a verbal staff presentation. No protests were received.
Public comment was solicited but not received.
On a motion by Councilmember Rasch, seconded by Councilmember Smith, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-041 C.S.:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Public Appearance (Afternoon)
10. Receive Subcommittee Recommendations; Appoint Applicants to Positions on the Appeals Hearing Board, Building and Housing Appeals Board, Measure P & S Oversight Committee; and Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Letter Recommending Appointment of a Representative to the City on the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Advisory Committee (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Appointed Charley Chell as alternate to the Appeals Hearing Board, Michael Baum to the Measure P & S Oversight Committee, and authorized the Mayor to sign a letter to the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) recommending Susie Bryan as member, and Katherine Egerton, as alternate, for appointment to the TAMC Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Advisory Committee (3-2, Councilmembers Rasch and Smith voting no)
Mayor Williamson and Vice Mayor Smith gave a verbal presentation outlining the interview process and providing their thoughts on the two applicants they had recommended for the one TAMC position, and answered Councilmembers' questions.
Public comment was received from Elizabeth Jannasch, who expressed appreciation for the public interview and deliberations process; and Daniel Armendariz, who expressed concern about impartiality, stating that some of the applicants seemed to know Subcommittee members.
The Mayor responded to the allegation about impartiality, saying it was mistaken and that there were applicants he knew better who had not received the Subcommittee's nomination.
The Council discussed the matter of whom to recommend for the TAMC Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Advisory Committee. Comments were made in favor of recommending Katherine Egerton, citing her experience and knowledge, and noting that she was the recommendation of Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 4., Item Page 3, Packet Page 23 City Council Minutes March 17, 2026
4 the Council's representative on the TAMC board (Vice Mayor Smith). Comments were made in favor of recommending Susie Bryan, citing her enthusiasm and imaginative approach, and referencing the current composition of the committee. It was noted by the current Council representative to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Advisory Committee (Councilmember Garcia) that the expertise on the committee came from lived experience and that the committee role was intended to help receive community feedback, while technical knowledge was provided by TAMC staff. It was suggested that one of the two applicants could be an alternate, and City Clerk Klein confirmed that the TAMC committee’s bylaws allowed alternates.
On a motion by Mayor Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following vote, the City Council appointed Charley Chell as alternate to the Appeals Hearing Board, Michael Baum to the Measure P & S Oversight Committee, and authorized the Mayor to sign a letter to the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) recommending Susie Bryan as member, and Katherine Egerton, as alternate, for appointment to the TAMC Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Advisory Committee:
AYES: 3 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Williamson
NOES: 2 COUNCILMEMBERS: Rasch, Smith
11. Authorize the City to Enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the County of Santa Cruz to Coordinate the Funding and Administration of the Local Government Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Coordination Program, Appoint a Councilmember to Represent the City, and Authorize $1,000 from Planning Office Professional Services Budget to Support the Work Effort (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-042 C.S., with Mayor Williamson appointed to represent the City and Councilmember Rasch appointed as alternate Community Development Director Cole gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.
Public comment was received from Tom Reeves and Suzanne Worcester, who both stressed the importance of this work and questioned contributing only $1,000.
The Council discussed the matter. It was suggested to appoint Mayor Williamson as the representative due to his previous communication with the County of Santa Cruz on the matter.
Support was expressed for joining the program. The amount of the contribution was discussed, and it was noted that the amount was consistent with the newness of the program for the City, and that as the program developed the City could decide to provide a higher contribution in the future.
On a motion by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-052 C.S., with Mayor Williamson appointed to represent the City and Councilmember Rasch appointed as alternate:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
The Council recessed at 5:56 p.m. and reconvened at 6:00 p.m.
12. Amend Resolution 25-060 to Include the Vasquez Adobe Repairs and Gordon House Repairs Projects in the FY 25-26 Capital Improvement Program and Authorize the Finance Director to Appropriate Funds from the Facility Reserve Fund to the Capital Projects Fund in the Amount of $1,093,000 (Exempt from CEQA, Article 19, Section 15306, Class 6)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-043 C.S.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 4., Item Page 4, Packet Page 24 City Council Minutes March 17, 2026
5 General Services Superintendent Dwight gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions with additional input provided by Library and Museums Director Edwards, Assistant City Manager Rojanasathira, and City Engineer/Deputy Public Works Director Easterling.
Public comment was received from Tom Reeves, who provided thoughts on roofing of the Vasquez Adobe.
The Council discussed the matter. It was stated that these City assets would not sell, and could not be counted on long-term for staff office space, in their current condition. It was stressed that the buildings should be repaired due to handicap access and safety access concerns, and that facility conditions, if maintenance and repairs were deferred, would only worsen over time.
Regarding recent discussions about the budget, it was stressed that it was difficult to use so many dollars from the facility reserve fund but that the purpose of reserves was for urgent situations like this.
On a motion introduced by Councilmember Smith, seconded by Councilmember Rasch, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-043 C.S.:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
13. Receive the Rental Inventory Program Annual Report (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Received report
Housing and Community Development Coordinator Abbasi gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions together with Community Development Director Cole and Housing Manager Wyatt. During the question and answer period, Councilmember Barber left the Chamber from 7:04 p.m. to 7:06 p.m.
Public comment was received from: Esther Malkin of Monterey County Renters United, who stressed that it would be vital to use this type of data to move forward before Assembly Bill 1482 ("AB 1482") expired; Tom Reeves, who asked about data collected on military housing allowances and vacation rentals; Lori Mazzuca, who asked about Housing Division staffing, its staff budget, and program enforcement; and Adam Pinterits, who said it was important to convey to stakeholders the differences between the Monterey and Salinas rental inventory programs.
City Attorney Davi, Housing and Community Development Coordinator Abbasi, and Community Development Director Cole answered Councilmembers’ questions on City Code provisions regarding the program's sunset date of January 1, 2029 and enforcement mechanisms, available data on military housing and vacation rentals, and Housing Division staffing.
The Council discussed the registry's merits. It was requested that staff bring the matter back with next steps for the Council's consideration, such as whether to continue the program, details on the program costs and how to appropriately recover them, and any recommended program changes.
14. Receive the 2025 General Plan Annual Report for Review and Comment (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Received report
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 4., Item Page 5, Packet Page 25 City Council Minutes March 17, 2026
6 Principal Planner Sabdo gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions together with Planning Manager Hill. During the questions period, Councilmember Barber left the Chamber from 8:17 p.m. to 8:19 p.m.
Public comment was received from: Laura Davis of LandWatch Monterey County, Diane Coward of RevisionWest, Melodie Chrislock of Public Water Now, and Suzanne Worcester, who all advocated for the City to allocate water to support housing projects and address the housing crisis; Kevin Dayton of Monterey Peninsula Chamber of Commerce, who provided comment on the report, calling out the need for more units and praising the City for its efforts regarding Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs); Monique Olsen, who expressed frustration over the difficulty of receiving a water allocation; and Adam Pinterits of Monterey County Association of Realtors, who stressed that there was a need for a desalination plant to address the water supply for housing.
During public comment Councilmember Smith left the Chamber from 8:39 p.m. to 8:41 p.m.
The Council briefly discussed with City Attorney Davi the governance process by which the Council could agendize the consideration of its prior policy on water allocation. A comment was shared by the Council that the public's concern was understood, and that the Council had to be cautious and not make decisions that would jeopardize the City with more risk and cost.
15. Deny a Request for a License Agreement for the Pecos League of Baseball, LLC at Frank E. Sollecito, Jr. Ballpark for Dates in May through July 2026 (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Denied request for a license agreement
Recreation Manager Leon and Recreation Supervisor Cota gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.
Public comment was received from: Michael Groves of EMC Planning Group and Monterey High School baseball, who spoke in support of the staff recommendation, citing concerns about cost and wear and tear; and Andrew Dunn of Pecos League, who spoke about game security during the 2025 season.
The Council discussed the matter briefly. Sadness was expressed to see the way the years of Pecos League baseball had ended up for Monterey. It was stated that if the future held any significant changes that hopefully the City would be open to reconsidering. It was stressed that such a license agreement would have to be profitable or at least be cost- and effort-neutral for the City. The Council thanked the Parks and Recreation Commission for reviewing the matter carefully and making their decision.
On a motion by Mayor Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following vote, the City Council denied the request for a license agreement for the Pecos League of Baseball, LLC at Frank E. Sollecito, Jr. Ballpark for dates in May through July 2026:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Smith, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
Council Comments
Councilmember Smith reported that Principal Planner Sabdo had presented to the Cannery Row Rotary Club on the City's progress with the Housing Element and that her presentation had been well received.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 4., Item Page 6, Packet Page 26 City Council Minutes March 17, 2026
7 Mayor Williamson reported on his recent ride-along with Police Officer Mendoza, and thanked the Police Department staff and City staff generally.
City Manager Reports
Interim City Manager Bauman shared that the public could learn more about the recent fire incident at 800 Casanova Avenue, and view the annual reports from the Police and Fire Departments, on the City website. He invited all to the upcoming Cutting Day event. He shared that Montage Health had recently published an article about the Police Department's Multidisciplinary Outreach Team (MDOT) and said it was linked on the City website.
Adjourn to Closed Session
Closed Session (Afternoon)
Public comment on the closed session was received from Adam Silverstein regarding Item 16, who shared his plan to open a high-end deli at 601 Wave Street. The Council adjourned to closed session at 9:10 p.m.
16. Closed Session 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)
Action: On a unanimous roll-call vote, the Council gave confidential direction to property negotiators
17. Conference with Legal Counsel: Anticipated Litigation, Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2), (e)(2): One Case - Dispute re:
Purchase of City-Owned Affordable Housing Unit at 300 Glenwood Circle #189, Nancy Mello, Applicant (Not a Project under CEQA 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 legal counsel
Adjournment
The Council adjourned at 9:28 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Tyller Williamson
City Clerk Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 4., Item Page 7, Packet Page 27 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Jose Acosta, HCD Coordinator
SUBJECT: Award Construction Contract for the Rehabilitation of a City Owned Inclusionary Unit under the Purchase & Resale Program (CDBG P&R Rehabilitation (585-1)) in an Amount Not to Exceed $87,000 (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061, and Categorically Excluded per 24 CFR 58.34(a)(12), 24 CFR 58.35(a)(5), 24 CFR
58.35(a)(3)(ii))
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt the attached resolution:
1. Accepting all responsive, responsible bids for
the Purchase and Resale Rehabilitation for
585 Laine Street, #1 (CDBG P&R
Rehabilitation (585-1))
2. Awarding a construction contract to the
lowest responsive, responsible bidder, The
Lopez Construction Family LLC in the amount
of $87,000.00 to rehabilitate a City owned
inclusionary unit under the Purchase & Resale
Program; and
3. Authorizing the City Manager, or their
designee, to execute the contract upon receipt
of the information required by the Call for
Bids.
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.
Support efforts and policies that provide equitable access to affordable housing in Monterey and the region.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Maintaining and increasing access to affordable housing supports the City’s ongoing housing efforts, including
those intended to serve extremely low, very low, and lowincome residents.
Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is asked to award
an $87,000 construction contract to
The Lopez Construction Family LLC
for the rehabilitation of a City-owned
inclusionary housing unit.
• Located at 585 Laine Street, #1, the
unit requires comprehensive interior
modernization, including new
cabinetry, flooring, windows, and
appliances before it can be resold to
a low-income household.
• The project is funded through
Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) allocations, and the
selected bid came in below the
initial budget estimate of $100,000.
• Staff recommends completing these
renovations rather than selling the
unit "as-is" to ensure it meets
habitability standards and remains
financially sustainable for lowincome buyers.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 5.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 5., Item Page 1, Packet Page 28 №12/25
Awarding contractual services agreements is consistent with past Council policy and is used for other types of contractual services for projects throughout the City. These services will augment the City’s capacity for project delivery, consistent with the City Council’s vision and strategic initiative of “Working to improve the quality of life of our residents.” This action is in accordance with Chapter 28-Purchasing of the City Code, which requires Contractual Services exceeding $75,000 to be approved by City Council.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The City of Monterey annually allocates Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to support the rehabilitation requirements of the Purchase & Resale Program. Currently, the City holds one inclusionary unit requiring substantial rehabilitation before it can be returned to the market for sale to low-income households. This unit is located at 585 Laine St # 1.
The scope of work for this unit involves a comprehensive interior modernization that exceeds standard maintenance requirements. Necessary capital improvements include the full replacement of kitchen cabinetry, countertops, flooring, windows, and appliances, as well as extensive wall remediation and bathtub replacements.
Funding for these rehabilitations has been formally allocated and is currently available.
Furthermore, the timely expenditure of these funds will ensure the City remains in compliance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) CDBG timeliness requirements.
On March 17, 2026, two bids were received and were deemed responsive and responsible. The apparent lowest bidder came in below the estimate of $100,000. The bids were opened by the Finance Director’s designee as follows:
Bidder Total Bid
The Lopez Construction Family LLC $87,000.00
ALS Construction Family LLC $109,127.41.00
Budget Estimate $100,000.00
Basis of award for this project is based on the Total Bid.
Available Funding Sources:
CDBG Funds $100,000.00
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) and Categorically Excluded per 24 CFR 58.34(a)(12), 24 CFR Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 5., Item Page 2, Packet Page 29 №12/25
58.35(a)(5), 24 CFR 58.35(a)(3)(ii)). 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 may elect to initiate a new call for bids process or sell the units in their current 'as-is' condition, neither course of action is recommended.
DISCUSSION:
Inclusionary housing units are a vital asset to the City of Monterey, representing the primary pathway for low-income residents to achieve homeownership. To ensure these units remain accessible and sustainable, the City performs the necessary rehabilitation prior to sale.
Selling these properties in their current "as-is" condition would be counter-productive to the program’s mission as it will impose an undue financial burden on the target demographic, as low-income buyers typically lack the supplemental capital required for substantial renovations.
By delivering move-in-ready housing, the City ensures these units meet essential habitability standards and remain financially sustainable for first-time, low-income homeowners, thereby preventing future deferred maintenance issues that could jeopardize the City’s housing stock.
To this end, on March 6, 2026, the Housing Division initiated a solicitation for the rehabilitation of a City-owned inclusionary unit. The solicitation was released via the City’s e-Procurement Portal (OpenGov) and the official City website to ensure a competitive and transparent process.
By the submission deadline of March 17, 2026, the City received formal bids from the following contractors:
• The Lopez Construction Family LLC
• ALS Construction & Renovation
Following a review of all submissions for cost-effectiveness, the City identified the most advantageous bid. The City intends to award the contract to The Lopez Construction Family LLC, the lowest responsive bidder, to execute the rehabilitation of one inclusionary unit.
KC/ja
Attachments: 1. Resolution
2. Bid Evaluation Tab
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 5., Item Page 3, Packet Page 30 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE REHABILITATION OF A CITY OWNED INCLUSIONARY UNIT AT 585 LAINE STREET #1 PURSUANT TO THE PURCHASE & RESALE PROGRAM (CDBG P&R REHABILITATION (585-1)) IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $87,000.00
WHEREAS, the City currently owns one inclusionary unit located at 585 Laine St # 1 that needs to be substantially rehabilitated and placed on the market to be sold to eligible lowincome, first-time home-buyer households under the Purchase & Resale Program; WHEREAS, a Call for Bids was issued on March 6, 2026, and on March 17, 2026, two bids were received;
WHEREAS, The Lopez Construction Family LLC and ALS Construction & Renovation submitted responsive bids for the Project;
WHEREAS, The Lopez Construction Family LLC submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid in the amount of $87.000.00.
WHEREAS, sufficient funds are available in the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to complete the project;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.
Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby:
1. Accepts all responsive, responsible bids for 585 Laine Street, #1 (CDBG P&R Rehabilitation (585-1))
2. Awards a to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, The Lopez Construction Family LLC in the amount of $87,000.00 to rehabilitate a City owned inclusionary unit under the Purchase & Resale Program; and
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 5., Item Page 4, Packet Page 31
3. Authorizes the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the contract upon receipt of the information required by the Call for Bids.
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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 5., Item Page 5, Packet Page 32 City of Monterey
Finance Department
Rafaela King, Finance Director
580 Pacific Street, Monterey, CA 93940
EVALUATION TABULATION
General Solicitation - Purchase & Resale Rehabilitation for 585 Laine St # 1
EVALUATION TABULATION
GEN No. CDBG P&R Rehabilitation (585-1.2)
Purchase & Resale Rehabilitation for 585 Laine St # 1
RESPONSE DEADLINE: March 17, 2026 at 2:00 pm
Tuesday, March 17, 2026
SELECTED VENDOR TOTALS
Vendor Total
The Lopez Construction
Family LLC
$87,000.00
ALS Construction &
Renovation
$109,127.41
TABLE 1
Vendor Total
The Lopez Construction
Family LLC
$87,000.00
ALS Construction &
Renovation
$109,127.41
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 5., Item Page 6, Packet Page 33 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
Prepared By: Angie Blake, Chief Information Officer
SUBJECT: Authorize Agreement with Dell, Inc. for Microsoft Server Licensing in the amount of $114,638.08 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a resolution to authorize the City Manager, or
designee, to enter into a contract with Dell, Inc. for
Microsoft Server Licensing.
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 Dell, Inc. 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 acquisition will be purchased from Dell, Inc. by utilizing the County of Riverside agreement #808445 Microsoft Volume Licensing Agreement.
The Finance Director, or her designee, approved the piggyback request on March 18, 2026. The fiscal impact of this purchase is $114,638.08.
Funding for this purchase is available in the Information Services Technology Project fund account 30C1603. Future funding will be provided from the Information Services Contractual Account 710-030-0340-0000-4220.
Agenda Report Highlights
• The City plans to upgrade Microsoft
server operating systems to reduce
cybersecurity risks and ensure
compliance with CJIS standards.
• The upgrade will support new virtual
server and data storage
infrastructure to enhance efficiency
and align with future needs.
• Funding for the server upgrade is
secured through the Information
Services Technology Project fund
and future contractual accounts.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 6.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 6., Item Page 1, Packet Page 34 №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:
Council could choose not to purchase and upgrade the Microsoft server operating systems; however, this option is not recommended due to no longer receiving critical security patches or updates, which increases cybersecurity risk and non-compliance with industry standards.
DISCUSSION:
Microsoft has announced that Windows SQL Server 2016 will reach end of extended support on July 14, 2026 and Windows Server 2016 will reach end of extended support on January 12, 2027. After this date, the operating system will no longer receive security updates, bug fixes, or technical support from Microsoft. Continued use of unsupported server operating systems significantly increases cybersecurity risk and operational exposure.
The City relies on multiple line-of-business (LOB) applications that require supported operating systems to remain eligible for vendor support, receive security updates, and maintain compatibility with future application upgrades. Vendors for these systems routinely require that the underlying operating systems remain within a supported lifecycle as a condition of continued support.
In addition, Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Security Policy requirements mandate that systems accessing, processing, or storing criminal justice information operate on supported and vendor-maintained platforms. Operating systems that are no longer supported by the manufacturer do not meet CJIS security standards because they no longer receive critical security patches needed to protect sensitive data.
The cost proposal for $114,638.08 provides current Microsoft licensing, software updates, and security patches for the City’s 82 virtual servers through January 6, 2036 for Microsoft SQL Server and November 14, 2034 for Windows Server 2025.
To maintain system security, vendor support eligibility, and compliance with CJIS requirements, staff recommends procuring licenses for a current, supported version of Microsoft Windows Server and associated Client Access Licenses (CALs). Coordinating this upgrade with the implementation of the City’s new virtual server and data storage infrastructure allows staff to complete server migrations and upgrades at the same time, avoiding duplicate work and Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 6., Item Page 2, Packet Page 35 №11/25
additional staff time. This approach ensures continued support for critical City systems, reduces cybersecurity risk, and supports compliance with regulatory and operational requirements.
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
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 6., Item Page 3, Packet Page 36 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT WITH DELL, INC. FOR MICROSOFT SERVER LICENSING IN THE AMOUNT OF $114,638.08
WHEREAS, this agreement is a proactive and cost-effective investment in infrastructure services and protection. It replaces end-of-life operating systems supporting the City’s 82 virtual servers, which host critical on-premises line-of-business applications; WHEREAS, the cost proposal of $114,638.08 provides current Microsoft licensing, software updates, and security patches for the City’s 82 virtual servers through January 6, 2036 for Microsoft SQL Server and November 14, 2034 for Windows Server 2025; 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 March 18, 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.
Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to enter into a contract with Dell, Inc. for Microsoft server licensing in the amount of $114,638.08.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 2026, by the following vote:
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 6., Item Page 4, Packet Page 37 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 6., Item Page 5, Packet Page 38 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
FROM: Andrea Renny, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Marissa Garcia, Engineering Assistant II
SUBJECT: Award Two (2) Professional Services Agreements with a Not-to-Exceed Annual Limit of $1,000,000 Each for Traffic Signal Maintenance Services to: 1) Bear Electrical Solutions, LLC and 2) St. Francis Electric, LLC ***CIP/NCIP*** (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
Traffic Signal Maintenance Services to Bear
Electrical Solutions, LLC, for a term of one year,
with the option to extend for four additional one
year terms, with an annual fee not to exceed
$1,000,000;
2. Awarding a Professional Service Agreement for
Traffic Signal Maintenance Services to St
Francis Electric, LLC, for a term of one year, with
the option to extend for four additional one year
terms, with an annual fee not to exceed
$1,000,000; and
3. 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.
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:
Awarding Professional Services Agreements to provide on-call, as-needed traffic signal Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is asked to award
two professional services
agreements for traffic signal
maintenance to Bear Electrical
Solutions, LLC and St. Francis
Electric, LLC.
• Each contract has a one-year initial
term with an annual limit of
$1,000,000 and the option for four
additional one-year extensions.
• These on-call agreements cover
routine preventative maintenance
and emergency responsive repairs
for 56 signalized intersections and
other traffic equipment.
• Using on-call firms is intended to
reduce administrative costs and
improve response times compared
to issuing separate requests for
proposals for every repair.
• While the agreements set a
maximum fee, the City is under no
obligation to expend any funds, and
tasks will be issued on a project-byproject basis.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 7.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 1, Packet Page 39 №12/25
maintenance services, as well as emergency repair, is consistent with past Council policy and is used for other types of professional services on projects throughout the City. In addition, on-call services augment the City’s capacity for project delivery, consistent with the City Council’s Vision and Strategic Initiative of “Working to improve the quality of life of our residents.” This action is also consistent with Council policy to approve all professional services agreements above $75,000.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
This action does not appropriate any funding. Fees for streetlight and signal maintenance will be directly charged to the Street Lighting account 101-310-3151-0000-4236 and Traffic Signals account 101-310-3151-0000-4237 respectively. For new installations, each Capital Improvement Project (CIP) and Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program project (NCIP) will be separately approved and budgeted by the City Council. 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. 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 decide not to award these Professional Services Agreements and direct staff to issue requests for proposals for each project individually; however, this is not recommended.
Without on-call firms readily available, the City would need to issues RFPs each time there is responsive traffic signal maintenance needs which would slow response times and require more administrative cost. Additionally, on-call services allows for more efficient and timely delivery of projects as multiple projects can be designed concurrently.
DISCUSSION:
The City of Monterey owns and maintains 56 signalized intersections, 24 radar speed feedback signs, 7 flashing beacons, 4 rectangular rapid flashing beacons and a lighted crosswalk. A wellmaintained system increases the dependability of the traffic signal equipment.
These contracts will provide the City with much needed maintenance and repair of the traffic signal system and related equipment from contractors that specialize in this field. The traffic signal preventive maintenance and repair program includes two types of work:
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 2, Packet Page 40 №12/25
• The routine preventative maintenance program includes quarterly, semi-annual and annual inspections, preventive maintenance and repairs. • The responsive repair portion of the work includes all unanticipated items such as responding to emergency repair calls, knockdowns and troubleshooting.
These contracts may also provide the City with the ability to implement NCIP and CIP projects in a timely manner for any portions of work that may require minor traffic signal or street light modifications.
The City has active and pending projects that require technical assistance from traffic signal maintenance services firms. Having two (2) on-call traffic signal maintenance firms available allows the City to provide these services in a timely manner.
The proposed Professional Services Agreements would be managed by the Public Works staff.
Individual project task orders will be issued based on the firm’s expertise, workload capacity, services to be performed, schedule requirements, and 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 arrangement 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 February 10, 2026, a request for proposals was issued and advertised through OpenGov. Two (2) proposals were received on March 10, 2026. A selection committee consisting of City staff from the Public Works Engineering and Streets and Utilities Maintenance Divisions, independently evaluated and ranked the two (2) proposals. After deliberations, the ranked firms are as follows:
Rank Firm, Location
1 Bear Electrical Solutions, LLC, Alviso, CA
2 St. Francis Electric, LLC, San Leandro, CA
Each agreement will have an initial one-year term and a $1,000,000 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-to-exceed funding limit of $1,000,000.
AR/mg
Attachments: 1. Resolution awarding Professional Services Agreement to Bear Electric Solutions, LLC
2. Resolution awarding Professional Services Agreement to St.
Francis Electric, LLC
3. Consultant Selection Evaluation Scorecard
e: Jeff Glass, Streets & Utilities Operations Manager
Bear Electrical Solutions, LLC
St. Francis Electric, LLC
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 3, Packet Page 41 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AWARDING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH A NOT-TO-EXCEED ANNUAL LIMIT OF $1,000,000 FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE SERVICES TO BEAR ELECTRICAL SOLUTIONS, LLC ***CIP/NCIP***
WHEREAS, the need exists for the City to obtain prompt professional traffic signal maintenance services to support traffic signal and street light operations, the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) and other municipal programs;
WHEREAS, on February 10, 2026, the City issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Traffic Signal Maintenance Services and advertised through the City’s procurement portal for all formal bids and request for proposals;
WHEREAS, on March 10, 2026 the City received two (2) proposals from firms qualified to 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 to perform this work; WHEREAS, following deliberations, the selection committee determined that Bear Electrical Solutions, LLC and St. Francis Electric, LLC were the best qualified firms; 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, this action does not appropriate any funding; and, WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.
Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 4, Packet Page 42
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby:
1. Awards a Professional Service Agreement for Traffic Signal Maintenance Services to Bear Electrical Solutions, LLC, for a term of one year, with the option to extend for four additional one-year terms, with an annual fee not to exceed $1,000,000; and
2. Authorizes the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the Professional Services Agreements upon receipt of information required by the Request for Proposal (RFP).
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 5, Packet Page 43 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AWARDING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH A NOT-TO-EXCEED ANNUAL LIMIT OF $1,000,000 FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE SERVICES TO ST.
FRANCIS ELECTRIC, LLC ***CIP/NCIP***
WHEREAS, the need exists for the City to obtain prompt professional traffic signal maintenance services to support traffic signal and street light operations, the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), Neighborhood and Community Improvement Program (NCIP) and other municipal programs;
WHEREAS, on February 10, 2026, the City issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Traffic Signal Maintenance Services and advertised through the City’s procurement portal for all formal bids and request for proposals;
WHEREAS, on March 10, 2026 the City received two (2) proposals from firms qualified to 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 to perform this work; WHEREAS, following deliberations, the selection committee determined that Bear Electrical Solutions, LLC and St. Francis Electric, LLC were the best qualified firms; 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, this action does not appropriate any funding; and, WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.
Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 6, Packet Page 44
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby:
1. Awards a Professional Service Agreement for Traffic Signal Maintenance Services to St. Francis Electric, LLC, for a term of one year, with the option to extend for four additional one-year terms, with an annual fee not to exceed $1,000,000; and
2. Authorizes the City Manager, or their designee, to execute the Professional Services Agreements upon receipt of information required by the Request for Proposal (RFP).
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 7, Packet Page 45 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
Bear Electrical
Solutions 1
St Francis Electric 2
SUMMARY SCORE SHEET
On-Call Traffic Signal Maintenance Project Code: N/A
Citywide Include On-Call Services: Yes
100 pts
Firm
Qualifications
& Experience
Project
References Project Team
Approach to
Traffic Signal
Maintenance
Procedure &
Schedule
Total Points:
20 pts 20 pts 20 pts 20 pts 20 pts
Last Modified: 7/18/25 Page 1 of 1
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 7., Item Page 8, Packet Page 46 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Prepared By: Ted Terrasas, REHS, Sustainability Manager SUBJECT: Amend Resolution 25-071 and Approve a New Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Between the Monterey Regional Waste Management District (ReGen Monterey) and Member Agencies Regarding Compliance with Organic Waste Recycling and Food Recovery Laws (SB 1383) for $43,178 for these Services for Fiscal Year 2025-26 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council amend Resolution 25-071 and
adopt a resolution approving a new Memorandum of
Understanding between the Monterey Regional Waste
Management District (ReGen Monterey) and member
agencies with organic waste recycling and food recovery laws (SB 1383) which included $43,178 for these
services for Fiscal Year 2025-26.
VALUE DRIVERS:
Protect and preserve our natural environment by
addressing climate change through ecologically
responsible and pragmatic solutions.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
California’s Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction law (SB 1383) requires the City to comply with waste
diversion goals. As a result, the program
implementation, monitoring, tracking, public outreach,
and reporting to the State are responsibilities assigned to the City. While the City could work to address these responsibilities on its own, collaborating with the other jurisdictions in the region facing the same regulatory
requirements offers a potentially more efficient and costeffective response.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The City Council approved Resolution 25-071 that authorized an amendment to an existing MOU between the City and ReGen Monterey to comply with organic waste recycling and recovery laws (SB 1383). Based on this approval, the city already paid $21,589 to ReGen Agenda Report Highlights
• In July 2025, the City Council
approved participating in a
Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) with ReGen Monterey and
other agencies to ensure
compliance with SB 1383 organic
waste recycling and food recovery
laws.
• A new MOU replaces the previous
amendment and clarifies the scope
of services for FY 2025-26.
• Key compliance tasks include waste
collection, monitoring, enforcement,
education, and reporting to meet
state-mandated requirements.
• City staff recommends adopting the
resolution to formalize the new
MOU and streamline collaboration
with ReGen Monterey and member
agencies.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 8.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 1, Packet Page 47 №11/24
Monterey for services. The remaining $21,589 is already included in the Planning Office 25/26 budget and will be paid at the end of the fiscal year. No additional budget allocation is needed.
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:
No alternatives were considered for this action.
DISCUSSION:
In July 2025, the City Council approved Resolution 25-071 amending a Memorandum of Understanding between Monterey Regional Waste Management District (ReGen Monterey) and member agencies. The only change from the previous approval is that it is a new MOU, not an amended MOU.
The MOU’s purpose was to ensure compliance with organic waste recycling and food recovery laws (SB 1383). This authorization included $43,178 for these services. Some of the key tasks associated with SB 1383 compliance require extensive program implementation by the City, including:
• Collection and Processing – Processing of organic (green/food) waste from commercial and residential sources, labeling and color coding all carts • Monitoring and Enforcement – Conducting annual route reviews for contaminants, perform waste composition studies, issue notices and violations and penalties
• Product Procurement – Annually procure an amount of organic material (compost, renewable gas, mulch) that complies with the target established by CalRecycle
• Ordinance Adoption – Adopt code requiring compliance with SB 1383 and establishing enforcement mechanism
• Edible Food Recovery Program – Implement a program that connects edible food generators with recovery organizations
• Education and Outreach – Annually provide information including but not limited to edible food recovery, material separation, waste prevention, methane Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 2, Packet Page 48 №11/24
reduction
• Record Keeping and Reporting – Maintaining a centralized implementation record relating to SB 1383 compliance (available within 10 days’ notice) in addition to annual reporting to the State
When the final MOU was received from ReGen Monterey, it was a new MOU, not an amendment. City staff proposes the adoption of this resolution to clarify that the action is a new MOU versus an amendment.
KC
Attachments: 1. Resolution
2. Updated Shared Costs for FY 25/26
3. Jurisdictional Allocations for FY 25/26
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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 3, Packet Page 49 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AMENDING RESOLUTION 25-071 AND APPROVING A NEW MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING (MOU) BETWEEN THE MONTEREY REGIONAL WASTE
MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (REGEN MONTEREY) AND MEMBER AGENCIES
REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH ORGANIC WASTE RECYCLING AND FOOD RECOVERY LAWS (SB 1383) FOR $43,178 FOR THESE SERVICES
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26
WHEREAS, SB 1383 is recognized as being the most significant solid waste legislation in the past 30 years and focuses on the diversion of organic waste from disposal in landfills; WHEREAS, according to the State of California, in 2017, 67% of waste in the state was organic;
WHEREAS, organic waste generates methane during decomposition, which has 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide within the first 20 years of reaching the atmosphere; WHEREAS, recovering edible food is critical in that 1 in 9 Californians are food insecure, and that unrecovered food becomes an organic waste product; WHEREAS, regulatory compliance requires the City, its waste hauler, and the Monterey Regional Waste Management District (ReGen) to establish new or increase existing waste diversion programs to comply with state regulations;
WHEREAS, in July 2025, the City Council approved Resolution 25-071 amending a Memorandum of Understanding between Monterey Regional Waste Management District (REGEN) and member agencies for these services. This authorization included $43,178 for services which the City has already paid $21,579 to Regen. The remaining $21,579 is included in the Planning Office 25/26 budget and no additional funding is needed; WHEREAS, when the City received the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), it was discovered that it was a new MOU, and not an amendment; 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.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 4, Packet Page 50
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the City Manager is authorized to execute the new FY 2025-26 MOU between ReGen Monterey and its member agencies.
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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 5, Packet Page 51 1 EXHBIT A
DETAILED ACTIVITIES & COSTS
FY 2025-2026
Scope of Work
The activities related to the implementation of SB 1383 may include contracting and policy development; public education; materials purchasing and distribution; reporting; contamination monitoring; edible food waste recovery; enforcement; procurement; organics processing; rate setting; cost monitoring; and any other related activities the Parties choose to address.
The District will take the lead producing public education campaigns in concert with the already provided Hauler and/or Member Agency resources. The Member Agencies will be responsible for production and mailing fees associated with outreach. The District will also contract with a vendor to administer contamination monitoring in the form of curbside lid flipping. The District will also provide CalRecycle reporting services to the Member Agencies. In addition, funds will be allocated to food recovery organizations for procurement of refrigerated holding facilities or transport vehicles to support edible food recovery efforts.
Costs
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 6, Packet Page 52 1 EXHIBIT B
MEMBER AGENCIES’ ANNUAL PROPORTIONATE SHARES & COSTS*
FY 2025-2026
*Member Agencies’ proportionate costs subject to adjustment annually in accordance with any change in scope and total costs.
Member agencies will be invoiced an annual amount not to exceed column below titled “with minimums.”
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 8., Item Page 7, Packet Page 53 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 Lot 2A in Block 97 for $4,963 Payable to Mr. Jim Sleeper and Mrs. Jill Sleeper (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 Lot 2A in
Block 97 for $4,963 payable to Mr. Jim Sleeper and Mrs. Jill Sleeper.
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 lot for 50% of the current lot sales price or issue a full refund of the original purchase price, whichever is greater. Here, the current lot purchase price is $5,176 less the $213 indenture fee for a total refund amount of $4,963.
By refunding the purchase amount, this lot would then be returned to inventory to be resold at the current market price including endowments and burial fees.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the Agenda Report Highlights
• The City of Monterey’s Cemetery El
Encinal proposes to buy back an
unoccupied cemetery lot from Jim
and Jill Sleeper for $4,963.
• This buyback amount is calculated
as the current lot purchase price of
$5,176 minus a $213 indenture fee.
• Staff recommends the purchase so
the lot can be returned to inventory
and resold at current market rates to
generate revenue for the Cemetery
Fund.
• Choosing not to buy back the lot is
discouraged to ensure the unused
property can be provided to other
constituents.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 9.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 9., Item Page 1, Packet Page 54 №11/24
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 Council could choose not to buy back the one (1) cemetery lot. This alternative is not recommended because the City could resell this one lot at the current market price including any burial costs for additional revenue to the City. Additionally, this lot could remain unoccupied for many years to come if not repurchased and resold, thus losing the potential for use by other constituents.
DISCUSSION:
The Cemetery received a letter from Mr. Jim Sleeper and Mrs. Jill Sleeper requesting the City to buy back one (1) individual lot that is unoccupied. If approved by Council, this lot would be placed back into the inventory to be resold. Revenue from a future purchase of these lots 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 Lot 2A in Block 97 for $4,963 payable to Mr. Jim Sleeper and Mrs. Jill Sleeper.
TN/sc
Attachments: 1. Resolution
2. Letter 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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 9., Item Page 2, Packet Page 55 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF MONTEREY CEMETERY EL INCINAL TO BUY BACK CEMETERY LOT 2A IN BLOCK 97 FOR $4,963 PAYABLE TO
MR. JIM SLEEPER AND MRS. JILL SLEEPER
WHEREAS, the City received a request to repurchase one (1) cemetery lot that is no longer needed;
WHEREAS, the current policy is to buy back a lot for 50% of the current lot sales price or issue a full refund of the original purchase price, whichever is greater. Here, the current lot purchase price is $5,176 less the $213 indenture fee for a total refund amount of $4,963; WHEREAS, by refunding the purchase amount, this lot would then be returned to inventory to be resold at the current market price including endowments and burial fees; WHEREAS, this lot could remain unoccupied for many years to come if not repurchased and resold, thus losing the potential for use by other constituents, and, WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.
Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.
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 Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 9., Item Page 3, Packet Page 56 to buy back Cemetery Lot 2A in Block 97 for $4,963 payable to Mr. Jim Sleeper and Mrs. Jill Sleeper.
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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 9., Item Page 4, Packet Page 57 ATTACHMENT 2
February 17, 2026
Mr. Scott Connolly
Cemetery Coordinator
City of Monterey
RE: Buy Back
Dear Mr. Connolly
On January 8, 2024, my wife and I purchased cemetery lot 2A in block 97 in the City of Monterey Cemetery. We are interested in selling the lot back to the City. Please advise us on what we would need to do next to move this request forward.
Thank you very much in advance.
Sincerely,
Jill Sleeper
Jim Sleeper
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 9., Item Page 5, Packet Page 58 Council
Agenda Report
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Authorize the City Manager to Sign an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement Extension with MidPen Housing for Development of Affordable Housing at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street, 424 and 450 Madison Street (Not a Project under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council authorize the City Manager to sign an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement extension with MidPen
Housing Corporation for the properties located at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street.
VALUE DRIVERS:
Support efforts and policies that provide equitable access to affordable housing in Monterey and the region.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) supports the
City’s on-going housing efforts, including those intended to serve extremely low, very low and low-income residents.
Moving forward with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement is a necessary step to support the City’s efforts to meet its Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation, should
any new housing units result from the subsequent
Development and Disposition Agreement and ground
lease.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: Yes.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The City Council entered into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with MidPen Housing Corporation (“MidPen”) for a 100% affordable housing project behind City Hall.
The City and MidPen have been working together to obtain funding. The City obtained $110,598.05 in Permanent Local Housing Allocation State funds for the project. The City disbursed this money to MidPen to contribute toward predevelopment costs. The PLHA funds are considered to be a loan and will be paid back to the City pursuant to the approved agreement, which is a State requirement. The City, with significant help from MidPen, also obtained a Regional Early Action Planning (REAP) grant from the Association of Monterey Bay Agenda Report Highlights
• The City is working with MidPen
Housing to build affordable housing
behind City Hall on Van Buren and
Madison Streets.
• Progress includes environmental
reviews, historic preservation
clearance, and finalizing
agreements for the project.
• The City has approved multiple
extensions to the agreement with
MidPen, with a fifth extension
proposed to continue negotiations
until April 12, 2027.
• City staff recommends approving
the fifth extension to help MidPen
finalize funding for the affordable
housing project.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 10.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 10., Item Page 1, Packet Page 59 №10/24
Area Governments (AMBAG) for this project. Through this process, the City was awarded up to a maximum of $2,450,000 in REAP 2.0 funds. Due to the State budget, AMBAG reduced the City’s grant to a maximum of $2,305,450 to cover predevelopment costs. The City Council also approved a $1,500,000 loan to support the project. The terms of the loan are to be negotiated.
MP Madison Street Associates, L.P. will fund the project through multiple sources, including loans, tax credits, housing vouchers, and grants.
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) because the City still retains discretion to approve, modify or not proceed with any project pending the outcome of the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement and further CEQA review. 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 extend the ENA with MidPen as a potential developer for the property located at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street. Staff is not supporting this alternative because MidPen is an experienced affordable housing developer and substantial progress has been made.
DISCUSSION:
Background
The City issued a Request for Proposals on July 20, 2020 to solicit proposals to develop affordable housing on four City-owned properties. The properties were:
• Harbor Yard located at 417 Figueroa Street
• Parking Lot 14 located at 442 Adams Street
• Calle Principal Parking Garage – 438 Calle Principal
• A portion of the City Hall Campus on Madison Street between Dutra and Van Buren Streets consisting of four properties (587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street).
Proposals were accepted on October 2, 2020. On February 16, 2021, the Council selected MidPen as the preferred developer for 417 Figueroa Street, 438 Calle Principal, 587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street. The City Council approved an ENA with Mid Pen Housing on July 19, 2022 for the development of only the site located behind City Hall (587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street). The City approved the 1st and 2nd ENA extensions administratively as allowed by the ENA. The 3rd ENA extension was approved by the City Council on March 19, 2024 via Resolution 24-037 and the 4th ENA extension via Resolution 25-021. The City Council approved an Affordable Housing and Property Disposition Agreement Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 10., Item Page 2, Packet Page 60 №10/24
and Ground Lease between MP Madison Street Associates, L.P and City of Monterey on October 15, 2024 via Resolution 24-164. The City obtained Section 106 Clearance and published the project’s environmental review documents since the fourth ENA extension. A fifth ENA Extension is proposed to finalize the project’s financing.
Analysis
Substantial progress has been made on the affordable housing project behind City Hall located at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street including, Section 106 State Historic Preservation Office Review, preparation of environmental documents and final approval of the Affordable Housing and Property Disposition Agreement and Ground Lease. The City Council is requested to approve a fifth amendment to the ENA extending the negotiations to April 12, 2027 as Mid Pen is working to obtaining project financing.
In conclusion, staff recommends the City Council direct the City Manager to sign an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement extension with MidPen Housing Corporation for the properties located at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street, 424 and 450 Madison Street.
KC
Attachment: 1. Draft Resolution
Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.org/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 10., Item Page 3, Packet Page 61 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AUTHORIZING CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AN EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT
ONE YEAR EXTENSION WITH MIDPEN HOUSING FOR DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT 587 AND 593 VAN BUREN STREET, 424 AND 450 MADISON STREET WHEREAS, the City of Monterey currently experiences both high housing costs and a low inventory of affordable housing units;
WHEREAS, in October 2019, the Governor signed several bills that acknowledge the statewide housing crisis and provide funding for affordable housing; WHEREAS, in 2019 the City Council reviewed City owned properties to determine their potential to be developed for affordable housing in support of the City’s on-going housing efforts, including those intended to serve extremely low, very low and low-income residents; WHEREAS, this review showed the potential to support the City in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation, should any new housing units results from this effort; WHEREAS, on August 20, 2019 and September 3, 2019, the City Council received a report on a site analysis of City owned properties for affordable housing development. The Council directed staff to focus on potential sites located on Figueroa Street, Calle Principal, Adams Street and Van Buren/Madison Streets;
WHEREAS, the City issued a Request for Proposals on July 20, 2020 to solicit proposals to develop affordable housing on four City owned sites consisting of properties located at 417 Figueroa Street, 442 Adams Street, 438 Calle Principal, 587 and 593 Van Buren Street, and 424 and 450 Madison Street;
WHEREAS, proposals were due on October 2, 2020, and the City received responsive proposals from five developers;
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey received a responsive proposal for 587 and 593 Van Buren Street, and 424 and 450 Madison Street from MidPen Housing Corporation that proposes to use 100% of the property area for the development of affordable housing, providing that 100% of the proposed units will be permanently affordable housing, with an affordability mix of units at 30% AMI, 40% AMI, 50% AMI, and 60% AMI;
WHEREAS, the Council directed staff to negotiate an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with MidPen Housing Corporation for 587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street;
WHEREAS, the Council approved an ENA with Mid Pen housing on July 19, 2022 via Resolution 22-104. This ENA was executed on August 15, 2022 and multiple amendments were approved on November 16, 2022, March 22, 2023 and April 1, 2025. The first amendment increased the due date for the preliminary development package from 90 days to 120 days.
The second amendment extended to the agreement to April 12, 2024, and increased the due Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 10., Item Page 4, Packet Page 62 date for the updated preliminary development package from 210 to 365 days. The third amendment extended the agreement to April 12, 2025 for additional environmental studies. The fourth amendment extended the agreement to April 12, 2026.
WHEREAS, the City Council approved an Affordable Housing and Property Disposition Agreement and Ground Lease between MP Madison Street Associates, L.P and City of Monterey on October 15, 2024 via Resolution 24-164;
WHEREAS, Mid Pen Housing has requested a fifth amendment to finalize project financing; 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) because the City still retains discretion to approve, modify or not proceed with any project pending the outcome of the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement and further CEQA review. 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, and;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby authorizes City Manager to enter into an exclusive negotiating agreement extension to April 12, 2027, in a form approved by the City Attorney with Mid Pen Housing Corporation for development of affordable housing at 587 and 593 Van Buren Street and 424 and 450 Madison Street.
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:
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 10., Item Page 5, Packet Page 63 ATTEST:
Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 10., Item Page 6, Packet Page 64 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Nicole Banks, Parks and Recreation Director
Prepared By: Mark Ackermann, Management Analyst
SUBJECT: Proclamation Recognizing the 50th Anniversary of the Laguna Grande Regional Joint Powers Agency (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council issue a
proclamation recognizing and celebrating the 50th
Anniversary of the Laguna Grande Regional Joint
Powers Agency (JPA) and encourage community
participation in the anniversary event on April 19, 2026.
VALUE DRIVERS:
In collaboration with our community partners, work to
improve the quality of life of all of our community
members by fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion;
championing equitable access to affordable housing;
and maintaining a safe environment.
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.
Protect and preserve our natural environment by
addressing climate change through ecologically
responsible and pragmatic solutions.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Issuing this proclamation recognizes five decades of
successful regional cooperation between the Cities of
Monterey and Seaside and the Monterey Peninsula
Regional Park District.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.
Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is asked to issue a
proclamation celebrating the 50th
Anniversary of the Laguna Grande
Regional Joint Powers Agency
(JPA).
• Established in 1976, the JPA is a
regional partnership between the
Cities of Monterey and Seaside and
the Monterey Peninsula Regional
Park District to manage Laguna
Grande Regional Park.
• Over five decades, the agency has
led efforts in environmental
restoration, habitat preservation,
and maintaining public walking
trails.
• A community celebration featuring
guided nature walks and interactive
activity stations is scheduled for
Sunday, April 19, 2026.
• This ceremonial recognition is costneutral and is being coordinated within existing regional agency
budgets and community
partnerships.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 11.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 11., Item Page 1, Packet Page 65 №10/24
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
This action is “cost-neutral.” The proclamation is a ceremonial recognition of an existing Joint Powers Agency and the associated 50th Anniversary event, which is being coordinated within existing regional agency budgets and community partnerships.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff has determined that this action is not a "project" under Section 15378, as it is a ceremonial/administrative recognition that does not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment. Furthermore, it is exempt under the "General Rule" (Section 15061(b)(3)) as there is no possibility the activity will have a significant effect on the environment.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
The City Council could choose to decline issuing the proclamation or to recognize the anniversary through a different format; however, a formal proclamation is consistent with the City’s "long and proud history of inclusion" and environmental stewardship.
DISCUSSION:
The Laguna Grande Joint Powers Agency (JPA) was established in 1976 to manage the natural and recreational resources of Laguna Grande Regional Park. For 50 years, this partnership has served as a model of regional cooperation, protecting open space and improving public access for both Monterey and Seaside residents.
Laguna Grande is a treasured community asset that contributes to the scenic beauty and quality of life on the Monterey Peninsula. Over the decades, the JPA has led vital efforts in:
• Environmental restoration and habitat preservation.
• Water quality improvements within the watershed.
• Maintaining walking trails and critical wildlife habitats.
The 50th Anniversary Celebration is scheduled for Sunday, April 19, 2026, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. The event will feature a guided bird walk, nature walks, and interactive activity stations intended to engage the community in the continued stewardship of this resource.
Recognizing the Laguna Grande JPA’s 50th Anniversary highlights the City’s commitment to regional partnership and environmental excellence. This proclamation honors the past contributions of board members and staff while reaffirming our shared commitment to preserving Monterey's natural scenic beauty for future generations.
NB/ma
Attachments: 1. Proclamation
2. Invitation to Mayor and Councilmembers
3. Flyer for 50th Anniversary Event
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 11., Item Page 2, Packet Page 66 №10/24
e: City of Seaside
Laguna Grande Regional Joint Powers Agency
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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 11., Item Page 3, Packet Page 67 ATTACHMENT 1
Proclamation recognizing
The Laguna Grande Joint Powers Agency’s 50th Anniversary and Anniversary Celebration on April 19, 2026
WHEREAS, the Monterey City Council recognizes the Laguna Grande Joint Powers Agency (JPA), established in 1976 through a collaborative partnership between the Cities of Monterey and Seaside and the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District to preserve, enhance, and manage the natural and recreational resources of Laguna Grande Regional Park; and, WHEREAS, for fifty years, the Laguna Grande JPA has demonstrated the power of regional cooperation in protecting open space, improving public access, and fostering environmental stewardship for the benefit of residents and visitors alike; and,
WHEREAS, Laguna Grande Regional Park serves as a treasured community asset, offering scenic beauty, wildlife habitat, walking trails, and recreational opportunities that contribute to the health, wellness, and quality of life of our diverse community; and, WHEREAS, the Laguna Grande JPA has played a vital role in advancing environmental restoration, water quality improvements, and habitat preservation efforts within the watershed through decades of thoughtful planning, investment, and community engagement; and, WHEREAS, the 50th Anniversary of the Laguna Grande JPA represents an opportunity to reflect on its accomplishments, honor its legacy of partnership, and take action to reaffirm a shared lasting commitment to environmental stewardship; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED THAT I, Tyller Williamson Mayor of the City of Monterey, on behalf of the City Council and citizens, hereby recognize and celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the Laguna Grande Joint Powers Agency and encourage all residents to participate in the anniversary event on April 19, 2026.
Dated: April 2026 ________________________
Tyller Williamson, Mayor
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 11., Item Page 4, Packet Page 68 ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 11., Item Page 5, Packet Page 69 FREE
Public
Event for All
Ages!
Celebrate at
Laguna Grande!
Laguna Grande
Regional Park
1259 Canyon Del Rey
Blvd, Seaside, CA
Join Seaside, Monterey,
and MPRPD in a family
friendly celebration as
we honor 50 years of
collaboratively managing
Laguna Grande Regional
Park through our Joint
Powers Agency!
Activities
50-year JPA Anniversary Event
Sunday, April 19, 2026
10am - 12:30pm
10:15am | Guided Bird Walk
11am | Nature Walk
All Day
Historical Information
Nature Crafts
Bird Bingo
Make Cordage with Tule
Public Works Trucks
Recreation Games
and MORE!
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 11., Item Page 6, Packet Page 70 ¡Celebra en
Laguna Grande!
Evento del 50 aniversario de la JPA
Domingo, 19 de abril de 2026
10am - 12:30pm
¡Eventos
públicos
GRATIS
para todas
las Edades!
Únete a Seaside,
Monterey y MPRPD en
una celebración familiar
mientras
conmemoramos 50 años
de manejo colaborativo
del parque regional
Laguna Grande a través
de nuestra Agencia de
Poderes Conjuntos
Parque Regional
Laguna Grande
1259 Canyon Del Rey
Blvd, Seaside, CA
Actividades
10:15am | Caminata guiada de aves
11am | Caminata por la naturaleza
Todo el Dia
Información histórica
Manualidades de naturaleza
Bingo de aves
Elaboración de cuerda con
tule
Camiones de obras publicas
Juegos recreativos
¡Y más!
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 11., Item Page 7, Packet Page 71 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Levi Hill, AICP, Planning Manager
Prepared By: Chris Schmidt, Senior Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Application AP-25-0236 and Use Permit Application UP-25-0013; Appellant Henry Ruhnke, Wald, Ruhnke and Dost Architects LLP; Property Owner W R MONT LLC; Industrial, Administration, and Research, Religious Assembly Overlay, Emergency Shelter Overlay, Multi-Family Residential Overlay (I-R-130- RA-ES-MF1) Zoning District; Employment General Plan Designation (Exempt from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1 and Section 15303, Class 3)
1. Adopt Findings to Overrule the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission’s Consistency Determination for a Day Care, General, Use at 2400 Garden Road, and
2. Grant Appeal and Overturn the Planning Commission’s Decision and Approve Use Permit UP-25-0013 for a Day Care, General, Use at 2400 Garden Road RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council determine whether the
attached findings reflect its prior direction and, if so:
1. Adopt a resolution overruling the Monterey
County Airport Land Use Commission’s
consistency determination for the proposed Day
Care, General use at 2400 Garden Road
pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section
21676(a); and
2. Adopt a resolution granting Appeal Application
AP-25-0236, overturning the Planning
Commission’s decision, and approving Use
Permit Application UP-25-0013 for a Day Care,
General, Use at 2400 Garden Road.
VALUE DRIVERS:
In collaboration with our community partners, work to
improve the quality of life of all of our community
members by fostering diversity, equity, and
inclusion; championing equitable access to
affordable housing; and maintaining a safe
environment.
Foster a local government that is transparent and
collaborative; and solicits, welcomes and
appreciates input from all.
Agenda Report Highlights
• The applicant plans to convert a
commercial office building at 2400
Garden Road into a daycare for children
aged 6 weeks to 6 years, with a
maximum of 104 children.
• The project aligns with the site’s zoning
subject to approval of a Use Permit, and
with the General Plan’s Employment
designation by supporting local workers
and businesses with childcare services.
• The site is within Safety Zone 7 of the
Monterey Regional Airport, which
discourages land uses involving
"vulnerable occupants" due to proximity
to active runways.
• Despite the Airport Land Use
Commission’s determination that the
project is inconsistent with airport safety
guidelines, the City Council initiated an
override process, citing substantial
evidence to support the project.
• Staff recommends that the Council review
the findings, officially overrule the ALUC’s
determination, and grant the appeal,
approving the daycare’s Use Permit.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 12.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 1, Packet Page 72 №11/25
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The subject property is located within the Airport Influence Area of the Monterey Regional Airport and is therefore subject to review by the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676.5. On July 28, 2025, the ALUC determined that the proposed Day Care, General, Use is inconsistent with the 2019 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP).
Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a), the City Council may overrule the ALUC’s determination if it adopts specific findings, supported by substantial evidence in the record, that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of the ALUCP, including the protection of public health, safety, and welfare.
The City Council previously adopted a resolution declaring its intent to overrule the ALUC’s determination and directing that notice of the proposed decision and findings be provided to the ALUC and the California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics. The required notice period has now concluded, and the City Council may take final action to overrule the ALUC determination by a two-thirds vote of the full Council.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: Yes.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: No fiscal implications have been identified.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1 and Section 15303, Class 3) because the project proposes minor alterations to the exterior of a developed site in an urbanized area and construction of small structures. The project would not involve an expansion of the existing building and proposes minor improvements to the site including a new waste enclosure and deck. Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.
Exception a - Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located - a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact 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 improvements are not located in a particularly sensitive environment and are generally limited to developed parts of the project site.
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 waste enclosure is a minor alteration to the site, which is already developed. No cumulative impacts are anticipated due to the project’s limited scope and distinct location.
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 significant effects are anticipated due to the project’s limited scope and distinct location.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 2, Packet Page 73 №11/25
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. The site is not visible from a scenic highway.
Exception e - Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project site is not located on a hazardous waste site that is included on any list compiled 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.
There are no historic structures on site, and the project site is not located in an area of high archaeological sensitivity. Therefore, impacts to historic or archaeological resources are not anticipated.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
The City Council may deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s decision. This decision would make any further action regarding the ALUC consistency determination unnecessary.
DISCUSSION:
Background
The applicant proposes to convert an existing commercial office building located at 2400 Garden Road into a Montessori-based day care facility serving children ages six weeks to six years. The subject site is approximately 32,700 square feet in area and is developed with an existing office building and surface parking. The site is designated Employment on the General Plan Land Use Map and is zoned I-R-130-RA-ES-MF1 (Industrial, Research and Administration Zoning District with Religious Assembly, Emergency Shelter, and Multi-Family Residential Overlay Districts).
Project Description
The proposed Day Care, General, Use includes a maximum enrollment of 104 children, consistent with existing water credits available at the site. The project includes interior tenant improvements, reconfiguration of the existing parking lot to accommodate drop-off and pick-up operations, construction of a new trash enclosure, and construction of an exterior deck to provide outdoor activity space. Hours of operation are proposed from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Monterey City Code Section 38-17 defines a “Day Care, General” use as the provision of nonmedical care for seven or more persons on a less than 24-hour basis and includes nursery schools, preschools, and childcare centers. In accordance with the City Code, the proposed Montessori operation is classified as a Day Care, General, Use for zoning purposes.
The I-R zoning district permits a Day Care, General, Use subject to approval of a Use Permit.
The Employment General Plan designation allows supportive institutional and service uses that serve employees, businesses, and the broader community. The City Council may determine that the proposed use is consistent with the objectives of the zoning district and the General Plan when appropriately conditioned.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 3, Packet Page 74 №11/25
ALUC Review
The project site is located within the Airport Influence Area of the Monterey Regional Airport and within Safety Zone 7 as identified in the 2019 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. On June 17, 2025, City staff received correspondence from Monterey Regional Airport staff indicating that the proposed use required ALUC review due to the introduction of vulnerable occupants within proximity to active runways.
On July 28, 2025, the Monterey County ALUC adopted a resolution determining that the proposed Day Care, General, Use is inconsistent with the ALUCP, citing safety concerns associated with the presence of children within approximately 1,395 feet of Runway 10R-28L.
Any decision to overrule the ALUC’s consistency determination would require City Council action, pursuant to State law.
Planning Commission and City Council Review
The Use Permit application was considered by the Planning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing on September 23, 2025. Following receipt of public testimony and deliberation, the Planning Commission voted to deny the Use Permit, concluding that the required public health and safety findings could not be made based on the project’s location within the Airport Influence Area and the ALUC’s inconsistency determination.
The applicant filed a timely appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision on October 3, 2025.
On November 4, 2025, the City Council reviewed the appeal, and associated staff reports and, following discussion, directed staff to return with a resolution granting the appeal and initiating the ALUC overrule process.
Pursuant to Monterey City Code Section 38-211, the City Council may grant an appeal if it determines that error was made by the Planning Commission or if it independently finds that the required findings for approval can be made based on the record. The City Council is not bound by the Planning Commission’s conclusions and may exercise its independent judgment in considering the appeal.
ALUC Override Process
On January 20, 2026, the City Council adopted a resolution declaring its intent to consider overruling the ALUC’s consistency determination, adopting draft override findings, and directing staff to transmit notice of the proposed decision and findings.
Following direction from the City Council, staff transmitted notice of the proposed override findings to the Monterey County ALUC and the California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a). State law requires that these agencies be provided at least 45 days’ notice prior to a local agency taking final action to overrule an ALUC determination.
Both agencies provided written comments regarding the proposed override.
A summary of the comments received from the California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics and the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission is provided below.
California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics Letter On March 4, 2026, the California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics provided a letter (Attachment 3) acknowledging receipt of the City’s notice of intent to overrule the ALUC Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 4, Packet Page 75 №11/25
determination. The Division noted that the project site is located within Safety Zone 7 of the Monterey Regional Airport influence area and referenced guidance from the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook stating that land uses involving “vulnerable occupants,” including children, are strongly discouraged within certain airport safety zones. The Division also recommended that the City consider evaluation of interior noise levels to ensure compliance with recommended noise criteria for school and similar uses.
Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission
On March 9, 2026, ALUC adopted a resolution to submit a letter (Attachment 4) responding to the City’s proposed override findings. The letter reiterates the ALUC’s prior determination that the proposed project is inconsistent with the 2019 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan due to the introduction of a day care use involving vulnerable occupants within Safety Zone 7 and within approximately 1,395 feet of Runway 10R-28L. The letter states that the ALUC does not agree that the City’s proposed findings demonstrate consistency with the purposes of Public Utilities Code Section 21670 and maintains that the project introduces occupants into an area subject to potential aircraft-related safety hazards and noise exposure.
Under State law, comments received from the ALUC and the Division of Aeronautics are advisory in nature and must be included in the administrative record for consideration by the City Council when determining whether to overrule the ALUC’s determination.
Analysis
ALUC Override Findings
Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a), the City Council may overrule a determination of the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission if it adopts specific legislative findings, supported by substantial evidence in the record, that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of Public Utilities Code sections 21670 - 21679.5.
Under Public Utilities Code section 21676(a), the ultimate authority for local land use decisions remains with the local jurisdiction, and the City Council may overrule an ALUC determination when supported by legislative findings and substantial evidence in the administrative record.
Public Utilities Code Section 21670 states that “It is the purpose of this article to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses”. The City Council may adopt the following findings to overrule the ALUC determination pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a):
1) The project site is within Safety Zone 7 (Airport Influence Area). Safety Zone 7 is the most permissible safety zone of the ALUCP. This Safety Zone allows for residential development at unrestricted densities, a maximum intensity of 300 persons per acre for non-residential land uses, and all development types, except hazards to flight, outdoor stadiums, and similar very high intensity uses. The proposed site is approximately 0.75 acres in size, and the proposed daycare would have a maximum on-site occupancy of 120 persons (104 students and 16 staff). No exterior modifications are proposed. The proposed daycare is not a hazard to flight, or a very high intensity use, and complies with the ALUCP’s maximum allowed intensity of 300 persons per acre.
2) The City Council finds that the proposed Day Care, General, use at 2400 Garden Road is consistent with the purposes of Public Utilities Code section 21670, including protection of Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 5, Packet Page 76 №11/25
public health, safety, and welfare through reasonable minimization of exposure to airportrelated hazards within an area already developed with urban uses. The project proposes reuse of an existing developed site located within Airport Safety Zone 7 and does not introduce new development into previously undeveloped land adjacent to the airport. 3) The Day care use is not prohibited within Safety Zone 7, however, projects that involve or would be occupied by “vulnerable occupants” (defined as children, the elderly, and people with disabilities) within 6,000 feet from the side of the runway is “strongly discouraged,” especially at the ends of runways, unless a site outside the zone would not serve the intended function. Here, the proposed day care will be located parallel to the runways. Also, the project site was previously used as a church, and as such it was occupied by vulnerable occupants. The City Council finds that feasible alternative locations outside Safety Zone 7 are not reasonably available for the proposed use. Substantial evidence in the administrative record demonstrates that alternative sites were evaluated and found unavailable or unsuitable due to zoning, parcel size, operational requirements, or market constraints. Given the geographic extent of Safety Zone 7, requiring avoidance of the zone would effectively preclude establishment of the proposed use within the City, which is not required by Public Utilities Code Section 21670.
4) Airport Safety Zone 7 is already substantially devoted to urban, institutional, and communityserving uses, including uses involving children and other potentially vulnerable populations.
The City Council finds that the proposed project will not interfere with airport operations, airspace protection, flight paths, or the orderly expansion of the Monterey Regional Airport, consistent with Public Utilities Code section 21675. The project is located along the side of an active runway, is not situated within a primary landing or takeoff zone, and does not introduce physical obstructions, height encroachments, or operational conflicts with aviation facilities.
5) The City Council finds that, based on its independent judgment and the administrative record, the public welfare benefits of expanding licensed child care capacity—including support for working families, economic participation, and community well-being—outweigh the generalized and non-site-specific risk considerations identified for Airport Safety Zone 7.
The City Council further finds that informed parental decision making, consistency with adopted zoning and General Plan policies, and the reuse of an existing developed site support the conclusion that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of Public Utilities Code section 21670 and that overruling the ALUC’s consistency determination is authorized under Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a).
Appeal of Use Permit Findings for Approval
Pursuant to Monterey City Code section 38-161, Use Permit applications may be approved if all three findings, described below, are made. On November 4th, 2025, the City Council directed staff to return with findings to approve the use permit request with findings:
6) That the proposed use is in accord with the objectives of this chapter and the purposes of the zone.
This finding is met. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of this chapter and the purposes of the zone. The project site is zoned I-R-130-RA-ES-MF1 (Industrial, Research and Administration Zoning District with Religious Assembly, Emergency Shelter, Multifamily Overlay Districts). The purpose of the I-R district is to accommodate a range of employment, research, technology, and institutional uses, while allowing compatible supporting uses that serve the needs of employees, businesses, and the broader community.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 6, Packet Page 77 №11/25
The proposed Montessori Community School would establish a childcare and early education center serving children from 6 weeks to 6 years, as well as a teacher training center. This use supports the employment-oriented intent of the district by providing muchneeded childcare options for local workers, supporting working families, and offering professional training for educators, which contributes to the local knowledge economy. The use is compatible with the office and research park character of the surrounding area, and the proposed site improvements, including a replacement trash enclosure and exterior play deck, have been designed to fit within the physical boundaries of the site. 7) That the proposed use and the proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the General Plan; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city.
This finding is met. The proposed use and the proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the General Plan; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city. The site is designated Employment on the Monterey General Plan Land Use Map, which is intended to provide locations for employment-generating uses, including offices, research and development, institutional uses, and supporting services. The proposed Montessori Community School aligns with the Employment designation by providing a service that directly supports the workforce and employers in the area. Childcare availability is a critical support service that improves employee retention, reduces absenteeism, and supports economic development.
The project will not introduce incompatible noise, traffic, or visual impacts, and the proposed deck will face a City-owned retention basin, further minimizing potential effects on nearby properties. The subject property is located outside of the 65-75 CENL contours and, therefore, is not expected to be exposed to loud airport noise and is considered a compatible use. The project will conform to noise standards pursuant to the California Building Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24). Additionally, as proposed, the project does not involve increasing the height of any structure beyond what currently exists on site. The proposed development will not interfere with airspace protection and is an allowed use with the approval of a Use Permit.
Although Safety Zone 7 policies discourage the siting of land uses involving vulnerable populations, such as daycare centers and schools, it’s noted that Safety Zone 7 encompasses a substantial portion of the City of Monterey. Per the applicant, “there are no other sites that are suitable within the Montessori Community School target area”. 8) That the proposed use will comply with any specific condition required for that use.
This finding is met. The proposed childcare center and training facility would comply with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations governing childcare licensing, health and safety, and accessibility. If approved, the City would recommend conditions of approval to require compliance with the approved site plans, maximum enrollment limits, stormwater and BMP requirements, tree protection, and cultural resource protocols. Additionally, operational conditions, such as hours of operation and adherence to approved pick-up and drop-off procedures would be imposed to ensure ongoing compatibility with the Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 7, Packet Page 78 №11/25
neighborhood. These conditions ensure the use would operate in a manner consistent with City standards and expectations.
In conclusion, staff recommends that the City Council determine whether the attached findings reflect its earlier direction and, if so, adopt the attached resolution overruling the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission’s consistency determination for the proposed Day Care, General use at 2400 Garden Road, and adopt the attached resolution granting the use permit appeal, overturning the Planning Commission’s decision, and approving the Use Permit subject to the recommended conditions of approval.
KC/lh/cs
Attachments: 1. Resolution Adopting Findings to Overrule ALUC Determination
2. Resolution Granting Appeal and Approving Use Permit
3. Caltrans Division of Aeronautics Letter dated March 4, 2026
4. ALUC Comment Letter dated March 9, 2026
e: Henry Ruhnke, Wald, Ruhnke and Dost Architects LLP, Appellant Shawn Capps, Wald, Ruhnke and Dost Architects LLP, Applicant Bill Tershy, representative for W R MONT LLC, Property Owner Madelynn Van Den Huevel, representative for W R MONT LLC, Property Owner Hansen P. Reed, Walker and Reed
Chris Morello, Monterey Regional Airport
Fionna Jensen, Principal Planner, County of Monterey, ALUC Staff Planner Writings distributed for discussion or consideration on this matter within 72 hours prior to the meeting, pursuant to Government Code § 54957.5, will be made available at the following link:
https://monterey.gov/Submitted-Comments
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 8, Packet Page 79 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
ADOPTING FINDINGS AND OVERRULING THE MONTEREY COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION’S CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION FOR A
DAY CARE, GENERAL USE AT 2400 GARDEN ROAD
WHEREAS, on January 15, 2025, Shawn Capps of Wald, Ruhnke and Dost Architects LLP, applicant on behalf of owner W R MONT LLC, proposed to convert the existing building to a private Montessori community school for children;
WHEREAS, the proposed project would convert an existing commercial office building into a Montessori-based day care facility serving children ages six weeks to six years, with a maximum enrollment of 104 children;
WHEREAS, the site is designated Employment on the General Plan Land Use Map and is zoned I-R-130-RA-ES-MF1 (Industrial, Research and Administration Zoning District with Religious Assembly, Emergency Shelter and Multifamily Overlay Districts). The I-R zoning district requires a use permit for the day care, general, use; WHEREAS, the project site is located within the Airport Influence Area and Safety Zone 7 of the Monterey Regional Airport as identified in the 2019 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP);
WHEREAS, on July 28, 2025, the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission determined that the proposed use is inconsistent with the 2019 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan;
WHEREAS, under Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a), a local agency may overrule a determination of an Airport Land Use Commission if it adopts findings supported by substantial evidence demonstrating that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of airport land use compatibility planning;
WHEREAS, the City may overrule a determination of the ALUC if it makes findings that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of Section 21670 regarding the protection of public health, safety and welfare in areas surrounding airports and provides the ALUC and the California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics (“Division”) with a copy of the proposed decision and findings at least 45 days prior to the City's action to overrule the ALUC, pursuant to Public Utilities Code section 21676(a);
WHEREAS, on November 4, 2025, the City Council, at a properly noticed public hearing, carefully considered all of the information presented to it, including the agenda report and information submitted at the public hearing by interested persons and continued the item with direction to staff to initiate the ALUC overrule process; WHEREAS, on January 20, 2026, the City Council adopted a resolution declaring its intent to consider overruling the ALUC determination, adopted draft override findings, and Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 9, Packet Page 80 directed staff to transmit notice of the proposed decision to the ALUC and the California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics;
WHEREAS, the City transmitted the required notice and draft findings to both agencies pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a), and the agencies provided written comments which are included in the administrative record; and
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1 and Section 15303, Class 3) because the project proposes minor alterations to the exterior of a developed site in an urbanized area, and construction of small structures. The project would not involve an expansion of the existing building and proposes minor improvements to the site including a new waste enclosure and deck. Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.
Exception a - Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located - a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact 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 improvements are not located in a particularly sensitive environment and are generally limited to developed parts of the project site;
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 waste enclosure is a minor alteration to the site, which is already developed. No cumulative impacts are anticipated due to the project’s limited scope and distinct location;
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 significant effects are anticipated due to the project’s limited scope and distinct location;
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. The site is not visible from a scenic highway;
Exception e - Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project site is not located on a hazardous waste site that is included on any list compiled 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.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 10, Packet Page 81 There are no historic structures on site, and the project site is not located in an area of high archaeological sensitivity. Therefore, impacts to historic or archaeological resources are not anticipated;
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 and conditions of approval of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby overrules the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission’s consistency determination regarding the proposed Day Care, General use at 2400 Garden Road, based on the following findings:
1) The project site is within Safety Zone 7 (Airport Influence Area). Safety Zone 7 is the most permissible safety zone of the ALUCP. This Safety Zone allows for residential development at unrestricted densities, a maximum intensity of 300 persons per acre for non-residential land uses, and all development types, except hazards to flight, outdoor stadiums, and similar very high intensity uses. The proposed site is approximately 0.75 acres in size, and the proposed daycare would have a maximum on-site occupancy of 120 persons (104 students and 16 staff). No exterior modifications are proposed. The proposed daycare is not a hazard to flight, or a very high intensity use, and complies with the ALUCP’s maximum allowed intensity of 300 persons per acre. 2) The City Council finds that the proposed Day Care, General, use at 2400 Garden Road is consistent with the purposes of Public Utilities Code section 21670, including protection of public health, safety, and welfare through reasonable minimization of exposure to airport-related hazards within an area already developed with urban uses.
The project proposes reuse of an existing developed site located within Airport Safety Zone 7 and does not introduce new development into previously undeveloped land adjacent to the airport.
3) The Day care use is not prohibited within Safety Zone 7, however, projects that involve or would be occupied by “vulnerable occupants” (defined as children, the elderly, and people with disabilities) within 6,000 feet from the side of the runway is “strongly discouraged,” especially at the ends of runways, unless a site outside the zone would not serve the intended function. Here, the proposed day care will be located parallel to the runways. Also, the project site was previously used as a church, and as such it was occupied by vulnerable occupants. The City Council finds that feasible alternative locations outside Safety Zone 7 are not reasonably available for the proposed use.
Substantial evidence in the administrative record demonstrates that alternative sites were evaluated and found unavailable or unsuitable due to zoning, parcel size, operational requirements, or market constraints. Given the geographic extent of Safety Zone 7, requiring avoidance of the zone would effectively preclude establishment of the proposed use within the City, which is not required by Public Utilities Code Section 21670.
4) Airport Safety Zone 7 is already substantially devoted to urban, institutional, and community-serving uses, including uses involving children and other potentially Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 11, Packet Page 82 vulnerable populations. The City Council finds that the proposed project will not interfere with airport operations, airspace protection, flight paths, or the orderly expansion of the Monterey Regional Airport, consistent with Public Utilities Code section 21675. The project is located along the side of an active runway, is not situated within a primary landing or takeoff zone, and does not introduce physical obstructions, height encroachments, or operational conflicts with aviation facilities. 5) The City Council finds that, based on its independent judgment and the administrative record, the public welfare benefits of expanding licensed child care capacity—including support for working families, economic participation, and community well-being— outweigh the generalized and non-site-specific risk considerations identified for Airport Safety Zone 7. The City Council further finds that informed parental decision making, consistency with adopted zoning and General Plan policies, and the reuse of an existing developed site support the conclusion that the proposed action is consistent with the purposes of Public Utilities Code section 21670 and that overruling the ALUC’s consistency determination is authorized under Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a).
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 12, Packet Page 83 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
GRANTING APPEAL APPLICATION AP-25-0236 AND APPROVING USE PERMIT UP-25-0013 FOR A DAY CARE, GENERAL USE AT 2400 GARDEN ROAD WHEREAS, on January 15, 2025, Shawn Capps of Wald, Ruhnke and Dost Architects LLP, applicant on behalf of owner W R MONT LLC, proposed to convert the existing building to a private Montessori community school for children;
WHEREAS, the proposed project would convert an existing commercial office building into a Montessori-based day care facility serving children ages six weeks to six years, with a maximum enrollment of 104 children;
WHEREAS, the site is designated Employment on the General Plan Land Use Map and is zoned I-R-130-RA-ES-MF1 (Industrial, Research and Administration Zoning District with Religious Assembly, Emergency Shelter and Multifamily Overlay Districts). The I-R zoning district requires a use permit for the day care, general, use; WHEREAS, on July 28, 2025, the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission determined that the proposed use is inconsistent with the 2019 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan;
WHEREAS, on September 23rd, 2025, the Planning Commission, at a properly noticed public hearing, carefully considered all of the information presented to it, including the agenda report and information submitted at the public hearing by interested persons; and denied the use permit application based on the findings identified in Resolution P25-022; WHEREAS, on October 3, 2025, Henry Ruhnke of Wald, Ruhnke and Dost Architects LLP, appellant, submitted an application to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission to deny Use Permit UP-25-0013 for a Day Care, General, use at 2400 Garden Road; (AP-25- 0236);
WHEREAS, on November 4, 2025, the City Council, at a properly noticed public hearing, carefully considered all of the information presented to it, including the agenda report and information submitted at the public hearing by interested persons and continued the item with direction to staff to initiate the ALUC overrule process; WHEREAS, on January 20, 2026, the City Council adopted a resolution declaring its intent to consider overruling the ALUC determination, adopted draft override findings, and directed staff to transmit notice of the proposed decision to the ALUC and the California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics;
WHEREAS, the City transmitted the required notice and draft findings to both agencies pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a), and the agencies provided written comments which are included in the administrative record; and
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 13, Packet Page 84 WHEREAS, the City of Monterey Planning Office determined the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Article 19, Section 15301, Class 1 and Section 15303, Class 3) because the project proposes minor alterations to the exterior of a developed site in an urbanized area, and construction of small structures. The project would not involve an expansion of the existing building and proposes minor improvements to the site including a new waste enclosure and deck. Furthermore, the project does not qualify for any of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions found at CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.
Exception a - Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located - a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact 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 improvements are not located in a particularly sensitive environment and are generally limited to developed parts of the project site;
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 waste enclosure is a minor alteration to the site, which is already developed. No cumulative impacts are anticipated due to the project’s limited scope and distinct location;
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 significant effects are anticipated due to the project’s limited scope and distinct location;
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. The site is not visible from a scenic highway;
Exception e - Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. The project site is not located on a hazardous waste site that is included on any list compiled 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.
There are no historic structures on site, and the project site is not located in an area of high archaeological sensitivity. Therefore, impacts to historic or archaeological resources are not anticipated;
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a resolution overruling the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission’s consistency determination for the proposed use pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676(a);
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 14, Packet Page 85
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 and conditions of approval of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby grants Appeal Application AP-25-0236 and overturns the Planning Commission decision to deny the use permit application based on the following findings:
1) That the proposed use is in accord with the objectives of this chapter and the purposes of the zone. The project site is zoned I-R-130-RA-ES-MF1 (Industrial, Research and Administration Zoning District with Religious Assembly, Emergency Shelter, Multifamily Overlay Districts). The purpose of the I-R district is to accommodate a range of employment, research, technology, and institutional uses, while allowing compatible supporting uses that serve the needs of employees, businesses, and the broader community.
The proposed Montessori Community School would establish a childcare and early education center serving children from 6 weeks to 6 years, as well as a teacher training center. This use supports the employment-oriented intent of the district by providing much-needed childcare options for local workers, supporting working families, and offering professional training for educators, which contributes to the local knowledge economy. The use is compatible with the office and research park character of the surrounding area, and the proposed site improvements, including a replacement trash enclosure and exterior play deck, have been designed to fit within the physical boundaries of the site.
2) The proposed use and the proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the General Plan; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city. The site is designated Employment on the Monterey General Plan Land Use Map, which is intended to provide locations for employment-generating uses, including offices, research and development, institutional uses, and supporting services. The proposed Montessori Community School aligns with the Employment designation by providing a service that directly supports the workforce and employers in the area. Childcare availability is a critical support service that improves employee retention, reduces absenteeism, and supports economic development.
The project will not introduce incompatible noise, traffic, or visual impacts, and the proposed deck will face a City-owned retention basin, further minimizing potential effects on nearby properties. The subject property is located outside of the 65-75 CENL contours and, therefore, is not expected to be exposed to loud airport noise and is considered a compatible use. The project will conform to noise standards pursuant to the California Building Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24). Additionally, as proposed, the project does not involve increasing the height of any structure beyond Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 15, Packet Page 86 what currently exists on site. The proposed development will not interfere with airspace protection and is an allowed use with the approval of a Use Permit.
Although Safety Zone 7 policies discourage the siting of land uses involving vulnerable populations, such as daycare centers and schools, it’s noted that Safety Zone 7 encompasses a substantial portion of the City of Monterey. Per the applicant, “there are no other sites that are suitable within the Montessori Community School target area”. 3) The proposed childcare center and training facility would comply with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations governing childcare licensing, health and safety, and accessibility. If approved, the City would recommend conditions of approval to require compliance with the approved site plans, maximum enrollment limits, stormwater and BMP requirements, tree protection, and cultural resource protocols. Additionally, operational conditions, such as hours of operation and adherence to approved pick-up and drop-off procedures would be imposed to ensure ongoing compatibility with the neighborhood. These conditions ensure the use would operate in a manner consistent with City standards and expectations.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Special:
1. The applicant shall obtain and maintain all required local, state, and federal permits, licenses, and certifications for the operation of a childcare center and Montessori teacher training facility, including but not limited to approvals from the California Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division. Proof of current licensing shall be provided to the City prior to commencement of operations and upon request. Failure to maintain required licenses or permits shall be grounds for revocation or modification of this use permit.
2. The operator shall maintain emergency response procedures consistent with state childcare licensing requirements, including shelter-in-place protocols for external events. Such procedures shall be maintained on-site and available for inspection upon request.
3. The applicant shall receive approval of an Architectural Review Permit for exterior alterations to the project site.
4. The use permit application is approved with a maximum enrollment of 104 children onsite at any time.
5. The approved hours of operation are 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Any changes to hours shall require review and approval by the Community Development Director.
6. The applicant shall implement staggered drop-off and pick-up times consistent with the operational plan to minimize traffic impacts. The applicant shall clearly communicate these procedures to families and staff.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 16, Packet Page 87
7. The AMI Montessori teacher training center component of the project is an accessory use to the day care use, and shall not be expanded to become the primary use of the site.
8. The applicant shall construct a driveway crossing and public sidewalk across the entire Garden Court frontage of the parcel.
Standard:
9. That, prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant shall provide a copy of these Conditions of Approval on the front page of any plans to be included in the Building Permit submittal.
10. That any modification to the approved plans requires review and approval by Planning staff or the Planning Commission, as necessary.
11. That the hours of construction shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 am to 7:00 pm Monday through Friday, 8:00 am to 6:00 pm Saturday and 10:00 am to 5:00 pm Sunday.
12. That the project is subject to the categorical water allocation program approved by the City Council and subject to the rules and regulations as adopted by the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District. The applicant proceeds at his own risk that water may not be available at the time he requests building permits. No building permits will be issued if water is not available for this project.
13. During construction, the developer shall employ temporary storm water best management practices (BMPs) for erosion and sediment control, prevention of non-storm water discharges, and implement good housekeeping and construction waste management practices to protect the storm drainage system and water quality as required by City Code Section 31.5-15(c), City Phase II Permit, State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Construction General Permit (CGP), and MRSWMP. Plans for the implementation of duringconstruction storm water management and BMPs, such as a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), shall be submitted to the City and subject to review and approval of the City Engineer and Building Official prior to issuance of a grading and/or building permit.
14. Tree protection shall be installed prior to initiation of any site disturbance as required by Municipal Code Chapter 37.
15. That this approval will expire 24 months from the date of approval by the City of Monterey unless the required building permits are issued for the project. It is the applicant’s responsibility to track the expiration date and any request for extension must be made a minimum of 60 days prior to expiration. No renewal notice will be sent to the applicant or property owner.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY this _____ day of _______, 202_, by the following vote:
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 17, Packet Page 88 AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Mayor of said City
City Clerk thereof
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 18, Packet Page 89 “Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS - M.S. #40
1120 N STREET
P. O. BOX 942874
SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001
PHONE (916) 654-4959
FAX (916) 653-9531
TTY 711
www.dot.ca.gov
March 4, 2026
Chris Schmidt Electronically Sent: [email protected] Senior Associate Planner
City of Monterey Community Development Department
580 Pacific St
Monterey, CA 93940
Re: Day Care, General, Use at 2400 Garden Road – Notice of Intent to Overrule the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission
Dear Chris Schmidt:
Thank you for notifying the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics (Division) of the proposed overrule by the City of Monterey. One of the goals of the Division is to assist cities, counties, and Airport Land Use Commissions (ALUC) or their equivalent, to understand and comply with the State Aeronautics Act pursuant to the California Public Utilities Code (PUC), Section 21001 et seq.
The proposed project is located within Safety Zone 7 (Airport Influence Area) of the Monterey Regional Airport, as defined by the Monterey Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), and falls within Generic Safety Zone 6 (Traffic Pattern Zone) per the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook. The ALUCP states any use involving vulnerable occupants in the area described above is strongly discouraged.
Vulnerable occupants include children, the elderly, and people with disabilities.
Regarding vulnerable occupants the Handbook states:
“Other types of land uses also tend to be given special deference by the community. These are uses for which risk acceptability cannot be measured simply in terms of the number of occupants. The vulnerability of the occupants to the risks of aircraft accidents must also be considered. In many instances, the appropriate policy may be outright prohibition of new instances of these uses and expansion of existing facilities… Two other segments of the population whom are often afforded special consideration and protection are the elderly and disabled. As with children, both groups include individuals who may not ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 19, Packet Page 90 Chris Schmidt, Senior Associate Planner
March 4, 2026
“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” know how to respond to an emergency or maybe physically unable to do so” (PG. 4-29).
Special measures should be taken to minimize hazards to the facility and occupants.
Regarding noise, the 2011 Handbook requires that land uses where interior activities are easily disrupted by noise must comply with interior noise level criteria. Specifically, it stipulates a maximum interior noise level of CNEL 45 dB for schools, libraries, museums, and similar land uses. Caltrans Aeronautics strongly recommends an onsite noise review to determine if additional noise attenuation is necessary to maintain interior noise levels below 45 CNEL, or lower if needed. Interior CNEL calculations should assume windows are closed.
These comments reflect the areas of review by Caltrans Division of Aeronautics with respect to airport-related noise, safety, and land use planning issues. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. If you have any questions, please contact me by email at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Leana Tolentino
Associate Transportation Planner
Division of Aeronautics
c: Matthew Friedman, Chief Office of Aviation Planning, <[email protected]>
Fionna Jensen, Principal Planner, County of Monterey Housing & Community Development, <[email protected]>
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 20, Packet Page 91
MONTEREY COUNTY
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
Monterey County ALUC Staff Phone: (831) 755-5025
C/O HCD – Planning Department FAX: (831) 757-9516
1441 Schilling Place, 2nd Floor Fionna Jensen
Salinas, CA 93901 Direct: (831) 796-6407
March 9, 2026 SENT VIA E-MAIL
[email protected]
ATTN:
Chris Schmidt, Senior Associate Planner
City of Monterey Community Development Department
580 Pacific Street
Monterey, Ca 93940
Subject: Notice of Intent to Overrule the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission Resolution No. 25-003 – Montessori Community School
Dear City Council of the City of Monterey,
The purpose of the State Aeronautics Act is to protect the public health, safety and welfare “by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas surrounding public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.” (Pub. Util.
Code §21670(a)(2).) The Monterey Regional Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) implements these purposes. Specifically, the ALUCP seeks to protect the public from the adverse effects of airport noise, to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to high risk of aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities encroach upon or adversely affect the use of navigable airspace.
On February 25, 2019, the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) adopted a new Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for the Monterey Regional Airport. On March 8, 2019, ALUC staff informed your office (letter attached) of the adoption of the ALUP for the Monterey Regional Airport. Pursuant to state law (Government Code Section 65302.3), local jurisdictions and districts had 180 calendar days to amend their general plans, specific plans, community plans, and zoning ordinances, as necessary, to be consistent with the ALUCP or take the steps necessary to overrule the ALUC. Until ALUC staff receive the requested documentation, and pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21676.5, local agencies shall submit all proposed land use regulations and permit applications within the Airport Influence Area to the ALUC for determination of consistency with the ALUCP. The City of Monterey has yet to adhere to this requirement.
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 21, Packet Page 92 Accordingly, on June 30, 2025, the City of Monterey submitted an application (ALUC File No.
REF250022) to ALUC staff requesting consideration of a proposed project to convert an existing 11,177 square foot commercial office building into a new Montessori Community School. The subject property is located at 2400 Garden Road, Monterey (APN: 013-322-008-000). The Montessori Community School provides infant and toddler daycare and educational programs for children up to 6 years old. The proposed project included the demolition and reconstruction of approximately 8,136 square feet of the interior portions of the upper floor area of the existing office building to accommodate new classroom spaces and support areas. Additional site improvements included construction of a new waste enclosure, reconfiguration of the parking lot to meet current standards and provide the required number of parking spaces, and modifications to existing landscaped areas. The project also proposed new exterior playground areas to support outdoor activities for the daycare/school.
On July 28, 2025, the County of Monterey Airport Land Use Commission, at a duly noticed public hearing, adopted Resolution No. 25-003 (Attachment 1), finding the City of Monterey’s application to convert the building into a daycare/school inconsistent with the 2019 Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for Monterey Regional Airport. Resolution No. 25-003 specifically found:
1. “The subject property is located approximately 1,395 feet south of Monterey Regional Airport runway 10R-28L…and is located in an area that may experience multiple arrival and departure accidents”;
2. “As set out in California Public Utilities Code section 21670, the ALUC is created ‘to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.’”;
3. As proposed, the project would introduce vulnerable occupants into an area subject to higher aircraft-related hazards; therefore, creating a potential public safety concern”; and
4. “…The proposed use is not compatible with 2019 ALUCP as it introduces a use that would be exposed to aircraft related noise and potential accidents, and traffic associated with operation of MRY. Accordingly, the ALUC finds that establishment, maintenance, and operation of the project will the circumstances of this particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort, and general welfare of persons occupied by the project site, and be potentially detrimental or injurious to the project’s occupants.”
The ALUC is in receipt of the City’s Notice of Intent to Overrule the ALUC’s decision regarding the Montessori Community School (City Council Resolution No. 26-008). The City’s draft overrule findings argue that the introduction of the proposed use at the project site is consistent with Public Utilities Code section 21670, including that section’s intent to protect public health, ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 22, Packet Page 93 safety, and welfare through reasonable minimization of exposure to airport-related hazards. The ALUC disagrees with the City’s draft findings to overrule the ALUC’s decision and does not find that adequate justification has been presented to demonstrate consistency with Public Utilities Code section 21670. This is more fully explained below.
1. City Council Resolution No. 26-008 asserts that the proposed project protects general public welfare because it is located parallel to the runway, rather than at the end of the runway. While the City correctly observes that daycare and school uses are not prohibited uses in Safety Zone 7, it inaccurately characterizes the ALCUP’s vulnerable occupants restriction as applying only to such land uses within 6,000 feet of the end of a runway. In fact, the policy applies to proposed uses within 6,000 feet of the side of a runway and 10,000 feet of the end of a runway. The subject property is approximately 1,395 feet from the side of Runway 10R–28L. Accordingly, it lies well within the 6,000-foot runway-side influence area and is subject to the ALUCP’s vulnerable occupant restriction. The 6,000 ft. runway-side standard exists because aircraft incidents, while statistically infrequent, are not limited exclusively to runway ends (e.g., runway excursions, loss of control events, aborted takeoffs, and other aviation-related hazards that may occur along the length of the runway). Per Exhibit D2 of the ALUCP, and based on data from airports around the U.S, the subject property is located in an area that may experience multiple arrival and departure accidents. Simply put, the proposed site’s location being parallel to the runway rather than at the end of the runway, by itself, does not mitigate the potential risk to the public of a land use in MRY’s Airport Influence Area. In addition, the proposed use is directly adjacent to Safety Zone 5, which prohibits daycares and school facilities.
2. City Council Resolution No. 26-008 states that the ALUCP requires alternative sites to be considered before allowing a use involving vulnerable occupants within 6,000 feet of the runway. While alternatives are worth considering, the ALUCP lacks this requirement.
Instead, the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (“CALUPH”) states that in cases where such uses should be avoided, they may be allowed only if a site outside the zone would not serve the intended function. However, this statement is advisory, not mandatory. The CALUPH is intended as guidance for when the ALUCP is silent, not to counter or supplement ALUCP requirements and policies. The ALUCP is clear in its discouragement of such uses near the sides and ends of the runway. Regardless, the City’s claim that “substantial evidence” shows that other sites were reasonably considered but excluded for the proposed use is conclusory; the City does not provide such evidence. Further, the relevant geography for analysis is not Safety Zone 7 in its entirety. Safety Zone 7 encompasses a large portion of the City. The ALUCP’s heightened safety concern applies specifically to the 6,000-foot runway-side and 10,000- foot runway-end areas. A meaningful alternative site evaluation would focus on locations outside those defined proximity areas. To the best of staff’s knowledge, no such evaluation has been completed. General assertions regarding market constraints or operational preferences do not substitute for a documented site selection analysis showing that no feasible alternatives exist beyond the strong discouragement area.
Although economic and operational considerations may influence local planning decisions, the statutory mandate under Public Utilities Code section 21670 is hazard ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 23, Packet Page 94 minimization. Market feasibility considerations, while relevant, cannot override health and safety considerations, which are the primary considerations underlying both the ALUCP and the law that underlies it.
3. City Council Resolution No. 26-008 notes that Safety Zone 7 is already substantially developed with urban, institutional, and community-serving uses, including uses involving children and other potentially vulnerable populations. While accurate, this observation overlooks that the purpose of the ALUCPS is to guide future land use decisions to avoid incremental increases in incompatible exposure. The presence of existing development does not eliminate the obligation to evaluate whether new or intensified uses further concentrate vulnerable populations in proximity to airport operations.
4. City Council, through Resolution No. 26-008, asserts that the public welfare benefits of expanding licensed childcare capacity outweigh generalized and non-site-specific risk considerations. The need for childcare services is acknowledged; it is an important community objective. However, Public Utilities Code section 21670 directs ALUCs to protect public health, safety, and welfare, specifically by minimizing exposure to airportrelated hazards. The statute does not establish a balancing test between broader social benefits and safety compatibility standards. Rather, it establishes hazard minimization as the governing objective for land use planning in airport influence areas. Adherence to the ALUCP’s strong discouragement standard here reflects a policy judgment that such exposure should be avoided where practicable.
5. City Council Resolution No. 26-008 references the prior use of the property as a church as support for compatibility, noting that the site previously accommodated gatherings that may have included vulnerable individuals. However, the comparison is not equivalent to the proposed use in either frequency, duration, or concentration of vulnerable occupants.
The prior church use was episodic and event-based, and has since ceased. Peak attendance likely occurred on Sundays or religious holidays. Occupancy during weekday hours would have been substantially lower or nonexistent. By contrast, the proposed Montessori Community School would operate five days per week, during daytime hours, with approximately 104 children present daily. This constitutes a continuous and predictable concentration of vulnerable occupants within close proximity to an active runway. The existence of a prior use does not establish that a proposed intensified use would be compatible under current safety standards or justify such action.
6. City Council, through Resolution No. 26-008, contends that the project’s consistency with adopted zoning and General Plan policies supports a finding that the project is consistent with the purposes of Public Utilities Code section 21670. Government Code section 65302.3 requires affected jurisdictions to submit their General Plan and zoning ordinances to the ALUC for review and determination of consistency with an adopted ALUCP. Since the adoption of the 2019 MRY ALUCP (June 19, 2019), the City has not submitted its General Plan and zoning ordinance for a formal ALUC consistency determination. As a result, the ALUC has not determined whether the City’s regulatory framework aligns with the safety standards of the 2019 ALUCP. Accordingly, reliance on ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 24, Packet Page 95 local policy consistency does not independently establish consistency with Public Utilities Code section 21670. The statutory purposes of Public Utility Code 21670 are implemented through the ALUCP, which ensures that future land use development (or changes in use) in the area surrounding MRY is compatible with airport operations and protects public health, safety, and welfare by minimizing noise and safety hazards. Local consistency, absent an ALUC consistency determination under Government Code section 65302.3, is not a substitute for compliance with the ALUCP’s runway proximity standards for vulnerable occupants.
In the event that Monterey Regional Airport District comments on the City’s Notice of Intent to Overrule have not been presented to the City Council, they are attached for your convenience (Attachment 2). The District’s letter reaffirms its original position that “The proposed undertaking at 2400 Garden Road would increase the potential number of vulnerable occupants in the vicinity of MRY which further decreases safety margins in the 6,000 ft / 10,000 ft review area which is inconsistent with the intent of the Monterey Regional Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan” and that the “Monterey Regional Airport strongly discourages the proposed use of 2400 Garden Road as a Day Care Center.” The ALUC concurs with the concerns raised in the District’s letter and appreciates the helpful exhibit and associated data, which are utilized for the discussion below.
Within the 6,000 ft /10,000 ft area surrounding the Monterey Regional Airport runways, there are 25 existing land uses that accommodate vulnerable occupants, nine of which were classified as Daycares/Preschools or In-House Daycare/Preschool. While existing land uses are exempt from ALUCP review, all new uses or changes in uses are regulated by the ALUCP. The ALUCP strongly discourages any use involving vulnerable occupants from being introduced within 6,000 ft / 10,000 ft of the Monterey Regional Airport’s runways (Table 4B of the ALUCP). The proposed project would be the tenth daycare/school within 6,000 ft or 10,000 ft of the MRY runways, and the closest facility to the airport. The nearest existing day cares are separated from the airport by major roadways, including CA-1, SR 218, and SR 68. The nearest similar use, Auburn’s House Montessori School, is located at 1242 Siddall St, Seaside, CA, which is 5,000 feet north of the nearest runway at MRY. In contrast, the proposed day care at 2400 Garden Road is 1,395 feet south of the main runway at MYR and directly adjacent to Zone 5, which prohibits daycare uses.
Caltrans provided comment on the Notice of Intent to Overrule on March 4, 2026, stating, “special measures should be taken to minimize hazards to the facility and occupants” (Attachment 3). No special measures have been taken to minimize hazards. Caltrans’ letter also supports the ALUCP’s ability to establish a policy that strongly discourages the introduction of uses involving vulnerable occupants within proximity to an airport. Per Caltrans’ recommendation, should the City Council overrule the ALUC, the ALUC strongly encourages that the Council require the Montessori Community School conduct an acoustics report to determine if additional noise attenuation is necessary to maintain interior noise levels below 45 CNEL, or lower if needed, and as required by the California Building Code.
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 25, Packet Page 96 For the above reasons, the ALUC strongly urges the City Council not to overrule the ALUC and uphold the ALUC's J.uly 28, 2025, decision to find the Montessori Community School application (HCD-Planning File No. REF250022) inconsistent with the 2019 MR Y ALUCP.
If you have any questions, please contact ALUC staff, Fionna Jensen, at (83 I) 796-6407 or JensenF [email protected]. Please provide ALUC staff with public notice regarding this item.
Respectfully,
Scherer
r>.__L,..,C Chair
Attachments:
1. ALUC Resolution No. 25-003
2. MR Y District Comments
3. Cal trans Comments
Cc: ALUC file No. REF250022
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 26, Packet Page 97 Before the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission, State of California
Resolution No. 25-003
Finding the proposed conversion of an
existing 11,177 SF commercial office
building into a day care/school facility and
accompanying proposed improvements
inconsistent with the 2019 Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for Monterey
Regional Airport.
REF250022, 2400 Garden Road, Monterey,
(APN: 013-322-008-000).
WHEREAS, on June 30, 2025, the City of Monterey (City) submitted an ALUC application (ALUC File No. REF250022) to ALUC staff requesting a consistency determination of the proposed conversion of an existing commercial office building into a day care/school facility (Montessori Community School) located at 2400 Garden Road, Monterey; and
WHEREAS, the ALUC is responsible for the review of local land use regulations affecting land uses within the Airport Influence Area for Monterey Regional Airport, as identified in the Monterey Regional Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), incorporated herein by reference, for consistency with the ALUCP; and WHEREAS, as proposed project includes the demolition and reconstruction of approximately 8,136 square feet of the interior portions of upper floor area of the existing office building to accommodate new classroom spaces and support areas, and other site improvements including construction of a new waste enclosure, reconfiguration of the parking lot to meet current standards and provide the required number of parking spaces, and modifications to existing landscaped areas. The existing building would be occupied by Montessori Community School, providing daycare and educational programs for infants and children up to 6 years old. The proposed day care/school facility would have a maximum on-site occupancy of 120 persons (104 students and 16 staff); and WHEREAS, pursuant to ALUCP Exhibit 4B, Noise Compatibility Criteria and Long Range Noise Exposure Contours, the subject property is located outside of the 65-, 70-, or 75- Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNELs), and therefore, the proposed development is a compatible use; and
WHEREAS, the project site is entirely located within the 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 77 horizontal surface elevation of 406 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The proposed development does not include increasing the height of any structure beyond what is currently existing on site and therefore will not encroach on Part 77 Surfaces and is an allowed use with respect to airspace protection criteria (ALUCP Policy 4.2.3); and
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 27, Packet Page 98
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Carl Miller, Chair
John Gaglioti
Jonathan Ahmadi
Danial Pick
Mary Ann Leffel
EXECUTIVE STAFF
Chris Morello
Executive Director
Scott Huber
District Counsel
February 23, 2026
TO: Monterey County Land Use Commission
RE: Notice of Intent to Overrule the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission As indicated in the Monterey Regional Airport initial response to the proposed Day Care - General facility (2400 Garden Road) would be located in Zone 7 – Airport Influence Area (AIA) for the Monterey Regional Airport (MRY) and outlined in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, the location requires further review by the ALUC in accordance with ALUCP policies.
The ALUCP prohibits the following land uses in Zone 7: hazards to flights and outdoor stadiums and similar uses of very high intensity. Additionally, as noted in Section 4.2.2.2 – Safety Zone Criteria, the ALUCP compatibility standards in Table 4B restrict the development of land uses that could pose hazards to the public or vulnerable populations in the event of an aircraft accident.
Any use involving vulnerable occupants is strongly discouraged within 6,000 feet from the side of the runway and 10,000 feet from the end of the runway, according to Table 4B of the ALUCP.
Vulnerable occupants are defined in footnote 12 of Table 4B as “children, the elderly, and people with disabilities.”
Based on a review of publicly available mapping, there are existing land uses that can accommodate vulnerable occupants located within the additional review area, as depicted on Exhibit A (attached) and outlined in Table 1 (below). While existing land uses are exempt from ALUCP review, it should be noted that any use involving vulnerable occupants in the 6,000 ft / 10,000 ft review area is strongly discouraged (Table B, Zone 7 – Other Development Conditions).
Seven of the 25 land uses accommodating vulnerable occupants identified in the additional review area would be classified as Day Care – General. The nearest existing day cares are separated from the airport by major roadways, including CA-1, SR 218, and SR 68. The nearest similar use, Auburn’s House Montessori School, is located at 1242 Siddall St, Seaside, CA, which is 5,000 feet north of the nearest runway at MRY. In contrast, the proposed day care at 2400 Garden Road is 1,395 feet south of the main runway at MYR and directly adjacent to Zone 5, which prohibits daycare uses.
The proposed undertaking at 2400 Garden Road would increase the potential number of vulnerable occupants in the vicinity of MRY which further decreases safety margins in the 6,000 ft / 10,000 ft review area which is inconsistent with the intent of the Monterey Regional Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
Accordingly, Monterey Regional Airport strongly discourages the proposed use of 2400 Garden Road as a Day Care Center.
.ll
MONTEREY
REGIONAL AIRPORT
T (831) 648-7000
F (831) 373-2625 200 Fred Kane Drive, Su1te 200
W www.montereya1rport.com Monterey, CA 93940
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 28, Packet Page 99 Table 1 | Existing Sites with Vulnerable Occupants in Additional Review Area Business Name Business Address Category
Anjelica's Villa 555 Francis Ave, Seaside, CA Assisted Living Center Auburn's House
Montessori School 1242 Siddall St, Seaside, CA Daycare/Preschool Ave Maria Convalescent
Hospital
1249 Josselyn Canyon Rd,
Monterey, CA Nursing Home
Bay View Academy
Lower
222 Casa Verde Way, Monterey,
CA Public K-8 Charter School
Country Roads Senior
Living 607 Charles Ave, Seaside, CA Senior Housing
Del Rey Oaks Senior
Paradise 18 Alta Cir, Del Rey Oaks, CA Assisted Living Center Del Rey Woods
Elementary School 1281 Plumas Ave, Seaside, CA Public K-6 School El Estero Elderly
Apartments 151 Park Ave, Monterey, CA Senior Housing
Golden Childhood Days 1122 Harcourt Ave, Seaside, CA In-Home Daycare/Preschool Hope Services –
Seaside 1144 Fremont Blvd, Seaside, CA Educational Center Little Lobos Academy 980 Fremont St, Monterey, CA Daycare/Preschool Lyceum of Monterey
County 1073 Sixth St, Monterey, CA Educational Center
Monterey Bay Charter
School 1700 Vía Casoli, Monterey, CA Public K-2 Charter School Monterey Bay Christian
School 1184 Hilby Ave, Seaside, CA Daycare/Preschool & Private K-8 Monterey Bay Education
Center
2100 Garden Road, Ste C312,
Monterey, CA Education Center
Monterey Bay Guest
Home 1100 Carson St, Seaside, CA Assisted Living Center Munchkinland Daycare 1570 La Honda Ct, Seaside, CA In-Home Daycare/Preschool NSA Monterey Child
Development Center 2 La Mesa Way, Monterey, CA Daycare/Preschool Peninsula Adventist
School 1025 Mescal St, Seaside, CA Private K-8 School
Ryan Ranch Children's
Center 2 Justin Ct, Monterey, CA Daycare/Preschool
Santa Catalina School 1500 Mark Thomas Dr, Monterey,
CA Private K-12
Serendipity Pre-School 1231 Seventh St, Monterey, CA Daycare/Preschool Teddy Bear Preschool 1291 Fourth St, Monterey, CA Daycare/Preschool The Park Lane 200 Glenwood Cir, Monterey, CA Assisted Living Center York School 9501 York Rd, Monterey, CA Private High School Sincerely,
Monterey Regional Airport
Chris Morello
Executive Director
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 29, Packet Page 100 3 Ave Maria Convalescent Hospital
4 Bay View Academy Lower
5 Country Roads Senior Living
6 Del Rey Oaks Senior Paradise
7 Del Rey Woods Elementary School
8 El Estero Elderly Apartments
9 Golden Childhood Days
10 Hope Services - Seaside
11 Little Lobos Academy
12 Lyceum of Monterey County
13 Monterey Bay Charter School K-2 (Foothill Campus)
14 Monterey Bay Christian School
15 Monterey Bay Education Center
16 Monterey Bay Guest Home
17 Munchkinland Daycare
18 NSA Monterey Child Development Center
19 Peninsula Adventist School
20 Ryan Ranch Children's Center
21 Santa Catalina School
22 Serendipity Pre-Schoo
23 Teddy Bear Preschool
24 The Park [ane
25 York School
1249 Josselyn Canyon Rd
222 Casa Verde Way
607 Charles Ave
18AltaCir
1281 Plumas Ave
151 Park Ave
1122 Harcourt Ave
1144 Fremont Blvd
980 Fremont St
1073 Sisth St
1700 Via Casali
1184 Hilby Ave
2100 Garden Road , Suite C31
1100 Carson St
1570 La Honda Ct
2 La Mesa Way
1025 Mescal St
2 Justin Ct
1500 Mark Thomas Dr
1231 Seventh St
1291 Fourth St
200 Glenwood Cir
9501 York Rd
Nursing Home
Public K-8 Charter School
Senior Housing
Assisted Living Center
Public K-6 School
Senior Housing
In-Home Daycare/Preschool
Educational Center
Daycare/Preschool
Educational Center
Public K-8 Charter School
Daycare/Preschool & Private K-8
Education Center
Assisted Living Center
In-Home Daycare/Preschool
Daycare/Preschool
Private K-8 School
Daycare/Preschool
Private K-12
Daycare/Preschool
Daycare/Preschool
Assisted Living Center
Private High School
Runway Centerline
• Land Uses with Vulnerable Occupants
9 Proposed Day Care Site
.J Additional Review Boundary
Municipal Boundaries
Highways
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 30, Packet Page 101 “Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS - M.S. #40
1120 N STREET
P. O. BOX 942874
SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001
PHONE (916) 654-4959
FAX (916) 653-9531
TTY 711
www.dot.ca.gov
March 4, 2026
Chris Schmidt Electronically Sent: [email protected] Senior Associate Planner
City of Monterey Community Development Department
580 Pacific St
Monterey, CA 93940
Re: Day Care, General, Use at 2400 Garden Road – Notice of Intent to Overrule the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission
Dear Chris Schmidt:
Thank you for notifying the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics (Division) of the proposed overrule by the City of Monterey. One of the goals of the Division is to assist cities, counties, and Airport Land Use Commissions (ALUC) or their equivalent, to understand and comply with the State Aeronautics Act pursuant to the California Public Utilities Code (PUC), Section 21001 et seq.
The proposed project is located within Safety Zone 7 (Airport Influence Area) of the Monterey Regional Airport, as defined by the Monterey Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), and falls within Generic Safety Zone 6 (Traffic Pattern Zone) per the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook. The ALUCP states any use involving vulnerable occupants in the area described above is strongly discouraged.
Vulnerable occupants include children, the elderly, and people with disabilities.
Regarding vulnerable occupants the Handbook states:
“Other types of land uses also tend to be given special deference by the community. These are uses for which risk acceptability cannot be measured simply in terms of the number of occupants. The vulnerability of the occupants to the risks of aircraft accidents must also be considered. In many instances, the appropriate policy may be outright prohibition of new instances of these uses and expansion of existing facilities… Two other segments of the population whom are often afforded special consideration and protection are the elderly and disabled. As with children, both groups include individuals who may not
CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR California Department of Transportation
• •
li:t/trans·
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 31, Packet Page 102 Chris Schmidt, Senior Associate Planner
March 4, 2026
“Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment” know how to respond to an emergency or maybe physically unable to do so” (PG. 4-29).
Special measures should be taken to minimize hazards to the facility and occupants.
Regarding noise, the 2011 Handbook requires that land uses where interior activities are easily disrupted by noise must comply with interior noise level criteria. Specifically, it stipulates a maximum interior noise level of CNEL 45 dB for schools, libraries, museums, and similar land uses. Caltrans Aeronautics strongly recommends an onsite noise review to determine if additional noise attenuation is necessary to maintain interior noise levels below 45 CNEL, or lower if needed. Interior CNEL calculations should assume windows are closed.
These comments reflect the areas of review by Caltrans Division of Aeronautics with respect to airport-related noise, safety, and land use planning issues. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. If you have any questions, please contact me by email at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Leana Tolentino
Associate Transportation Planner
Division of Aeronautics
c: Matthew Friedman, Chief Office of Aviation Planning, <[email protected]>
Fionna Jensen, Principal Planner, County of Monterey Housing & Community Development, <[email protected]>
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 32, Packet Page 103 WHEREAS, the project site is located within Safety Zone 7 (Airport Influence Area), as delineated in the ALUCP. Safety Zone 7 is the most permissible safety zone, allowing residential development at unrestricted densities, non-residential land uses up to a maximum intensity of 300 persons per acre, and all development types except hazards to flight, outdoor stadiums, and other very high-intensity uses.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Table 4B of the ALUCP, projects within Safety Zone 7 that involve vulnerable occupants (including children, the elderly, and persons with disabilities) within 6,000 feet from the side of a runway require ALUC review and are “strongly discouraged”. The subject property is located approximately 1,395 feet south of Monterey Regional Airport runway 10R-28L; and
WHEREAS, Exhibit D2 of the ALUCP identifies the various factors (runway length, arrival and departure accidents1
, flight patterns, long-range noise contours), that
were considered to create the MRY Safety Zones. Per Exhibit D2, and based on data from airports around the U.S, the subject property is located in an area that may experience multiple arrival and departure accidents; and WHEREAS, Policy 4.2.2.2 of the ALUCP states, “The safety zone land use compatibility standards in Table 4B restrict the development of land uses that could pose particular hazards to the public or to vulnerable populations in case of an aircraft accident.” The proposed use is strongly discouraged by the ALUCP due to its close proximity to MRY runway 10R-28L. In addition, the proposed use is directly adjacent to Safety Zone 5, which prohibits daycares and school facilities; and WHEREAS, as set out in California Public Utilities Code section 21670, the ALUC is created “to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.” As proposed, the project would introduce vulnerable occupants into an area subject to higher aircraftrelated hazards; therefore, creating a potential public safety concern; and WHEREAS, the ALUC testified during the July 28, 2025 hearing that introduction of the proposed use is not compatible with 2019 ALUCP as it introduces a use that would be exposed to aircraft related noise and potential accidents, and traffic associated with operation of MRY. Accordingly, the ALUC finds that establishment, maintenance, and operation of the project will the circumstances of this particular case be detrimental to the health, safety, comfort, and general welfare of persons occupied by the project site, and be potentially detrimental or injurious to the project’s occupants; and WHEREAS, the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics, verbally informed ALUC staff of it’s discouragement to introduce vulnerable occupants within
WHEREAS, the Monterey Regional Airport District commented on the project, and verbally testified at the July 28, 2025 hearing, stating, “Due to the potential presence 1 Nominalized from other airports across the United States. Accident Data from California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, 2011.
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 33, Packet Page 104 of vulnerable occupants within the vicinity of the airport, Monterey Regional Airport does not support the proposed use of 2400 Garden Road as a Day Care Center” (letter dated July 18, 2025); and
WHEREAS, on July 28, 2025, the ALUC conducted a duly noticed public meeting to consider the proposed project located at 2400 Garden Road, Monterey (APN:
013-322-008-000); and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission does hereby find that the conversion of an existing 11,177 SF commercial office building into a day care/school facility and accompanying proposed improvements are inconsistent with the 2019 ALUCP for Monterey Regional Airport.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 28th day of July 2025, upon motion of Commissioner Leffel and seconded by Commissioner Cleveland, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Commissioners Leffel, Carbone, Cleveland, Scherer, Kerr, and Donaldson NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Cohan
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST
Craig Spencer, Secretary to the ALUC
By: ___________________________________________
Fionna Jensen, Designee of Secretary to the ALUC
July 28, 2025
ATTACHMENT 4
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 12., Item Page 34, Packet Page 105 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
FROM: Kimberly Cole, AICP, Community Development Director Anastacia Wyatt, Housing Manager
Prepared By: Jacob Verania, HCD Coordinator
SUBJECT: Receive Update from the Housing Authority of the County of Monterey (HACM) on Status of Displaced Tenants Resulting from the Fire at 800 Casanova Avenue and Authorize the City Manager to Donate From the Available Balance from the FY 25-26 Budget for the Rental Assistance Program to HACM and/or Other Organizations to Continue Support of the Displaced Tenants as Needed (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive update from the HACM on the status of
displaced tenants resulting from the fire at 800
Casanova Avenue and authorize the City Manager to
donate from the available balance from the FY 25-26
Budget for the Rental Assistance Program to HAMC
and/or other organizations, such as All In Monterey
County, Community Homeless Solutions, the Food
Bank, the Red Cross, Meals on Wheels, etc., to continue support of displaced tenants as needed.
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:
Receiving a report from HACM on displaced tenants
from the 800 Casanova Avenue Fire and considering
offering further assistance to HACM and/or other
organizations is consistent with the City’s value drivers and policies of the City to foster community wellbeing.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE
ACT) APPLIES: No.
Agenda Report Highlights
• The City Council is considering an
update from the Housing Authority
of the County of Monterey regarding
tenants displaced by a three-alarm
fire at 800 Casanova Avenue.
• A March 9, 2026 fire resulted in one
death, multiple injuries, and the
displacement of 85 residents who
initially received temporary shelter
at a local hotel.
• The City Manager would be
authorized to donate available funds
from the FY 25-26 Rental
Assistance Program to support
displaced tenants with essential
needs and permanent housing.
• This financial support requires no
new budget allocation because the
City Council previously allocated
$250,000 for the Rental Assistance
Program.
• Various non-profit and public
agencies are collaborating.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 13.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 13., Item Page 1, Packet Page 106 №12/25
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
No new budget allocation is required to provide financial assistance to HACM and/other organizations because the City Council previously allocated $250,000 for the Rental Assistance Program in FY 2025-2026. This action would authorize payments from remaining funds available in the Rental Assistance Program account 101-400-4305-0000-4425 to be paid to HACM and/or other organizations as needed to assist tenants displaced by the fire.
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 further assist HAMC’s tenants if it is determined that no further assistance is required.
DISCUSSION:
This action authorizes a status report from HACM regarding displaced tenants from the fire at 800 Casanova Avenue. The HACM was created under the authority of the Health and Safety Code by Resolution which identified a need for safe and sanitary low-income housing, by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors on March 17, 1941. Monterey County Housing Authority Development Corporation (HDC), a 501(c)(3) public benefit corporation specializes in offering comprehensive development consulting services to housing authorities and affordable housing developers.
Background
On March 9, 2026, a three-alarm early morning structure fire started at an apartment complex at 800 Casanova Avenue on a property owned by HDC, the property owner. As noted above, HDC is a development arm for the Housing Authority of the County of Monterey.
The fire started at 3:51 a.m. and was ultimately extinguished by the Monterey Fire Department with mutual aid support. Six residents were transported to the Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula for burns and smoke inhalation, and two of those residents were transferred to the Santa Clara Valley Medical Center’s Burn Unit in San José. Another 85 residents were displaced and initially provided temporary shelter at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Monterey. Unfortunately, one resident passed away.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 13., Item Page 2, Packet Page 107 №12/25
The HACM has been actively identifying permanent housing for displaced residents. A variety of non-profit and public agencies have also been assisting HACM tenants in their temporary housing to provide services and assist with identifying new permanent housing opportunities.
The City continues to communicate with HACM and various supporting agencies. The City also reviewed information from its Rental Inventory and contacted property owners to help identify vacant units. This list was provided to help identify housing locations. There is still significant work ahead to identify, locate, and permanently house the displaced tenant population.
This action authorizes the City Manager to donate funds to HACM and/or other organizations to address the unmet needs of fire victims, including case management, furnishings, clothing, toiletries, food, and other necessities.
KC/aw/jv
Attachments: 1. Resolution
e: Housing Authority of the County of Monterey
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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 13., Item Page 3, Packet Page 108 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO DONATE FROM THE AVAILABLE BALANCE FROM THE FY 25-26 BUDGET FOR THE RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM TO
HACM AND/OR OTHER ORGANIZATIONS TO CONTINUE SUPPORT OF THE
DISPLACED TENANTS AS NEEDED
WHEREAS, on March 9, 2026, a three alarm early morning structure fire started at an apartment complex at 800 Casanova Avenue on a property owned by HDC Limited Liability Company 2, a private property owner. HDC Limited Liability Company 2 is a development arm for the Housing Authority of the County of Monterey;
WHEREAS, more than 85 tenants were displaced by the fire; WHEREAS, the Housing Authority of the County of Monterey has been actively identifying permanent housing for displaced residents. A variety of non-profit and public agencies have also been assisting HACM tenants in their temporary housing to provide services and assist with identification new permanent housing opportunities; WHEREAS, this action authorizes the City Manager to donate funds to HACM and/or to other organizations to address the unmet needs of fire victims, including but not limited to, case management, furnishings, clothing, toiletries, food, and other necessities; WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.
Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby:
1. Authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to donate funds to the Housing Authority of the County of Monterey and/or to other organizations to assist tenants displaced by the fire at 800 Casanova Avenue. The type of assistance that is approved by this resolution is to be broadly construed to effectuate its purpose, and such assistance Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 13., Item Page 4, Packet Page 109 includes, but is not limited to, case management services, food, clothes, toiletries, temporary housing, furniture, and pet supplies.
2. Authorizes the donation payments be made from the Rental Assistance Program account 101-400-4305-0000-4425 up to the account balance of $125,000.
3. Any organization receiving a donation pursuant to this authorization shall submit quarterly reports to the Finance Director on qualified expenditures.
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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 13., Item Page 5, Packet Page 110 ALL IN Monterey County, Inc
To: Nat Rojanasathira, Assistant City Manager
[email protected]
Re: Grant Request for Continued Support of the Displaced Casanova Residents
Dear Mr. Rojanasathira,
ALL IN Monterey County, Inc. has been standing alongside our friends and neighbors who were deeply impacted by the fire at Casanova Plaza from the very first day. Since the fire, we have worked closely with the affected residents to meet their most urgent needs—providing clothing, food (made possible through the generosity of our community), medications, transportation, and other essential items. Just as important, we have offered steady support through listening, friendship, and care during an incredibly traumatic time.
Our peninsula community has shown remarkable generosity, and ALL IN has partnered with local agencies, nonprofits, churches, community groups, and individuals to support displaced residents. However, the needs have far exceeded the donated items available. To date, residents have not been able to retrieve any personal belongings, and it remains unclear whether anything is salvageable as testing is still underway. Many residents have not yet been informed of the full extent of their losses.
We have now entered the recovery phase as residents begin moving into permanent housing.
Sadly, they are starting this next chapter with little to nothing. ALL IN Monterey County is committed to ensuring each resident has what they need to live safely and with dignity. We are currently providing a basic move-in setup that includes a mattress, microwave, towels, shower curtain, bedding, garbage can, dishes, and pots and pans. As resources allow, we continue to Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 13., Item Page 6, Packet Page 111 add essential items such as bed frames, side tables, and chairs. While these supplies have been purchased using donated funds, the cost has exceeded the financial support allocated for fire recovery efforts.
Some residents had renters’ insurance, but many did not. We are prioritizing medical needs and replacing critical items that residents cannot access. We estimate the cost to provide basic necessities—excluding furniture and specialized medical equipment—at approximately $770 per person. To support all 87 displaced residents, the total cost is approximately $67,000.
We respectfully request a grant or donation of $20,000 to help us continue our work with the Casanova Plaza residents. This support will ensure they have what they need to safely settle into their new homes and begin rebuilding their lives. ALL IN Monterey County remains committed to checking in with each resident and supporting their long-term recovery.
We appreciate your consideration of this request.
Thank you,
Tanya Kosta Audrey Cray Haven Brearton
President Treasurer Secretary
ALL IN Monterey County
(831) 256-2385
[email protected]
501(c)3 Tax ID Number: 92-0554137
We give with kindness. We give with good intentions. We give from our heart, our ALL IN heart.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 13., Item Page 7, Packet Page 112 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Jean Rasch, Councilmember
SUBJECT: Councilmember Rasch’s Request to Agendize a Discussion Regarding Council Expenses and Benefits (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff on whether to agendize the discussion.
VALUE DRIVERS: As provided in the attached request.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The City Council’s Governance Policy (Resolution No. 25-082 C.S.) provides:
Agendizing of City Council Items by Individual Councilmembers.
1. A Councilmember may submit an agenda report to the City Clerk’s Office outlining a request to agendize a matter of business on a future agenda. This agenda report should, in 350 words or less, describe what, how, and why the matter of business should be considered by the City Council. The City Clerk’s Office will add the item to an upcoming agenda.
2. At the Council Meeting where the request is considered, the Councilmember who submitted the request will deliver a verbal report consistent with the agenda report. This verbal report should not exceed three minutes. The City Council may ask questions pertaining to whether the item should be agendized (e.g., the required amount of staff time, the priority level to be assigned to the item, etc.).
3. Public comment will be received.
4. In deliberating the request, the sole issue to be determined is whether the substantive issue warrants being heard at a future date. A majority vote is not required, instead, the motion will pass with two “yes” votes.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Agendizing a matter does not have a fiscal implication. Fiscal implications of the suggested changes will be included in the future agenda item, if agendized.
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 Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 14.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 1, Packet Page 113 №11/25
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 choose not to agendize the matter.
DISCUSSION:
On March 30, 2026, Councilmember Rasch provided a written request to agendize, which is attached as Attachment 1.
At its meeting on April 7, 2026, the City Council will consider whether this item should be added to a future City Council meeting agenda. Consistent with the City Council’s Governance Policy, the member of Council who submitted the request will deliver a verbal report consistent with the agenda report. This verbal report should not exceed three minutes. The City Council may ask questions pertaining to whether the item should be agendized (e.g., the required amount of staff time, the priority level to be assigned to the item, etc.). Public comment will then be received.
In deliberating the request, the sole issue to be determined is whether the substantive issue warrants being heard at a future date. A majority vote is not required, instead, the motion will pass with two “yes” votes.
JR/cbk
Attachments: 1. Request
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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 2, Packet Page 114
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 3, Packet Page 115 ATTACHMENT Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 4, Packet Page 116 ATTACHMENT Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 14., Item Page 5, Packet Page 117 Council
Agenda Report
№11/25
FROM: Jean Rasch, Councilmember
SUBJECT: Councilmember Rasch’s Request to Agendize a Discussion Regarding ADA Parking in Public Lots (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff on whether to agendize the discussion.
VALUE DRIVERS: As provided in the attached request.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The City Council’s Governance Policy (Resolution No. 25-082 C.S.) provides:
Agendizing of City Council Items by Individual Councilmembers.
1. A Councilmember may submit an agenda report to the City Clerk’s Office outlining a request to agendize a matter of business on a future agenda. This agenda report should, in 350 words or less, describe what, how, and why the matter of business should be considered by the City Council. The City Clerk’s Office will add the item to an upcoming agenda.
2. At the Council Meeting where the request is considered, the Councilmember who submitted the request will deliver a verbal report consistent with the agenda report. This verbal report should not exceed three minutes. The City Council may ask questions pertaining to whether the item should be agendized (e.g., the required amount of staff time, the priority level to be assigned to the item, etc.).
3. Public comment will be received.
4. In deliberating the request, the sole issue to be determined is whether the substantive issue warrants being heard at a future date. A majority vote is not required, instead, the motion will pass with two “yes” votes.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Agendizing a matter does not have a fiscal implication. Fiscal implications of the suggested changes will be included in the future agenda item, if agendized.
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 Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 15.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 1, Packet Page 118 №11/25
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 choose not to agendize the matter.
DISCUSSION:
On March 30, 2026, Councilmember Rasch provided a written request to agendize, which is attached as Attachment 1.
At its meeting on April 7, 2026, the City Council will consider whether this item should be added to a future City Council meeting agenda. Consistent with the City Council’s Governance Policy, the member of Council who submitted the request will deliver a verbal report consistent with the agenda report. This verbal report should not exceed three minutes. The City Council may ask questions pertaining to whether the item should be agendized (e.g., the required amount of staff time, the priority level to be assigned to the item, etc.). Public comment will then be received.
In deliberating the request, the sole issue to be determined is whether the substantive issue warrants being heard at a future date. A majority vote is not required, instead, the motion will pass with two “yes” votes.
JR/cbk
Attachments: 1. Request
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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 2, Packet Page 119
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 15., Item Page 3, Packet Page 120 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
FROM: David J. Hober, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Receive Police Department Annual Report – 2025 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council receive the Monterey Police
Department (MPD) Annual Report – 2025.
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:
Receiving the 2025 Monterey Police Department Annual
Report 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; prepare for emergencies and community resiliency; 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; transparent and inclusive government –
foster a local government that is transparent and
collaborative; and solicits, welcomes and appreciates
input from all.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Receiving the 2025 Monterey Police Department Annual Report carries no fiscal impact.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:
The City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Agenda Report Highlights
• The 2025 Annual Report highlights
the Police Department's progress in
addressing crime, engaging with the
community, improving training
programs, and advancing
operations.
• The report combines statistical data,
narrative stories, and visual
elements to promote transparency
and strengthen public trust.
• The MPD strengthened
relationships with Monterey’s
diverse community through
proactive policing strategies.
• The report emphasizes the MPD’s
efforts to recruit and retain highly
qualified personnel and enhance
officer training to meet current
demands.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 16.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 1, Packet Page 121 №12/25
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 presentation of the 2025 Monterey Police Department Annual Report provides an opportunity to equip the Council with essential insights into the department's operations and achievements. However, it remains within the Council's discretion to decline receiving a report.
DISCUSSION:
The 2025 Monterey Police Department (MPD) Annual Report highlights the department’s key achievements, initiatives, and performance over the past year. This comprehensive report demonstrates the MPD’s dedication to ensuring public safety, building community partnerships, and providing professional law enforcement services to the City of Monterey.
The Annual Report combines statistical data, narrative stories, and visual elements like graphs and photos to promote transparency and make information more accessible. The report highlights the MPD’s major progress in addressing crime, engaging with the community, improving training programs, and advancing operations.
In 2025, the MPD maintained its focus on proactive policing strategies and strengthened relationships with Monterey’s diverse community, including residents, businesses, military personnel, educational institutions, and visitors.
The report also offers insight into the Department’s ongoing efforts to recruit and retain highly qualified personnel, improve officer training to meet current demands, and strengthen public trust through transparency and accountability.
The Annual Report demonstrates the Department’s dedication to serving those who live, learn, work, and visit Monterey. It also highlights the collaborative support of the City Council, City staff, and community members, who remain essential partners in the MPD’s success.
Staff recommends that the City Council review and accept the 2025 Monterey Police Department Annual Report as a comprehensive overview of the department’s achievements and its commitment to maintaining a safe and vibrant community.
DJH/djh
Attachments: 1. The 2025 Monterey Police Department Annual Report Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 2, Packet Page 122 №12/25
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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 3, Packet Page 123 W H O W E A R E . W H A T W E R E P R E S E N T OUR MISSION. OUR VISION. OUR VALUES
MISSION
Responsive to All, Second to None, Every Time
VISION
The Monterey Police Department is a professional,
dynamic and innovative organization with the highest
ethical standards. The MPD is committed to serving
everyone with honor, dignity, fairness and respect.
DEPARTMENT VALUES
Maximize, Value and Train our MPD Workforce
Proactively Police the City of Monterey to Ensure a
Low Crime Rate
Develop, Embrace and Enhance Community
Partnerships
MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT
2025 ANNUAL REPORT
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 4, Packet Page 124 T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S 02- CHIEF'S MESSAGE
03- MONTEREY QUICK FACTS
04- MPD ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
05- I.MPD WORK FORCE
08- II.MPD POLICE SERVICE
14- III.OFFENSE AND ARREST SUMMARY REPORT
16- IV.MPD TRANSPARENCY
20- V.MPD HIRING AND TRAINING - AN OVERVIEW
21- VI.MPD ACCOMPLISHMENTS / PRIORITIES 2025-2026
23- VII.MPD -WE WILL NEVER FORGET
Staffing
National and State Average of Sworn Officers
New Staff / Awards / Retirements
Calls for Service
Department Activity
Contemporary Policing Solutions
Multi-Disciplinary Outreach Team
Jail & Records
Offense & Arrest Reporting
Traffic Reporting
Equitable Justice and Policing: Three Influencing Dimensions Force Application
ICAT and CIT Training
Equipment and Technology
Internal Affairs
Annual Military Equipment Reporting
Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) System
Police Officer Selection Process
POST Basic Course Academy
MPD Field Training Program
Probationary Period
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 5, Packet Page 125 It is my privilege to serve as the twenty-second Chief of Police for the Monterey Police Department (MPD). This year marks eleven years since I was honored to serve in this role, and this Annual Report is the seventh we have produced since 2018. Our 2025 MPD Annual Report offers a platform to highlight some of our accomplishments in 2025, along with general information about the MPD. We aim to present this information in an accessible way, including statistics, vignettes, graphs, and photos.
The dedicated members of the MPD understand that serving the City of Monterey is a privilege. We take pride in serving a city enriched by generations of hardworking residents, two military training institutions shaping America’s service members, internationally and regionally renowned educational institutions, and a world-famous tourist destination with a legacy rooted in literary history and marine biology research, all located in one of the most stunning coastal areas in the world. This unique setting motivates us to provide the most professional and modern police services to those who live, learn, work, and visit Monterey.
I want to express my sincere appreciation to the community, City Council, and all City staff for their steadfast support of the Monterey Police Department. I especially want to commend the men and women of the MPD for their dedication, hard work, and unwavering commitment to serving others.
As you explore this 2025 edition of the Monterey Police Department Annual Report, we hope it offers valuable insights into your police department and the work we do for our community.
C H I E F ' S M E S S A G E
David J. Hober
Chief of Police
02 MPD Annual Report 2025
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 6, Packet Page 126
CITY OF MONTEREY
Monterey Quick Facts
POPULATION:
LAND AREA:
29,116
ELEVATION: 26 ft. (City Council Chambers)
FOUNDED:
CAPITAL:
NICKNAMES:
MONTEREY PD:
ATTRACTIONS
Monterey Bay Aquarium, Cannery Row, Fisherman's Wharf,
Downtown, Recreation Trail, Monterey Jazz Festival, Colton Hall, Defense Language Institute, Naval Postgraduate School, Doc Rickett's Pacific Biological Laboratories
03 MPD Annual Report 2025
NEIGHBORHOODS
Aguajito Oaks, Alta Mesa, Casanova Oak Knoll, Del Monte Beach, Del Monte Grove/ Laguna Grande, Deer Flats, Downtown, Fisherman's Flats, Glenwood, Monterey Vista, New Monterey, Oak Grove, Old Town, Skyline Forest, Skyline Ridge, Villa Del Monte
CONSTITUTION:
8.65 Square Miles
June 30,1770
Capital of Alta California of Spain (1804- 1821)
Hosted California's first constitutional
convention in 1849 after Mexico ceded California to the United States.
and of Mexico (1822 -1836)
First City and The Cradle of History
Established in 1911
(U.S. Census Bureau 2023 Estimate)
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 7, Packet Page 127
OPERATIONS P A T R O L P A T R O L C O M M U N I T Y
A C T I O N T E A M
CHIEF OF POLICE L I E U T E N A N T A P L A T O O N B P L A T O O N T R A I N I N G / I A I N V E S T I G A T I O N S M P D R E S E R V E O F F I C E R P R O G R A M
M P D V O L U N T E E R P R O G R A M
M P D C H A P L A I N P R O G R A M
E V I D E N C E S A A A D M I N .
S U P P O R T
S U P P O R T
S E R V I C E S
P A T R O L D I V I S I O N L I E U T E N A N T P R D S R E C O R D S O P E R A T I O N S
A S S I S T A N T C H I E F O F P O L I C E
C H I E F O F P O L I C E L I E U T E N A N T A D M I N / I N V E S T I G A T I O N S R E C O R D S / J A I L / F I N A N C E Watch I Watch II
Watch III
T R A F F I C D I V I S I O N A C A D E M Y / F T O Watch I Watch II
Watch III
MDOT
MCBH Mobile Crisis
APS Social Worker
CHOMP Homeless Nav
INTERIM
53 Sworn
Police Officers 19 Professional Staff 04
MPD Annual Report 2025
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 8, Packet Page 128
MPD COM
0 20 40 60 80 100
BA Degree
Male
Female
Asian
Hispanic
Black
White
MPD AND CITY OF MONTEREY
DEMOGRAPHICS
I. MPD
WORKFORCE
MPD City of Monterey
68% 10%8% 23% 4%3% 64%67% 21% 7% 50%50%54%
STAFFING 2023 2022 2021
Sworn Officers % Below Street Ready
-15% -19% -16%
Number of Sworn Officers Authorized
53 53 53
NATIONAL AND STATE AVERAGE RATIO OF SWORN OFFICERS PER 1,000 RESIDENTS Ratio (2023) California - per 1,000 inhabitants
Ratio (2023) United States - per 1,000 inhabitants
3.5 3.51 3
1 4
4 1
2 MPD collegiate education includes BA degree 68% & Masters Degree 28%. National female ratio of sworn officers was 16.5% in 2023 (FBI Crime Data Explorer). "Below Street Ready" includes vacancies, disability, military leave, and officers that are in entry-level training prior to becoming solo-beat officers.
3 4 FBI Crime Data Explorer.
05 MPD Annual Report 2025
2024
-19%53 https://www.census.gov
Ratio (2023) Monterey - per 1,000 inhabitants
2.12 4
2 90%
2025
-22%53
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 9, Packet Page 129
POLICE OFFICER BRENT HALL NEW MPD STAFF/PROMOTIONS
New Staff / Promotions/
Retirements in 2025
RETIREMENTS
Police Officer Brent Hall served the City of Monterey for over 25 years, starting his career in July 1999. Officer Hall worked as a Patrol Officer, Field Training Officer, and most notable Monterey’s favorite Traffic Officer. During his time as an Officer, Brent mentored and counseled many of Monterey’s youth, and built lasting relationships with many community and business owners. Congratulations on your retirement 06 MPD Annual Report 2025
Officer Hall!
POLICE OFFICER
NEW MPD STAFF
Rafael Mendoza
POLICE OFFICER RECRUITS
Amber Phillips
Brittney Davis
POLICE SERVICES TECHNICIANS
Ali Al Zamle
Angelee Berganio
Edgar Ibarra Blas
Joel Mendoza
Juan Puentes
Cody Van Blarcom
PROMOTIONS
SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST
POLICE SERGEANT
POLICE RECORDS & DETENTION SUPERVISOR
Alma Murphy Mike Garcia Monica Gonzalez
COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER INTERNS
Montana Cota
Nikolas Delgado
Martin Cardoso Rodriguez
Wendy Cortez-Calderon
COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER
Sarah Carpenter
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 10, Packet Page 130
MERITORIOUS SERVICES AWARDS
Sergeant Jeremiah Ruttschow
Officer Mckenna Hill
Officer Joey Parigi
Officer David Vasalech
CSO Leticia Perez
CSO Sarah Carpenter
CSO Intern Michelle Robles
MDOT Members Brittany Camargo,
Monica Morales, and Maggie Mendoza
Officer Russell Speirs
Officer Lee Doyle
Officer Amanda Arrollo
Officer Jacob Singley
Officer Juan Rodriguez
2025 MAJOR AWARDS
O F F I C E R O F T H E Y E A R
P R O F E S S I O N A L
E M P L O Y E E
O F T H E Y E A R
C O M M U N I T Y O R I E N T E D
P O L I C I N G A W A R D
D e t e c t i v e W a y l a n d K o p p
Wayland was selected for his dedicated service
to the MPD that goes above and beyond. As
one of only two detectives in a busy
Investigations Division, Wayland was frequently
tasked with covering on-call shifts and working
complex investigations including fraud,
narcotics sales, internet crimes against
children, and violent crimes. Wayland
frequently volunteered to represent MPD as a
motor officer in the monthly STOPP program
and rode a motor during several MPD special
events such as Car Week. Congratulations
Wayland!
P o l i c e S e r v i c e s T e c h n i c i a n
C a t i e M o n t a n t e
Catie was selected for being an exceptional
teammate who exemplifies reliability and a
commitment to excellence in every aspect of
her job. She consistently goes above and
beyond to provide exceptional service to MPD
staff or the public. She always maintains a
positive and selfless attitude even in the most
challenging circumstances. She is empathetic
with everyone she encounters, including
subjects booked into the MPD jail. Her
dedication to help her co-workers demonstrates
true teamwork. Congratulations Catie!
07 MPD Annual Report 2025
V O L U N T E E R O F T H E Y E A R
O f f i c e r D a v i d V a s a l e c h
David was selected for his service to the
community as a member of MPD Community
Action Team (CAT). As a CAT team member,
David frequently engaged with unhoused
individuals with compassion. He and other
members of CAT/MDOT were able to provide
both short term and long term assistance to
those in need such as buying them meals with
their own personal funds to securing long term
transitional housing. David also helped CAT to
organize and deliver toys to families in need
for the annual holiday toy drive.
Congratulations David!
R e s e r v e O f f i c e r M i c k E d e l e n
Since joining MPD as a reserve, Mick has
been an outstanding Reserve Officer. He
frequently volunteers to assist MPD in any
way that he can while maintaining a positive
attitude. Mick provides a wider range of
services to MPD including jail transports,
special event staffing, and assisting
investigations. He works well with all
divisions and is often one of the first to be
called when extra help is needed. Mick has
also become a drone pilot and he has
assisted MPD and outside agencies
numerous times with drone requests. Mick’s
selfless work ethic and positivity have
significantly assisted MPD in providing
exceptional service to the community.
Congratulations Mick!
DISTINGUISHED SERVICE
AWARDS
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 11, Packet Page 131 40,328 Monterey PD Calls for Service in 2025 1,220
Monterey PD Seaside PD Marina PD
Pacific Grove PD
CSUMB PD Del Rey Oaks PD Sand City PD Carmel-by-the-Sea 0 10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
40328
33583
25620
13577
5006
3191 2867 1220
1.CALLS FOR SERVICE
II. MPD
POLICE
SERVICE
2025 Monterey PD 40,328 33,583
2. DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY
Total Department
1 Includes total number of narrative reports, supplemental reports, arrests, field interview cards, citations. Seaside PD Marina PD 25,620 Pacific Grove PD 13,577 Total Department Activity
Narrative Reports
Supplemental Reports
Online Reports
Felony Arrests (Booked)
Misdemeanor Arrests (booked)
DUI Arrests
Citations
2 Parking Citations
Proactive Foot Patrols
Special Event Overtime (hours)
Sworn Officer Training
Narcan Administered (Opioid OD)
1 Carmel-by-the-Sea PD CSUMB PD 5,006 08
MPD Annual Report 2025 Sand City PD 2,867 Del Rey Oaks PD 3,191 2024
2 Hazard, Non-hazard, Administrative Citations.
2025
10,258
3,551 3,786
1,499 1,382
223 187
390 236
1,058 822
173 193
1,144 1,513
393 667
3,230
1,424 1,181
3,216 4,881
8 12
10,987
4,314
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 12, Packet Page 132 T R A F F I C U N I T ( 0 . 5 O F 3 A U T H O R I Z E D
M O T O R C Y C L E O F F I C E R S )
COMMUNITY ACTION TEAM-CAT
(STAFFING 3 OF 6 POSITIONS)
2024 2024 Traffic Stops 139 Hazardous Citations 76 285 Non-Hazardous Citations 37 Injury Collision Reports 12 Patrol Coverage Hours Arrests 113 Citations 129 Encampment Cleanups 453 MDOT Housed Persons 20 MDOT Services Provided 57 Community Outreach Meetings 41 Special Event Hours 276 Patrol Coverage (hours) 998
INVESTIGATIONS
(STAFFING 3 OF 6 POSITIONS)
2025 Assigned Cases 96 New Cases Assigned 192 Closed Cases 97 Arrests 62 Firearms Recovered 39 Lab Submissions 48 Search Warrants 130 DA Complaints Issued 34 2057MDOT Housed Persons
MDOT Services
Provided
Investigations Call-outs 19 09
MPD Annual Report 2025 202480 192 128421355 1273210 2025 111 168 52410 14794 270 1137 2025 388 313 437 13121 C O M M U N I T Y A C T I O N T E A M & I N V E S T I G A T I O N S
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 13, Packet Page 133
CONTEMPORARY
POLICING SOLUTIONS
MULTI-DISCIPLINARY OUTREACH TEAM (MDOT)
CAT and MPD officers offer services in every contact they make with persons who appear to be unhoused. MPD has collaborated with a myriad of agencies to address homelessness, domestic violence, substance abuse and other quality of life issues. This collaboration led to the creation of the MultiDisciplinary Outreach Team (MDOT) and includes the following meetings and personnel (all of the personnel have devoted office space at the MPD and work directly alongside MPD CAT staff):
TRANSPARENCY MPD webpage – annual reporting, monthly reporting, crime statistics, case & arrest booking logs, policies/procedures & training outlines, complaints & commendations, and media releases.
10 MPD Annual Report 2025 Homeless Exchange – a monthly meeting between the MPD Community Action Team and local social service providers.
City Liaison Group – a monthly meeting with multiple city department first line supervisors designed to address specific issues in the City of Monterey.
Adult Protective Services – a Monterey County social worker handles issues related to elderly or dependent adults.
Montage Health/CHOMP Community Outreach – a CHOMP social worker engages with people who are homeless or in danger of becoming homeless.
Monterey County Behavioral Health – A Monterey County crisis worker is available to handle calls or on-going problems related to individuals suffering from mental health-related issues.
Interim, Inc. – An Interim Outreach Counselor provides resources such as housing, residential treatment, social support and supported education and employment services for adults who have mental illnesses.
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 14, Packet Page 134 MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT’S
MULTI-DISCIPLINARY OUTREACH TEAM 11
MPD Annual Report 2025
TEAM DEVELOPMENT & PROBLEM SOLVING APPROACH
MDOT was developed in 2018 in response to concern about the number of unsheltered individuals in the City of Monterey. A collaborative, whole-of-community approach was necessary to get these individuals the help they need and services they deserve.
The approach also needed to be sustainable and comprehensive. MPD was accustomed to making frequent contact with individuals (over 500 contacts was not uncommon), but they were not used to connecting with social services and other agencies. Collaboration with community partners became a core element of MDOT’s work. Adult Protective Services and Montage Health became the first agencies to join MPD as members of MDOT. They created permanent desks for their employees at the police department.
Monterey County Behavioral Health, and Interim Incorporated’s MCHOME also became members, and each of them has a permanent desk at the police department where they can quickly and effectively respond to the needs of the unsheltered.
With trust in the community building, MDOT focused on sustainability of care for their clients. Historically, support services and police departments have little interaction between each other. That lack of communication between these agencies leads to difficulty in providing long-term support for those who need it. This led to the creation of a monthly meeting between MDOT and representatives from 14 other agencies known as the “Homeless Exchange.” This meeting allows organizations with knowledge and access to specialized resources to coordinate and provide comprehensive care for specific individuals.
MDOT also developed a recurring City Liaison meeting with first-line supervisors designed to give City departments the opportunity to share quality of life concerns that MDOT may be able to address.
A SUCCESS STORY
This case study showcases a significant success story born from the persistent efforts of the Monterey Police Department (MPD) and its dedicated Multi-Disciplinary Outreach Team (MDOT). It highlights the real impact that long-term collaboration, compassion, and community partnerships can have on one individual’s journey toward stability and support.
JANE DOE 0525 is a 43-year-old unhoused individual experiencing mental health challenges. Since 2019, MPD has documented over 40 contacts with her, involving a mix of law enforcement actions—such as arrests for disturbing the peace, indecent exposure, and possession of paraphernalia—as well as many outreach attempts to offer services and support.
Despite repeated refusals over the years, MDOT never gave up. Team members continued engaging DOE with empathy and consistency, slowly building trust through each encounter. These efforts laid the groundwork for what would become a turning point in her life.
MDOT identified a new housing opportunity for DOE. Thanks to the longstanding rapport built over years of outreach, DOE accepted the offer, a monumental step forward.
In preparation for her transition, Monterey Police staff went above and beyond: they assembled a new bed at the Shuman HeartHouse and personally purchased new clothes for DOE, helping ensure she felt welcomed and supported in her new environment.
On May 21, 2025, with the help of our partners at Community Human Services, MDOT successfully moved DOE into the Shuman HeartHouse.
There, MDOT Member Monica Morales can continue providing consistent support and help her maintain mental health treatment appointments—offering her a true chance at stability and recovery.
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 15, Packet Page 135 MPD
OUTREACH & NAVIGATION
CENTER
12 MPD Annual Report 2025
OUTREACH AND NAVIGATION CENTER
The MPD has also opened an Outreach and Navigation Center (Substation) located at 401 Camino El Estero. This dedicated space provides a collaborative workspace for MPD, MDOT, and other service providers and is an ideal location in close proximity to those in need of services. The MPD collaborated with the Central Coast Overdose Prevention coalition to install free Narcan dispensers at the substation, the MPD and the Transit Center to increase access to this lifesaving medication. Easy access to Narcan saves lives during an overdose when it can be administered immediately.
As these examples clearly demonstrate, the CAT team, MDOT and the Outreach and Navigation Center have made an immediate positive impact on the lives of vulnerable individuals in our community. The MPD will continue to embrace a proactive approach to preserving community safety and providing exceptional public service.
THE CHALLENGE CONTINUES
This case study highlights the challenges the MDOT Team encounters on a regular basis when working with individuals experiencing addiction and homelessness. While these challenges can present significant obstacles to long-term success, they do not deter the team from continuing their efforts to support individuals and make a lasting, positive impact on the community.
JOHN DOE 1225 is a 41-year-old unhoused individual struggling with alcohol addiction. Since 2016, the Monterey Police Department has documented 65 contacts with him, including 39 arrests related to alcohol-related violations.
Throughout those contacts, services and treatment options were offered numerous times, but they were consistently declined until December 2025.
At that time, DOE agreed to enter a residential rehabilitation facility. During his time in treatment, Monterey Police Department officers visited him to offer encouragement and to let him know they were proud of the steps he was taking toward recovery. DOE successfully completed the treatment program in early 2026, and there was optimism that he would continue forward on a sober and stable path.
However, addiction often involves setbacks. Shortly after completing the program, DOE was again found intoxicated and passed out in public, resulting in another arrest.
The MDOT Team understands that recovery is rarely a straight path. Setbacks like this are viewed not as failures, but as part of the ongoing challenge of addiction. The team remains committed to continuing outreach and offering services to DOE, with the hope that he will again choose treatment and move toward long-term recovery in the future.
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 16, Packet Page 136
MPD JAIL AND
RECORDS 13
MPD Annual Report 2025
JAIL INSPECTIONS
The Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) conducted the 2025 on-site inspection of the Monterey City Jail on March 19, 2025, to determine compliance with the minimum standards for local detention facilities, as outlined in Titles 15 and 24, pursuant to Penal Code Section 6031. The BSCC also conducted compliance monitoring pursuant to Welfare & Institutions Code Section 209(f) for the federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA). Additionally, local inspections by the County Health Officer and the State Fire Marshal were conducted in the following areas:
Nutritional Health (on 4/24/25)
Environmental Health (on 4/24/25)
Medical and Mental Health (on 4/24/25)
The BSCC, County Health Officer and State Fire Marshal determined the Monterey City Jail to be in compliance and no corrective actions required. 844
Monterey Police Services Technicians booked a
total of 844 subjects in 2025.
424
Police Services Technicians processed 424
informational reports, which include found/lost
property, found/lost animals, repossessed/towed
vehicles, and online reports.
Monterey Senior Police Services Technicians
3,590 booked 3,590 items of property in 2025.
subjects
booked
informational
reports
property booked
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 17, Packet Page 137 C R I M E A G A I N S T P E R S O N III. OFFENSE AND ARREST
SUMMARY REPORT
14 MPD Annual Report 2025 The Monterey Police Department utilized the National Incident Based Reporting System (NIBRS) and California Incident Based Reporting System (CIBRS) starting in March 2022.
483
C R I M E A G A I N S T P R O P E R T Y
855
C R I M E A G A I N S T S O C I E T Y
360
Rape Robbery Aggravated Assault Burglary
Larceny
2025 Offenses
Reported
Offense
Counterfeiting / Forgery
Fraud
Drug / Narcotic Violations
2 0 2 5 / 2 0 2 4 O F F E N S E R E P O R T I N G
Motor Vehicle Theft
Murder
Arson
Embezzlement
Vandalism
Simple Assault
M O N T E R E Y P O L I C E D E P A R T M E N T Total Offenses Group A Crime Rate per 100,000 Population Total Arrests Arrest Rate per 100,000 Population Hate Crime Offenses Law Officers Assaulted Summary based reporting Crime Rate per 100,000 Population
1,698 698 5989 2461.911116 1816.45 0
8 5970 332 234
261 30 180 161 14 151 Stolen Property 41 Weapons Law Violations 4019 2 0 2 5 2024 Offenses Reported
2 0 2 4 % C H A N G E
499 -3%
943
385
-9%
-6%
2 0 2 5 2 0 2 4 % C H A N G E 0
10187380 414 296
287 49 162 171 10 121 5235 1,827 784 6443.99 2197.4 9
22 2222.07 -7% -11% -7% 12% 22% -27% -18% % Change 0
-20% 6%-4% -26% -20% -21% -33% -9% -39% 11% -6% 40% 25% -21% 14%
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 18, Packet Page 138 T E N Y E A R T R A F F I C R E P O R T I N G 15
MPD Annual Report 2025 819 764 437
TRAFFIC REPORTING
COLLISIONS Injury Non Injury 2015 2016 0
186 223 633 614 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2024/2025 Change
2024/2025
% Change
TOTAL Fatal 0 2 1 1 1 3 1 0
231 221 215 122 124 159 +3 +2% 523 540 548 314 409 389 -64 -15% 837 756 762 536 549 -61 -11% DUI Arrest 221 219 192 171 191 111 150 261 -19 -10% Collision 54 52 42 49 69 32 56 62 +16 +28% 20230144 344 488 222 46 20242140 417 559 192 57 0
20252
143 353 498 173
73 ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 19, Packet Page 139
1. EQUITABLE JUSTICE AND
POLICING: THREE
INFLUENCING DIMENSIONS
TRANSPARENCY The vision statement and ethos of the MPD establish the foundation by which all of the Department’s staff operate.
The three influencing dimensions that support the Police Department’s efforts towards equitable justice and policing are as follows:
1- LEGAL MANDATES AND REQUIREMENTS OF CA Police Departments and police officers
In this dimension lies the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) and other legal
requirements such as legislative mandates. It is through these guidelines (some legally mandated, some best
practices) that the MPD ensures requirements for the hiring and continual training of personnel. 2- Constant Review of Best Policing Practices from across the country
Such as the six pillars of President Barack Obama's Task Force on 21st Century Policing, a benchmark document
released in 2015.
3 - Implementation of and accountability by the MPD and the community
This dimension involves analyzing, responding and assessing all of the aspects included in the other dimensions and ensuring implementation through policy, selection, training, accountability and constant review and update. A crucial aspect in this dimension is the interaction, relationship and input with and from the community.
Reinforced with self-awareness, policy, selection, training, supervision, leadership, accountability and review. IV. TRANSPARENCY 16 MPD Annual Report 2025
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 20, Packet Page 140
2.FORCE APPLICATION The MPD consistently reviews its policy to ensure it is in compliance with the law and best practices, primarily through new MPD (Lexipol) policy releases.
The following is a review of MPD policy (sections noted in parentheses) as outlined in POST Use of Force Standards and Guidelines, (2020) by California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST), which includes 21 standards as follows:
·Fair and unbiased policing (LE Code of Ethics; Vision; 100.5; 102.3; 300.2; 300.2.2; 313; 319.4; 319.5.3; 319.5.9(f))
·Alternatives to use of force - De-escalation & force alternatives (300.4.6; 300.3; 427.5; 427.6; 430.3)
·Application of Use of Force – Proportionality (300; 300.2; 300.3) ·Application of Use of Force – Approved methods and devices (300; 302; 303; 304; 305; 306)
·Application of Deadly Force (300; 300.5)
·Use of firearms – Draw/exhibit a firearm (300; 300.5.2; 321.2.2; 306) ·Use of firearms – Risk to bystanders (300; 300.5)
·Use of firearms – Vehicles (300; 300.5.1)
·Duty to Intervene (300; 300.2.1)
·Reporting potential excessive use of force (300.2.3)
·Duty to provide or procure medical assistance (300; 300.2; 300.7; 303.7.3; 304.7) ·Reporting use of force – Internal reporting & notification (300; 300.6; 321.2.2; 304.4; 303.11; 305.12)
·Supervisor’s responsibility – Supervisor review of force (300; 300.8; 301; 304.8) ·Use of Force Incident Review – Internal reporting and notification (300; 300.8; 301; 304; 305) – MPD Command review all Uses of Force.
·Policy availability to the public (300; 300.13)
·Policy review and update (300; 300.12)
·Procedures regarding citizen complaints (300; 300.11; 1010) ·Disclosure of public records related to the use of force (300; 300.14) ·Training requirements – Vulnerable populations (332; 336; 426; 427) ·Training requirements – Demonstrated knowledge and understanding (300; 300.9) ·Training requirements – Minimum training and course titles (300; 300.9) During 2025, there were a total of 40 separate Use of Force (UOF) incidents involving MPD members where officers used any level of force. This averages about 3.3 UOF incidents per month. The force used by officers throughout 2025 was nearly all physical force, including takedowns, control holds, body weight, and/or pain compliance techniques. As in previous years, this is the main type of UOF used by MPD officers and is considered the lowest level of force options. In 2025, there was 1 use of a CEW (Taser), 1 use of OC spray, 1 use of less lethal munitions (Pepperball), and the remaining incidents involved Physical Force.
Twenty-one suspects reported minor injuries during a UOF incident. The injuries included abrasions or bruising. One suspect complained of pain from the use of force. Eight officers sustained minor injuries during the 2025 UOF incidents.
Thirty-two of the 40 UOF incidents involved suspects who were either under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or showed signs of having mental health issues (or some combination of the three). The department received two citizen complaints related to the UOF incidents.
The MPD continues to train all sworn personnel in Crisis Intervention Training (CIT) to better assist individuals with mental health issues and in Integrating Communication, Assessment, and Tactics (ICAT) de-escalation. MPD also remains part of the One Mind Campaign sponsored by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP). This program encourages police agencies to adopt four “Pillars” of professional conduct and policies to ensure appropriate responses to individuals experiencing a mental health crisis. MPD is one of only 21 law enforcement agencies in California participating in this campaign (out of over 670 across the U.S.). Additionally, of the 21 California agencies that took the pledge, MPD is one of four to have fully completed it.
MPD continues to focus on the future by updating new technology, tactics, and procedures in the field of force options.
17 MPD Annual Report 2025
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 21, Packet Page 141
3.ICAT AND CIT-TRAINING Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) –Integrating Communications, Assessment, and Tactics (ICAT) is a training program designed to give officers a strong foundation in critical thinking as it relates to responding to crisis related incidents and potential use of force situations. ICAT has been designed to give officers the tools, skills and options to safely diffuse a wide variety of critical incidents that could potentially result in the use of force.
Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) training is hosted by Monterey County Behavioral Health Services. The 40-hour training is taught by behavioral health, law enforcement and advocacy group members. The training provides officers with tools to better understand common signs and symptoms of mental illness and co-occurring disorders; recognize when those signs and symptoms represent a crisis situation; safely de-escalate individuals experiencing behavioral health crises and utilize community resources and diversion strategies to provide assistance.
The Monterey Police Department has adapted
the ICAT training into a two-day course of
both classroom presentation and hands-on
scenario based learning. The officers are
trained in combining critical thinking,
communication, crisis intervention and tactics
into an integrated and systematic approach
when responding to potentially critical
incidents. The ultimate goal is to keep both the
public and officers as safe as possible. A full
day of scenario based training follows the
classroom instruction, where officers and
supervisors put the training into use in multiple
simulated crisis situations.
ICAT incorporates the tenants of DeEscalation: Strategies & Techniques for California Law Enforcement, (2020) by
California Commission on Peace Officer
Standards and Training (POST), and
Guiding Principles on Use of Force,
(2016) by the Police Executive Research
Forum (PERF).
ICAT utilizes the Critical Decision Making Model (CDM) 18 MPD Annual Report 2025
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 22, Packet Page 142
4.EQUIPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY 5. INTERNAL AFFAIRS The MPD equips officers with contemporary tools to complement the deescalation training officers receive. Examples include the Taser Conducted Energy Device, plexi-glass shields, less-lethal kinetic energy projectiles, and the “WRAP” safe restraint device.
In 2025, the police department upgraded all department-issued pistols with optic sights to remain contemporary with other law enforcement agencies and modern equipment standards.
The MPD went live with a new Records Management System in February 2024 and a new Jail Booking Management System in May 2024. Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) were installed throughout the city starting in November 2024. The ALPR's public transparency portal can be found at the MPD's website. E Q U I P M E N T T E C H N O L O G Y
The MPD has a specific policy and procedure for receiving, investigating, and responding to citizen complaints (MPD Policy 1010). In 2016, the MPD contracted with outside consultants to conduct most citizen complaints. The Chief of Police reviews all complaints and investigations related to the complaints for final disposition. Citizen complaints are reported to the Civilian Complaints Against Peace Officers (CCAPO) database at the California Department of Justice annually. All complaints that include allegations of serious misconduct per the Commission of Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Regulation 1205 are sent to POST for an additional review in accordance with California Penal Code 13510.9.
In 2025, the MPD conducted six internal affairs investigations involving sworn staff, which included one department-initiated investigation and five citizen complaints. The complaints included allegations of procedural concerns, bias-based policing, courtesy, force, and workplace discrimination. Of the six complaints, one was sustained, three were exonerated, and two were unfounded. In 2025, the MPD logged 40,328 calls for service; the six internal affairs complaints represent .01% of the logged calls for service.
19 MPD Annual Report 2025
6. ANNUAL MILITARY EQUIPMENT REPORTING
7. AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READER
(ALPR) SYSTEM
The MPD ALPR system was operational in December 2024. The MPD webpage includes a Flock camera transparency portal with information about the camera system, a map showing the camera locations, the MPD ALPR policy, and other relevant details. The MPD provides the Council with an annual update every April.
In 2025, the ALPR system proved to be an invaluable technological tool for providing leads, verifying information related to criminal investigations, recovering stolen vehicles and property, locating suspects wanted for violent crimes, and quickly resolving threats to the community.
Several cases highlight the benefits of this technology. During the Monterey Bay Half Marathon at 7:11 a.m., a subject contacted County Communications to report that he had an assault weapon and intended to shoot people on Del Monte. During the investigation, the ALPR system helped locate the suspect’s vehicle, and at 9:00 a.m., MPD officers found the suspect at an apartment on Park Avenue in Monterey. The suspect, from the Sacramento area, would not have been found without the ALPR system’s assistance. He was arrested, and a handgun was recovered from the arrest scene. A search warrant on his home in Sacramento County uncovered three illegal assault rifles and several other firearms. In another case involving a home invasion robbery on Victoria Rise, a resident interrupted two burglars who then attacked him, choking him unconscious. Home surveillance captured the suspects leaving, and a nearby ALPR camera quickly identified the suspect’s vehicle. Lastly, in an investigation involving a subject filming under teenage girls’ skirts on Cannery Row, the ALPR system confirmed that the suspect’s car was parked in the area at that time, strengthening the evidence against him and assisting in his arrest. The suspect was a registered sex offender.
On September 30, 2021, California Assembly Bill 481 (AB 481) was signed into law. California Government Code §§ 7070, 7071, and 7072 establish the requirements for law enforcement’s acquisition, use, and funding of “military equipment.” The bill mandated that law enforcement agencies seeking to continue using military equipment must obtain approval from their governing body. On April 19, 2022, the Monterey City Council approved MPD Policy 706 – Military Equipment and the Military Equipment Inventory with Ordinance 3649, which was codified in Monterey City Code § 27-10.
Government Code § 7072 requires law enforcement agencies to submit an annual military equipment report to their governing body for as long as the equipment is available for use. This has been done and approved by the council every April since 2022, most recently on April 1, 2025.
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 23, Packet Page 143
2.POST BASIC COURSE ACADEMY
(6 MONTHS)
COURSES INCLUDE:
Leadership, Professionalism & Ethics; Criminal Justice System; Policing in the Community; Victimology/Crisis Intervention; Introduction to Criminal Law; Property Crimes; Crimes Against Persons/Death Investigations; General Crime Statutes; Crimes Against Children; Sex Crimes; Juvenile Law and Procedure; Controlled Substances; Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) Law; Laws of Arrest; Search and Seizure; Presentation of Evidence; Investigative Report Writing; Vehicle Operations; Use of Force; Patrol Techniques; Vehicle Pullovers; Crimes in Progress; Handling Disputes/Crowd Control; Domestic Violence; Unusual Occurrences; Missing Persons; Traffic Enforcement; Traffic Collision Investigations; Crime Scenes, Evidence, and Forensics; Custody; Lifetime Fitness; Arrest and Control; First Aid, CPR, and AED; Firearms/Chemical Agents; Information Services; People with Disabilities; Gang Awareness; Crimes Against the Justice System; Weapons Violations; Hazardous Materials Awareness; Cultural Diversity/Discrimination; Emergency Management; Scenario Tests; and Comprehensive Tests
3. MPD FIELD TRAINING PROGRAM
(APPROXIMATELY 16 WEEKS)
(1) week orientation
Phase One – (4) weeks Field Training Officer (FTO) #1
Phase Two – (4) weeks FTO #2
Phase Three – (4) weeks FTO #3
Phase Four – (4) weeks FTO #1 (two weeks plain clothes) Daily Observation Reports (DOR) evaluations phase 1-4 completed by FTO Supervisor’s Weekly Report evaluations phase 1-4 – completed by FTO Sergeant
4. PROBATIONARY PERIOD
(18 MONTHS FROM BASIC COURSE ACADEMY)
Phase Five – Twice per month evaluations by Sergeant until one year point Phase Five – Monthly evaluations by Sergeant until completion of probation (18 months)
1.POLICE OFFICER SELECTION PROCESS
(APPROX. 60-90 DAYS)
Applicant submits an application, which includes: the POST Entry-level Law Enforcement Test Battery (PELLETB) Written Exam results and Work Sample Test Battery (WSTB) Physical Ability test results that are administered by police academies.
Monterey Human Resources and MPD staff schedule eligible candidates for an oralboard examination. The oral-board assesses: Experience; Problem Solving; Communication Skills; Interest/Motivation; Interpersonal Skills; and Community Involvement/Awareness.
If the candidate successfully passes the Oral-Board examination, a second oral interview is conducted with the candidate and MPD Command Staff.
Candidate Background Investigation (POST Background Investigation Manual) Candidates complete a Personal History Statement (PHS). The PHS is a 25-page questionnaire that is the basis for the background investigation regarding the candidate.
Fingerprints submitted to FBI and DOJ
Areas of investigation: Citizenship Verification; Age Verification; Criminal Records Checks – Local, State and National; Driving Record Check; Education Verification; Employment History Checks; Relatives/Personal References Checks; Dissolution of Marriage Check; Neighborhood Checks; Military History Check; Credit Records Check; Personal Information, Relatives and References, Education, Residence, Experience and Employment, Military Experience, Financial, Legal, Motor Vehicle Operation, Other Topics
Assessing: Integrity; Impulse Control/Attention to Safety; Substance Abuse and Other Risk-Taking Behavior; Stress Tolerance; Confronting and Overcoming Problems, Obstacles, and Adversity; Conscientiousness; Interpersonal Skills; Decision-Making and Judgment; Learning Ability; and Communication Skills.
Conditional Offer of Employment Psychological Evaluation Medical Evaluation V. MPD OFFICER HIRING & TRAINING - AN OVERVIEW 20 MPD Annual Report 2025
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 24, Packet Page 144 The MPD will prioritize staffing (Patrol, Traffic Enforcement, Community Action Team, Investigations, and Professional Staff) to deliver services at the community's desired levels.
In 2025, the MPD saw six sworn members leave for various reasons, including one who retired, one who was promoted from officer at the MPD to sergeant at the Sheriff’s Office, one who left law enforcement to move to a lower-cost area, and several who resigned for different reasons. The MPD hired ten sworn members during 2025 and still had three sworn vacancies at the end of the year.
In 2026, the MPD predicts that eight to ten officers will leave service, with two relocating to areas with a lower cost of living, six retiring, and other turnover expected. This presents significant challenges because it typically takes about 12 months to hire and train “street-ready” officers to fill these vacancies.
In 2026, the MPD will create new Sergeant and Lieutenant promotional lists to account for expected retirements from these ranks during the year.
The MPD will proactively address crime issues.
In 2025, the MPD responded to over 40,000 calls, booked more than 1,400 arrests, issued over 1,100 citations, processed over 3,500 items of property, conducted more than 3,200 foot patrols, administered NARCAN® for opioid overdoses 8 times, arrested 173 drunk drivers, and worked over 10,100 overtime hours, including more than 1,400 hours for special events.
During 2025, MPD Detectives were called out during non-business hours on 19 occasions and were assigned to conduct 192 investigations beyond what patrol officers investigate (death investigations, sexual assault, domestic violence, controlled substance, firearms investigations, financial crimes investigations, other serious assault cases, etc.).
The MPD is involved in cannabis coordination efforts alongside the City Manager’s Office and the Planning Office, and helped regulate the two cannabis businesses that opened in 2025.
In 2025, the Police Department managed 13 special events spanning 28 days and over 1,400 overtime hours of special event staffing. These events, such as the Monterey Jazz Festival, 4th of July Parade, Monterey County Fair, Car Week, Monterey Bay Half Marathon, and California Roots Festival, are covered by Police Department staff working overtime outside of their normal assignments.
The MPD will build on its success in community outreach through programs such as the community police academy, the CSO Intern Program, Coffee with a Cop, Active Shooter training, and ongoing attendance at community meetings.
In 2025, the Community Action Team (CAT) attended 41 community event meetings.
The MPD hosted the 2025 Community Police Academy, which spanned nine weeks from February to April. The MPD also provided presentations for the Monterey Anda Academy, the First City Academy, and the Monterey Way Academy.
The MPD participated in and provided presentations related to active attackers with the Community Hospital of Monterey, Monterey Peninsula Unified School District, Monterey Peninsula College, the Aquarium, Monterey County Office of Education, City of Monterey Departments, and other entities.
The MPD will use its comprehensive approach to address quality-of-life issues related to homelessness (CAT & MDOT).
In 2025, the MPD CAT/MDOT team abated more than 400 illegal encampments, provided direct services to unhoused individuals 57 times, made 113 arrests, issued 129 citations, conducted 67 hours of bike patrol, and successfully assisted 20 individuals in obtaining housing. While services declined on 101 occasions, the team continued to offer assistance at every opportunity, underscoring its commitment to engagement, compassion, and public safety.
VI. MPD ACCOMPLISHMENTS / PRIORITIES 2025 & 2026
21 MPD Annual Report 2025
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 25, Packet Page 145 The MPD will ensure the highest standards of professionalism through training, succession planning and officer safety & wellness (POST standards, professional organizations and training, CIT, ICAT, RISE).
In 2025, the MPD introduced two briefing training platforms designed to deliver information and training in a way that supports consistent reinforcement during daily shift briefings. One is called “The Briefing Room” and provides officers with updates on legislative changes and case law. The other, called “Ethicards,” provides discussion points related to ethical decision-making.
In 2026, the MPD will pursue accreditation through the California Police Chiefs Association's newly developed California Accreditation for Public Safety (CAPS) program. This is a major commitment and will take three years to complete.
The MPD will build trust & legitimacy; review & improve policy; utilize & enhance technology and social media; build strong community policing relationships & address crime issues; focus on contemporary training & education and officer wellness & safety.
VI. MPD ACCOMPLISHMENTS / PRIORITIES 2025 & 2026
22 MPD Annual Report 2025
The MPD continues to advocate for and research solutions to the aging infrastructure of the Public Safety Facility. The current building, constructed in 1959, houses the Police Headquarters, the Fire Administration, Downtown Fire Station 11, and the Emergency Operations Center (EOC).
A Central Public Safety Facility Study was completed in 2024 to evaluate a full rebuild, which was found to be a costly option. More affordable solutions need to be developed and documented, along with funding opportunities to address the worsening conditions. The MPD has reached a critical point regarding its facility’s operational capacity. To provide the necessary locker room space for personnel, several administrative offices have been repurposed, and internal adjustments have been made. The current locker facilities are at full capacity.
During 2026, the MPD will explore a strategic NCIP-funded reconfiguration and transition of various locations to try to use the same spaces differently until a permanent solution can be put in place.
Workforce safety and protection efforts have been ongoing. Gates for the exterior fence around the public safety campus were scheduled for installation in 2025, but various issues delayed the project, and the gates are now planned for early 2026.
The MPD will utilize, enhance, and leverage technological advances.
The MPD is researching AI technologies to help with report writing, which will improve the turnaround time for completing, reviewing, and releasing reports.
In 2026, the MPD will upgrade the police vehicle fleet with new mobile radios because the current radios are at the end of their lifespan, no longer supported, and incompatible with the latest technology developments.
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 26, Packet Page 146
LINE OF DUTY DEATHS
VII. WE WILL NEVER FORGET
OFFICER JAMES EDWARD COLLARD
SERGEANT DONALD HERBERT LANSING
OFFICER AMY ROGERS ALLEN RODRIGUEZ
SERGEANT DOUGLAS CHARLES HOLLEY
On April 20, 1969, Officer Collard was assigned to the
Traffic Division and working day shift on a police
motorcycle. He and Traffic Officer Allen Davidson
overheard a radio call of a boat in trouble in the water in front of the Monterey Beach Hotel. They were relatively close and they elected to respond. Upon Arrival they
found a boat had overturned in the water and there were several people needing immediate assistance in the water.
Officer Collard and Officer Davidson took off their belts and safety equipment and fearlessly dove into the water to rescue the victims. Tragically, Officer Collard
drowned. Officer Collard was the second Monterey Police Officer to die in the line of duty.
On May 4, 1971, Sergeant Lansing was attending a
scheduled department-wide shoot at the Fort Ord
military base. He left the range in his private vehicle, however was still on duty. While on Fort Ord property,
a large military truck accidentally struck Sergeant
Lansing's vehicle killing him instantly. Many of his
fellow officers and friends, who were also leaving the
firing range, came upon this tragic accident and
discovered that Sergeant Lansing had been killed.
Sergeant Lansing was the third Monterey Police Officer
killed in the line of duty.
Officer Amy Allen Rodriguez passed away on Monday,
April 4, 2016 after battling cancer for over a year. Amy was a fifteen year veteran of the Monterey Police
Department (MPD), being hired by the MPD in August
2000. During her tenure with the MPD, Officer Rodriguez selflessly touched thousands of people who lived, worked and visited Monterey while she was assigned as a patrol officer, detective and Field Training Officer.
Sergeant Doug Holley passed away on Friday, October
27, 2017 after battling cancer for several years. Doug
was a five year veteran of the Monterey Police
Department (MPD), being hired by the MPD in September
2012. Prior to becoming part of the MPD family, Doug
worked for the Stockton Police Department for over
seventeen years as an officer and sergeant assigned to
various assignments including patrol, gang investigations and SWAT. During his tenure with the MPD, Sergeant
Holley served the community of Monterey while he was
assigned as a patrol officer, Community Action Team
officer and a sergeant.
ALWAYS IN OUR HEARTS 23
MPD Annual Report 2025
OFFICER HONORE EDWIN PYBURN
On January 1, 1925, at approximately 0100 hours,
Officer Pyburn was responding to a disturbance. He
jumped onto the running board of a patrol vehicle driven by Officer Harry Elasho. As Officer Elasho rounded the
corner at Alvarado and Franklin, Officer Pyburn slipped from the running board and fell to the ground striking his head. He was transported to the hospital where he
succumbed to his injuries. Officer Pyburn was an Army
veteran who had worked as an MPD officer for a little
over a year. Officer Pyburn was the first Monterey Police Officer killed in the line of duty (special thanks to retired MPD Officer Adam Costa for researching this in 2024).
ATTACHMENT
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 16., Item Page 27, Packet Page 147 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
FROM: David J. Hober, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Receive Annual Report of the Police Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) System (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council Receive the Monterey Police
Department (MPD) Annual Report of the Police
Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) System.
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:
Receiving the Monterey Police Department Annual
Report of the Police Automated License Plate
Recognition (ALPR) System 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; drive innovation through technology and business
solutions that enhance productivity and effectiveness for staff, as well as customer service for the public;
transparent and inclusive government – foster a local
government that is transparent and collaborative; and
solicits, welcomes and appreciates input from all.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.
Agenda Report Highlights
• The Monterey Police Department
(MPD) has presented its second
annual report on the Automated
License Plate Recognition (ALPR)
system, covering the 2025 calendar
year.
• The MPD network currently includes
35 active stationary cameras, 6
pending installations, and 15 mobile
cameras mounted on patrol
vehicles.
• In 2025, the system captured
approximately 12,500 vehicles per
day and supported roughly 800
investigations, including robberies,
stolen vehicles, and missing
persons.
• Policy updates were implemented to
strengthen accountability by
requiring a "need and right to know"
for data access and expanding
mandatory training for system
operators.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 17.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 1, Packet Page 148 №12/25
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Receiving the Annual Report of the Police Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) system carries no fiscal impacts. Procurement of the system and the ongoing annual costs were approved by Council Action on September 17, 2024, under Resolution No. 24-148.
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 presentation of the Annual Report of the Police Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) system is conducted at the direction of the Council. However, it remains within the Council's discretion to decline acceptance of the report.
DISCUSSION:
Background
This report serves to comply with Council direction memorialized in MPD Policy 433.4.1 – Annual Reporting – Within one year of approval of the MPD ALPR system, and annually thereafter, the Chief of Police or the authorized designee will present an ALPR report to City Council related to the ALPR system, to include changes to the policy.
On April 2, 2024, the Council directed that the Monterey Police Department proceed with the implementation of an Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) program. On September 17, 2024, Council approved procurement and ongoing funding of the Flock Group, Inc., Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) system.
This is the second annual ALPR report, being presented on April 7, 2026, and covers the twelve-month period from January 1, 2025, to December 31, 2025. The inaugural ALPR Annual Report was presented on April 1, 2025, and encompassed the two-month period from December 12, 2024, when the system became operational, through February 28, 2025. The first annual ALPR report was presented in April 2025 to align with the MPD Annual Military Equipment Report and the MPD Annual Report, which are delivered each April. As a result, all three reports are provided simultaneously, offering a comprehensive overview.
The Monterey Police Department (MPD) has 35 active stationary cameras, with 6 pending installation, for a total of 41 cameras, and 15 mobile ALPR cameras outfitted in marked patrol vehicles. Monterey PD has a signed MPD ALPR Data Sharing Request and Agreement and is currently sharing its camera network with 11 agencies: Cal Fire, California State Parks, Carmel Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 2, Packet Page 149 №12/25
PD, Gilroy PD, Marina PD, Monterey County Sheriff’s Office, Monterey County District Attorney, Oakland PD, Pacific Grove PD, Seaside PD, and Watsonville PD. The MPD can access 245 ALPR networks statewide. The MPD does not share or access networks outside the state or with the federal government.
Per day, the MPD’s camera network captured approximately 12,500 vehicles. In 2025, MPD ALPR users conducted 5,889 searches across approximately 800 investigations. These investigations included robberies, burglaries, stolen vehicles, and missing persons. Major investigations made up the bulk of ALPR searches. For example, an armed robbery with a firearm had 151 searches (MPD25-00724). A home-invasion robbery involved 152 searches (MPD25-00874).
Changes to Policy
Two changes were made to Monterey Police Department Policy 433 – Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) - following the Council's request for adjustments to the policy at the April 1, 2025, presentation.
• Section 433.7(c) Accountability added the following language o (i.e., there must be a need and right to know)
• Section 433.10 Training, added the following language o That training shall encompass, at a minimum:
▪ Proper operation and use of the ALPR system
▪ Restrictions of use,
▪ Alert protocols,
▪ Authorized data collection and retention,
▪ Accountability,
▪ A review of the aspects contained in this Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) Policy to include the civil code law sections related to ALPR systems,
▪ And other aspects as determined by the ALPR Coordinator.
Audits
The annual Police Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) system audit was conducted for the period of 01-01-25 to 12-31-25 and provided to the City Attorney for review. The MPD Policy is among the most stringent, and already includes aspects that other agencies are moving toward, such as written sharing agreements and 30-day non-evidentiary deletion.
Internal Audits – MPD access
Over 1,000 internal MPD ALPR inquiries were audited, including several hundred per month.
Most searches reviewed were within policy. There were several occasions when officers conducted inquiries without including Case or CAD numbers; additionally, some “successes” were not flagged in the Mark 43 Records Management System. Those specific MPD staff were admonished to include Case or CAD numbers unless extenuating circumstances apply.
Network Audits – Outside agency access
In May of 2025, the Monterey Police Department (MPD) became aware of and began conducting “network audits,” which provide information on external agencies accessing the MPD network. During this audit, the MPD determined that a function known as “Statewide Look Up” was activated on the MPD system. A “Statewide Look Up” is an ALPR search that requires that a specific license plate be entered and is performed across Flock agencies statewide that have Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 3, Packet Page 150 №12/25
the feature enabled. If there is a result, the searching agency receives a limited amount of information from the host network, such as date, time, and location. The audit revealed that agencies without the MPD sharing agreement were able to perform the “Statewide Look Up” from December 2025 to June 4, 2026, when Flock disabled the feature at the MPD's direction.
While the MPD ALPR system was accessed through these “Statewide Look Up” searches, it is unknown whether any MPD data was returned, as the network audit shows hits for every statewide lookup performed.
When the MPD became aware of the “Statewide Look Up” feature, we also inquired about any other similar features, and Flock advised that there was a search feature known as “Nationwide Lookup”; however, Flock related that it was not activated on the MPD network. Additionally, California agencies were blocked from opting into Nationwide Lookup. Flock did relate that the Nationwide lookup allowed access to some federal agencies, including Homeland Security Investigations and U.S. Customs and Border Protection, during a pilot project that has since been discontinued.
MPD conducted an extensive network audit of tens of thousands of searches by outside agencies that included the MPD network through the statewide lookup. These searches were not focused on the Monterey network; they were broad searches that included the MPD network. It does not appear that searches were conducted by out-of-state or federal agencies, and none were found to list immigration or reproductive health as reasons for the searches.
There were several instances among the eleven agencies that have sharing agreements with the full MPD network in which they did not list specific case or CAD numbers. In those instances, the MPD sent emails to the agency and advised that case or CAD numbers were required for inquiries into the MPD system and that failure to do so would result in loss of access to the MPD ALPR network.
ALPR Investigative Assistance to the MPD
The following are examples of investigations that were aided by utilizing the Police ALPR system:
• Recovery of a stolen vehicle on Johnson Street.
• Investigating criminal threats on Wave Street.
• Investigating elder abuse and battery.
• Arrest and recovery of a stolen truck on Lighthouse.
• Arrests of two subjects for burglary of a residence.
• Arrests of two subjects for burglarizing ATMs from two businesses and possession of an assault rifle.
• Recovery of a stolen vehicle on Glenwood Circle.
• Investigation and identification of two suspects who committed a robbery with a firearm at the Monterey Dog Park, who were later arrested in the Sacramento area. • Recovery of a stolen vehicle on Glenwood Circle.
• Investigation of a home invasion robbery on Victoria Rise. A resident interrupted two burglars, who then attacked him, choking him unconscious. Home surveillance cameras captured the suspects leaving, and a nearby ALPR camera aided in the rapid identification of the suspect car.
• Investigation of a criminal threat and child endangerment case. ALPR cameras were used to track the suspect’s path of travel, which ultimately identified and confirmed the suspect's presence at the crime scene.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 4, Packet Page 151 №12/25
• Investigation of an armed robbery at Del Monte Beach. ALPR cameras were used to show that the suspect was at the scene and to corroborate statements. Three suspects were eventually identified and arrested.
• Investigation of a theft from a vehicle in which a suspect was identified and arrested. • Investigation into elder abuse and theft, in which a suspect was identified and arrested. • An investigation into possession of a controlled substance, in which a suspect was identified.
• An investigation of a subject filming up underaged girls skirts on Cannery Row. ALPR assisted in corroborating that the suspect’s car was parked in the area at the time. The suspect was a registered sex offender and was later arrested. • An arrest and recovery of a stolen vehicle.
• An investigation related to a fight and an assault with a deadly weapon with possible gang connections at the Monterey Fair, which aided in the arrest of several suspects. • An investigation into shoplifting on North Fremont, which led to the identification of a suspect.
• An investigation into a felony hit and run of a teenage pedestrian. A suspect vehicle was confirmed to be involved based on witness and the ALPR system. • An investigation related to a suspect who committed several burglaries on the peninsula and was located using the ALPR system. After his arrest, MPD Detectives recovered stolen property from a recent Monterey burglary in his vehicle. • An investigation into a hit and run with major injuries of a 70-year-old pedestrian at Pacific and Scott Street. The ALPR system led to the identification and apprehension of the suspect on the same day as the incident occurred.
• A death investigation related to an unhoused individual at the Monterey skate park, wherein the ALPR system aided in corroborating statements and identifying potential witnesses.
• During the Monterey Bay Half Marathon at 7:11 a.m. a subject called County Communications and advised that he was in possession of an assault weapon and was going to shoot people on Del Monte. During the course of the investigation, the ALPR system assisted in locating the suspect’s car and at 9:00 a.m., MPD officers located the suspect in an apartment on Park Avenue in Monterey. The suspect was from the Sacramento area and would not have been located without the assistance of the ALPR system. The suspect was arrested and a handgun was recovered from the location where he was arrested. A search warrant conducted on his home in Sacramento County resulted in locating three illegal assault rifles and multiple other firearms. • An investigation related to a domestic violence suspect who the MPD was able to locate utilizing the ALPR system.
• A suspect in a sexual assault case was identified and located with assistance from the ALPR system.
• A domestic violence suspect was located and arrested utilizing the ALPR system.
The successful implementation of Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) has significantly enhanced the Monterey Police Department's ability to ensure public safety and improve crimesolving efficiency. By providing real-time data and critical investigative leads, ALPR technology has proven to be an invaluable tool in addressing criminal activity and recovering stolen property. The continued use and refinement of this technology demonstrate the City’s commitment to leveraging innovative solutions to maintain a safe and secure community for all residents and visitors.
DJH/djh
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 5, Packet Page 152 №12/25
Attachments: 1. MPD Policy 433 – Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) 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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 6, Packet Page 153 Policy
433
Monterey Police Department
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/07/04, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) - 1
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
433.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this policy is to provide guidance for the capture, storage and use of digital data obtained through the use of Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) technology. 433.2 DEFINITIONS
• Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR): A device that uses cameras and computer technology to capture images of vehicle license plates and other vehicle data in order to identify and compare those captured digital images to lists of license plate numbers associated with Vehicles of Interest (as identified below). • ALPR Operator: A trained Department member authorized to utilize ALPR system/ equipment. ALPR operators may be assigned to positions identified in section 433.4.1(a) of this policy, and the ALPR Administrator may order the deployment of the ALPR systems for use in legitimate law enforcement efforts. • ALPR Administrator: The Investigations/Administrative Division Commander serves as the ALPR Administrator for the Department.
• Hot List: A list of license plates associated with Vehicles of Interest compiled from one or more databases including, but not limited to, NCIC, CA DMV, Local BOLO's, etc. • Vehicles of Interest: Including, but not limited to vehicles reported as stolen; vehicles displaying stolen license plates or tags; vehicles linked to missing and/or wanted persons and vehicles flagged by the Department of Motor Vehicles or law enforcement agencies.
• Detection: Data obtained by an ALPR of an image (such as a license plate) within public view that was read by the device, including potential images (such as the plate and description of vehicle on which it was displayed), and information regarding the location of the ALPR system at the time of the ALPR's read. • Hit: Alert from the ALPR system that a scanned license plate number may be in the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) or other law enforcement database for a specific reason including, but not limited to, being related to a stolen car, wanted person, missing person, domestic violation protective order, involved in a crime, or terrorist-related activity.
433.3 POLICY
The policy of the Monterey Police Department is to utilize ALPR technology to capture and store digital license plate data and images while recognizing the established privacy rights of the public.
All data and images gathered by the ALPR are for the official use of this department. Because such data may contain confidential information, it is not subject to public disclosure unless required by law.
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 7, Packet Page 154 Monterey Police Department
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/07/04, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) - 2
433.4 ADMINISTRATION
The ALPR technology, also known as License Plate Recognition (LPR), allows for the automated detection of license plates along with the vehicle make, model, color, and unique identifiers through the Monterey Police Department's ALPR system and vehicle identification technology. It is used by the Monterey Police Department to convert data associated with vehicle license plates and vehicle descriptions for official law enforcement purposes, including but not limited to identifying stolen or wanted vehicles, stolen license plates and missing persons. It may also be used to gather information related to active warrants, homeland security, plot movement of wanted suspects , suspect interdiction and stolen property recovery.
All installation and maintenance of ALPR equipment, as well as ALPR data retention and access, shall be managed by the ALPR Administrator. The ALPR Administrator will assign members under their command to administer the day-to-day operation of the ALPR equipment and data. 433.4.1 ALPR ADMINISTRATOR
The Administration Division Commander shall be assigned the role of ALPR Administrator and is responsible for ensuring compliance with the requirements of Civil Code § 1798.90.5 et seq. This includes, but is not limited to Civil Code § 1798.90.51; Civil Code § 1798.90.53:
(a) Only properly trained and specifically authorized Department members (sworn officers, analysts, police service technicians, police service assistants and community service officers) with an operational need to utilize the system are authorized to use or access the ALPR system or to collect ALPR information. (b) Ensuring that specific training requirements are established and that authorized users complete such training.
(c) Ensuring the security of the information and compliance with applicable privacy laws. (d) Ensuring that procedures are followed for system operators and maintaining records of access in compliance with Civil Code § 1798.90.52.
(e) Maintaining a list of the job title or other designation of the employees who are authorized to access and use ALPR information.
(f) Working with the Custodian of Records on the retention and destruction of ALPR data. (g) Ensuring this policy and related procedures are conspicuously posted on the department's website.
Annual Reporting - within one year of approval of the MPD ALPR system, and annually thereafter, the Chief of Police or the authorized designee will present an ALPR report to City Council related to the ALPR system, to include changes to the policy.
433.5 OPERATIONS
Use of an ALPR is restricted to the purposes outlined below. Department members shall not use, or allow others to use the equipment or database records for any unauthorized purpose (Civil Code § 1798.90.51; Civil Code § 1798.90.53).
(a) An ALPR shall only be used for official law enforcement business.
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 8, Packet Page 155 Monterey Police Department
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/07/04, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) - 3
(b) An ALPR may be used in conjunction with any routine patrol operation or criminal investigation. Reasonable suspicion or probable cause is not required before using an ALPR.
(c) While an ALPR may be used to canvass license plates around any crime scene, particular consideration should be given to using ALPR-equipped cars to canvass areas around homicides, shootings and other major incidents. Partial license plates reported during major crimes should be entered into the ALPR system in an attempt to identify suspect vehicles.
(d) No member of this department shall operate ALPR equipment or access ALPR data without first completing department-approved training.
(e) No ALPR operator may access department, state or federal data unless otherwise authorized to do so.
(f) The officer will verify an ALPR response through the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) or dispatch before taking enforcement action that is based solely on an ALPR alert.
(g) Login/Log-Out Procedure. To ensure proper operation and facilitate oversight of the ALPR system, all users will be required to have individual credentials for access and use of the systems and/or data, which has the ability to be fully audited. (h) Permitted/Impermissible Uses. The ALPR system, and all data collected, is the property of the Monterey Police Department. Department personnel may only access and use the ALPR system for official and legitimate law enforcement purposes consistent with this Policy. The following uses of the ALPR system are specifically prohibited:
1. Invasion of Privacy: Except when done pursuant to a court order such as a search warrant, it is a violation of this policy to utilize the ALPR to record license plates except those of vehicles that are exposed to public view (e.g., vehicles on a public road or street, or that are on private property but whose license plate(s) are visible from a public road, street, or a place to which members of the public have access, such as the parking lot of a shop or other business establishment).
2. Harassment or Intimidation: It is a violation of this policy to use the ALPR system to harass and/or intimidate any individual or group.
3. Use Based on a Protected Characteristic. It is a violation of this policy to use the ALPR system or associated scan files or Hot Lists solely because of a person's, or group's race, gender, religion, political affiliation, nationality, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, or other classification protected by law.
4. Personal Use: It is a violation of this policy to use the ALPR system or associated scan files or Hot Lists for any personal purpose.
5. First Amendment Rights. It is a violation of this policy to use the ALPR system or associated scan files or Hot Lists for the purpose or effect of infringing upon First Amendment rights.
Anyone who engages in an impermissible use of the ALPR system or associated scan files or Hot Lists may be subject to; criminal prosecution, civil liability, and/or administrative sanctions, ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 9, Packet Page 156 Monterey Police Department
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/07/04, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) - 4
up to and including termination, pursuant to and consistent with the relevant collective bargaining agreements and City and Department policies.
433.5.1 ALPR ALERT PROTOCOLS
Once an alert is received, the operator will confirm that the observed license plate from the system matches the license plate for the observed vehicle. Before any law enforcement action is taken because of an ALPR alert, the alert will be verified through a CLETS inquiry via MDC or through Dispatch.
Officers will not take any police action that restricts the freedom of any individual based solely on an ALPR alert unless it has been validated. Because the ALPR alert may relate to a vehicle and may not relate to the person operating the vehicle, officers are reminded that they need to have reasonable suspicion and/or probable cause to make an enforcement stop of any vehicle. (For example, if a vehicle is entered into the system because of its association with a wanted individual, officers should attempt to visually match the driver to the description of the wanted subject prior to making the stop or should have another legal basis for making the stop.) Hot Lists. Designation of Hot Lists to be utilized by the ALPR system shall be made by the ALPR Administrator or his/her designee. Hot lists shall be obtained or compiled from sources as may be consistent with the purposes of the ALPR system set forth in this policy. Hot Lists utilized by the Department's ALPR system may be updated by agency sources more frequently than the Department may be uploading them and thus the Department's ALPR system will not have access to real time data. Occasionally, there may be errors in the ALPR system's read of a license plate.
Therefore, an alert alone shall not be a basis for police action (other than following the Vehicle of Interest).
Prior to initiation of a stop of a vehicle or other intervention based on an alert, Department members shall undertake the following:
(a) Verification of status on a Hot List. An officer must receive confirmation, from Communications or other department computer device, that the license plate is still stolen, wanted, or otherwise of interest before proceeding (absent exigent circumstances).
(b) Visual verification of license plate number. Officers shall visually verify that the license plate of interest matches identically with the image of the license plate number captured (read) by the ALPR, including both the alphanumeric characters of the license plate, state of issue, and vehicle descriptors before proceeding. (c) Department members alerted to the fact that an observed motor vehicle's license plate is entered as a Hot Plate (hit) in a specific BOLO (Be On The Lookout) list are required to make a reasonable effort to confirm that a wanted person is actually in the vehicle and/or that a reasonable basis exists before a Department member would have a lawful basis to stop the vehicle.
Department members will clear all vehicle stops from Hot List alerts by indicating the positive ALPR Hit, i.e., with an arrest or other enforcement action. If it is not obvious in the text of the call as to the correlation of the ALPR Hit and the arrest, then the Department member shall update ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 10, Packet Page 157 Monterey Police Department
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/07/04, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) - 5
Communications and the original person and/or the system administrator inputting the vehicle in the Hot List (hit).
General Hot Lists (Stolen Vehicle System - SVS, Felony Wanted Vehicles - SFR, and Lost or Stolen License Plates - SLR) will be automatically downloaded into the ALPR system a minimum of once a day with the most current data overwriting the old data.
All entries and updates of specific Hot Lists within the ALPR system will be documented by the requesting Department member within the appropriate general offense report. As such, specific Hot Lists shall be approved by the ALPR Administrator (or designee) before initial entry within the ALPR system. The updating of such a list within the ALPR system shall thereafter be accomplished pursuant to the approval of the Department member's immediate supervisor. The hits from these data sources should be viewed as informational, created solely to bring the officers attention to specific vehicles that are suspected to have been associated with criminal activity.
All Hot List license plate numbers and suspect information entered into the ALPR system will contain the following information as a minimum:
• Entering Department member's name
• Related case number
• Short synopsis describing the nature of the originating call In the event the suspect vehicle or an occupant commits a violation of the law then the vehicle can be stopped or the occupants detained as in any other lawful stop or arrest.
When an ALPR alerts on a stolen vehicle for a non-sworn professional staff member, the employee shall pull over in a safe location and use the radio to alert an officer to the vehicle's location. At no time shall a professional staff member take any action with the vehicle or any occupants. 433.6 DATA COLLECTION AND RETENTION
The Administration Division Commander is responsible for ensuring systems and processes are in place for the proper collection and retention of ALPR data.
All non-evidentiary ALPR data and license plate information records, not associated with any case report, investigation, complaint or citation, shall be downloaded to the server or cloud and stored for a maximum of 30 days. Thereafter, it shall be entirely purged from all active and backup systems. Evidentiary ALPR data shall be tagged with a case report or citation number and be retained for the same length of time as other evidence relevant to the case in accordance with the Records Retention Schedule.
The ALPR 3rd party vendor will store the data (data hosting) and ensure proper maintenance and security of data stored in their data towers. The ALPR vendor will purge their data at the end of the 30 days of storage. However, this will not preclude the Monterey Police Department from maintaining any relevant vehicle data obtained from the system after that period pursuant to the retention period set forth above for evidentiary and non-evidentiary data. Relevant vehicle data are scans corresponding to the Vehicle of Interest on a Hot List.
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 11, Packet Page 158 Monterey Police Department
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/07/04, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) - 6
Restrictions on use of ALPR Data: Information gathered or collected, and records retained by ALPR cameras or any other MPD ALPR system will not be sold, accessed, or used for any purpose other than legitimate law enforcement or public safety purposes. The release of necessary data to the City's authorized 3rd party vendor or to towing services shall not be considered the sale, sharing, or transferring of ALPR information.
433.7 ACCOUNTABILITY
All data will be closely safeguarded and protected by both procedural and technological means.
The Monterey Police Department will observe the following safeguards regarding access to and use of stored data (Civil Code § 1798.90.51; Civil Code § 1798.90.53):
(a) All ALPR data downloaded to the mobile workstation and in storage shall be accessible only through a login/password-protected system capable of documenting all access of information by name, date and time (Civil Code § 1798.90.52). (b) All access to ALPR will be maintained in an audit trail, including the date and time the information was accessed, the license plate number or other data used to query the system, the username of the person who accessed the information and the purpose for accessing the information.
(c) Members approved to access ALPR data under these guidelines are permitted to access the data for legitimate law enforcement purposes only (i.e. there must be a need and right to know), such as when the data relate to a specific criminal investigation or department-related civil or administrative action. (d) All non-law enforcement requests for access to stored ALPR data shall be referred to Administration Division Commander and processed in accordance with applicable law. (e) Such ALPR data may only be released to other authorized and verified law enforcement officials and agencies for legitimate law enforcement purposes consistent with the law and these policies.
(f) No entry of "Hot Lists" or other data may be entered in to the ALPR database without supervisor approval.
(g) Every ALPR Detection Browsing Inquiry must be documented with the associated Monterey Police Department case number or incident number. A specific reason for the inquiry will only be entered when, due to extenuating circumstances, there is no case or incident number.
For security or data breaches, see the Records Release and Maintenance Policy. 433.8 ALPR DATA AUDITS
It is the responsibility of the Administration Division Commander or designee to ensure that an audit is conducted of ALPR detection browsing inquiries at least once during each calendar year.
The Department will audit a sampling of the ALPR system utilization from the prior 12-month period to verify proper use in accordance with the above-authorized uses. The audit shall randomly select at least 10 detection browsing inquiries conducted by department employees during the ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 12, Packet Page 159 Monterey Police Department
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/07/04, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) - 7
preceding twelve-month period and determine if each inquiry meets the requirements established in the "Accountability" policy section.
The audit shall be documented in the form of an internal department memorandum to the Chief of Police. The memorandum shall include any data errors found so that such errors can be corrected.
After review by the Chief of Police, the memorandum will be forwarded and reviewed by the City Attorney. The memorandum and any associated documentation shall be filed and retained by the Administration Division Commander.
433.9 RELEASING ALPR DATA
The ALPR data may be shared only with other law enforcement or prosecutorial agencies for official law enforcement purposes or as otherwise permitted by law, using the following procedures:
(a) The agency makes a written request for the ALPR data that includes:
1. The name of the agency.
2. The name of the person requesting.
3. The intended purpose of obtaining the information.
(b) The request is reviewed by the Administration Division Commander or the authorized designee and approved before the request is fulfilled.
(c) The Administration Division Commander or the authorized designee will consider the California Values Act (Government Code § 7282.5; Government Code § 7284.2 et seq), before approving the release of ALPR data. The Monterey Police Department does not permit the sharing of ALPR data gathered by the City or its contractors/subcontractors for purpose of federal immigration enforcement, these federal immigration agencies include Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Patrol (CPB). The MPD will not share ALPR information with out-of-state or federal agencies, including out-of-state and federal law enforcement agencies. Nor will ALPR data be shared with any law enforcement agency for the purposes of enforcing prohibitions on reproductive or gender-affirming care. (d) The approved request is retained on file.
Requests for ALPR data by non-law enforcement or non-prosecutorial agencies will be processed as provided in the Records Maintenance and Release Policy (Civil Code § 1798.90.55). 433.10 TRAINING
The Personnel/IA Sergeant (Training) shall ensure that members receive department-approved training for those authorized to use or access the ALPR system (Civil Code § 1798.90.51; Civil Code § 1798.90.53). That training shall encompass, at a minimum:
• Proper operation and use of the ALPR system,
• Restrictions of use,
• Alert protocols,
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 13, Packet Page 160 Monterey Police Department
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2025/07/04, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) - 8
• Authorized data collection and retention,
• Accountability,
• A review of the aspects contained in this Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) Policy to include the civil code law sections related to ALPR systems, • And other aspects as determined by the ALPR Coordinator.
ATTACHMENT 1
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 17., Item Page 14, Packet Page 161 Council
Agenda Report
№12/25
FROM: David J. Hober, Chief of Police
Prepared By: Michael Bruno, Assistant Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Receive Annual Report and Renew the Military Equipment Purchase and Use Ordinance – Monterey City Code, Chapter 27, Article 3, Section 27-10 (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council find that the military equipment
identified in the Monterey Police Department’s Annual
Military Equipment Report has complied with the
standards for approval set forth in the Military Equipment Use Policy; MPD Policy 706 – Military Equipment and
the Military Equipment Inventory and renew the Military Equipment Purchase and Use Ordinance – Monterey
City Code, Chapter 27, Article 3, Section 27-10.
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.
Develop and retain a quality workforce by providing
sufficient resources and support to develop, retain, and recruit a high-quality city workforce.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Renewing an ordinance in compliance with state
legislation related to the City’s Police Department
acquisition and use of military equipment and the related MPD policy 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; prepare for emergencies and community resiliency; recognize that our workforce
Agenda Report Highlights
• The Monterey Police Department
(MPD) is seeking City Council
approval of its Annual Military
Equipment Report and the renewal
of the Military Equipment Purchase
and Use Ordinance.
• The report details the inventory,
usage, and costs of specific
equipment used for de-escalation
and life-saving purposes.
• The MPD intends to add two
specialized pick-up trucks or SUVs
to its inventory to serve as
dedicated command vehicle
platforms for managing critical
incidents and natural disasters.
• Each fully outfitted command
vehicle is estimated to cost
$150,000, with funding to be
requested through existing funds.
• Although some inventory is
classified as "military equipment"
under state law, the MPD does not
possess any equipment obtained
through federal military surplus
programs.
Date: 4/7/2026
Item No.: 18.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 1, Packet Page 162 №11/25
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.
CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT (LEVINE ACT) APPLIES: No.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The financial considerations for the Department’s existing inventory are listed in the attached Annual Military Equipment Report (May 2025 to May 2026). These recurring costs are funded through the existing Police Department operating budget, unless otherwise noted.
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:
Without Council approval, the Police Department’s ability to respond to critical incidents would be greatly diminished and would be detrimental to the safety of the public, involved parties, and public safety officers, and would increase the City’s risk exposure.
DISCUSSION:
On September 30, 2021, California Assembly Bill 481 (AB 481) was signed into law. California Government Code §§ 7070, 7071, and 7072 codify the requirements established by AB 481 for law enforcement’s acquisition, use, and funding of “military equipment.” The information presented in this agenda report explains the Police Department’s compliance with the requirements of AB 481.
Initial approval – April 19, 2022
In enacting AB 481, the Legislature stated that the public has a right to know about any funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment by state or local government officials to increase transparency, accountability, and oversight. The same applies to the public’s right to participate in any government agency’s decision to fund, acquire, or use such equipment.
The bill required law enforcement agencies that seek to continue the use of military equipment acquired prior to January 1, 2022, to receive approval from their governing body prior to May 1, 2022.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 2, Packet Page 163 №11/25
On April 19, 2022, the Monterey Police Department provided a council report and presentation related to Assembly Bill 481, MPD Policy 706 – Military Equipment, and requested the creation of the Military Use and Purchase Ordinance. The Monterey City Council approved MPD Policy 706 – Military Equipment and the Military Equipment Inventory with Ordinance 3649 on April 19, 2022.
Annual Military Equipment Report – Every Year in April
Government Code § 7072 requires law enforcement agencies that received approval for their military equipment use policy, to submit to their governing body an annual military equipment report for each type of military equipment approved by the governing body within one year of approval, and annually thereafter for as long as the military equipment is available for use.
The governing body shall annually review the Military Equipment Purchase and Use Ordinance and vote on whether to renew the ordinance at a regular meeting. During its review, the governing body shall consider the annual report and determine whether each type of military equipment has complied with specified standards for approval. Specifically, pursuant to Government Code section 7071(e)(2), the City Council may only approve the renewal of the ordinance if it determines:
(1) The military equipment is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety. (2) The proposed military equipment use policy will safeguard the public's welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.
(3) If purchasing the equipment, the equipment is reasonably cost effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety. (4) Prior military equipment use complied with the military equipment use policy that was in effect at the time, or if prior uses did not comply with the accompanying military equipment use policy, corrective action has been taken to remedy nonconforming uses and ensure future compliance.
May 2022 and Each Subsequent Year
The City Council renewed the Military Equipment Purchase and Use Ordinance – Monterey City Code, Chapter 27, Article 3, Section 27-10 in April 2022 and each subsequent year.
May 2025 to May 2026
The Monterey Police Department’s Annual Military Equipment Report (May 2025 to May 2026) is attachment 3 to this Agenda.
Prior to the presentation of this year’s report, the Monterey Police Department hosted a Community Town Hall on March 9, 2026, at the Monterey City Council Chambers. To ensure maximum accessibility, the meeting was streamed live via Zoom and AMP. The event was promoted through a media release, the City and Police Department websites, and various social media platforms.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 3, Packet Page 164 №11/25
Public participation included one in-person attendee and a pre-meeting inquiry regarding military equipment. The caller expressed support for the department’s equipment needs but shared concerns regarding uniform identification. To clarify, Monterey Police Department personnel wear clearly marked uniforms featuring a nametag, badge, and dual department patches to ensure high visibility and accountability.
Background Information Related to the Equipment
The primary purpose of all equipment purchased by the Police Department is to save civilian lives, protect law enforcement personnel, reduce the risk for the City, and enhance public safety. Some of the items designated by AB 481 as “military equipment” have been in our Police Department’s equipment inventory for many years. Monterey Police Department policies and procedures govern the use, safe handling, storage, and qualification of the specified equipment.
Much of the equipment is part of the de-escalation process of Integrating Communications, Assessment, and Tactics (ICAT), which involves continuously evaluating the situation to attempt other techniques. The equipment may be used to create cover and distance, allowing more time for decision-making. This allows the use of less-lethal tactics as part of a range of options to resolve a critical incident without using deadly force. These things allow officers to take in and constantly evaluate the totality of the circumstances, resulting in increased safety and reduced risk for everyone involved.
In addition, the California Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) requirements for the operation and deployment of this equipment are managed by the Police Department’s Training Unit. As new tools are deployed, POST, internal training, vendor-provided training, or crosstraining among surrounding law enforcement agencies are implemented appropriately.
The MPD has leveraged federal and state grants and asset forfeiture programs, including the Bullet Proof Vest Grant, Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant, Citizens’ Option for Public Safety Grant, State Homeland Security Grant, and Urban Areas Security Initiative Grant, to acquire the equipment described. The federal government also offers what is commonly known as the “1033 Program” to provide surplus military equipment to law enforcement agencies. That being said, the MPD has not applied for or received designated military equipment through the 1033 Program, and it does not possess any equipment that it has obtained from the military.
Regardless, some of MPD’s equipment qualifies as “military equipment” under the broad language of the 16 categories defined by Government Code § 7070.
Monterey Police Department Policy 706 - Military Equipment The Police Department’s policy manual (structured on the Lexipol policy manual framework) addresses the appropriate use and deployment of military equipment. Specifically, MPD Policy 706 – Military Equipment addresses the law's required parameters. AB 481 requires law enforcement to publicly release a written policy document governing the use of military equipment. The Monterey City Council approved MPD Policy 706 by way of Monterey City Ordinance 3649, and the policy is posted on the Police Department’s webpage.
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 4, Packet Page 165 №11/25
The approved Military Equipment Use Policy (Policy 706 – Military Equipment) is Attachment 2 to this report. This policy includes an inventory of all qualifying equipment as an attachment, divided into three sections and described in more detail below:
Section One – Qualifying equipment owned/utilized by the Monterey Police Department. (California Government Code § 7070(c))
Section Two – Qualifying equipment owned/utilized by law enforcement agencies, the MPD collaborates and/or participates with as part of the Monterey Peninsula Special Response Unit (MPRSRU). (California Government Code § 7071(a)(1)(d))
Section Three – Government Code § 7072(a) requires that the MPD indicate whether it intends to acquire additional military equipment in the next year and the quantity sought. Here, the MPD intends to acquire:
o Two (2) pick-up trucks or SUV vehicles to serve as a dedicated command vehicle platform.
o Costs - $150,000 for each fully outfitted vehicle. Funding will be requested through the budgetary vehicle replacement fund. Annual fuel and maintenance costs are approximately $15,000. Note that this agenda item does not authorize the purchase of these vehicles. Rather, this action approves these vehicles as authorized military equipment under MPD Policy 706.
o Purposes and authorized use: Unlike standard patrol vehicles, these vehicles are specifically configured to support the Incident Command System (ICS) during critical incidents, natural disasters, and high-risk operations. They provide a centralized, weather-protected environment where an Incident Commander or Watch Commander can effectively manage resources, maintain a strategic overview of the scene, and coordinate multi-agency responses. The acquisition of these vehicles aligns with established public safety standards and mirrors the operational capabilities currently used by the Fire Department's Battalion Chiefs to manage fire ground operations.
Field supervisors are required to carry a significantly higher volume of specialized equipment than standard patrol officers, including tactical breaching tools, extended medical kits, rigorous protective equipment, and incident management boards. The proposed utility platform provides sufficient payload and cargo capacity to safely store and organize this essential gear, ensuring it is immediately accessible upon arrival. A standard patrol vehicle lacks the physical space to accommodate this load-out without compromising the vehicle's safe operation or the supervisor's rapid deployment.
A critical component of this command vehicle is its enhanced communications suite, designed to bridge the gap between field units and dispatch during chaotic events. The vehicle will be upfitted with additional radio transceivers and command infrastructure, allowing the supervisor to monitor and transmit across multiple frequencies, including tactical channels, mutual aid frequencies, and Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 5, Packet Page 166 №11/25
fire/EMS operational channels. This capability is vital for ensuring seamless interoperability and officer safety during complex incidents. o Rules that govern use: MPD Policy 703 – Vehicle Use.
o Required training: No additional training is required to operate the vehicle.
Monterey Police Department Annual Military Equipment Report (May 2025 to May 2026) The Monterey Police Department Annual Military Equipment Report (May 2025 to May 2026) is Attachment 3 to this report. This report includes an attachment with an inventory of all qualifying military equipment, which mirrors the inventory in MPD Policy 706 – Military Equipment, but expands to report on the previous year, as described below.
Annually, the Police Department will prepare and present to the City Council an annual Military Equipment report and post it on the Police Department’s website within 30 days of the City Council meeting, where the following items are reviewed:
• The quantity possessed for each type of military equipment as of the date of the annual report;
• Summary of how the military equipment was used and the purpose of its use; • Summary of any concerns or complaints received involving the use of military equipment;
• The results of any internal audits, any information about violations of the military equipment use policy, and any actions taken in response; • Total annual cost of each type of military equipment, including acquisition, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrade, and other ongoing costs; and, • Acquisition plans (including the source of funds) for the coming year, type, and quantity.
DJH/mb
Attachments: 1. Resolution
2. MPD Policy 706 – Military Equipment
3. Monterey Police Department Annual Military Equipment Report (May 2025 to May 2026)
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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 6, Packet Page 167 RESOLUTION NO. __-___ C.S.
A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY
№011/24
RECEIVE ANNUAL REPORT AND RENEW THE MILITARY EQUIPMENT PURCHASE AND USE ORDINANCE – MONTEREY CITY CODE, CHAPTER 27, ARTICLE 3, SECTION 27-10 WHEREAS, the Monterey City Council approved the Monterey Police Department Policy 706 – Military Equipment and the Military Equipment Inventory with Ordinance 3649 on April 19, 2022 and renewed each subsequent year; and
WHEREAS, the Monterey Police Department’s Annual Military Equipment Report complies with the standards for approval set forth in the Military Equipment Use Policy; MPD Policy 706 – Military Equipment and Military Equipment Inventory, and California Government Code Sections 7070, 7071, and 7072 for law enforcement’s acquisition, use, and funding of “military equipment”; and
WHEREAS, Government Code § 7072 requires law enforcement agencies that received approval for their military equipment use policy, to submit to their governing body an annual military equipment report for each type of military equipment approved by the governing body within one year of approval, and annually thereafter for as long as the military equipment is available for use. The governing body shall review the Military Equipment Purchase and Use Ordinance and vote on whether to renew the ordinance at a regular meeting. During its review, the governing body shall consider the annual report and determine whether each type of military equipment has complied with specified standards for approval; and WHEREAS, the primary purpose of all equipment purchased by the Police Department is to save civilian lives, protect law enforcement personnel, reduce the risk for the City and enhance public safety. Some of the items designated by AB 481 as “military equipment” have been in our Police Department’s equipment inventory for many years. Monterey Police Department policies and procedures govern the use, safe handling, storage, and qualification of the specified equipment. Much of the equipment is part of the de-escalation process of Integrating Communications, Assessment, and Tactics (ICAT), which involves continuously evaluating the situation to attempt other techniques. The equipment may be used to create cover and distance and allow more time for decision-making processes. This allows the use of less-lethal tactics as part of a range of options to resolve a critical incident without using deadly force. These things allow officers to take in and constantly evaluate the totality of the circumstances, resulting in increased safety and reduced risk for everyone involved; WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 7071(e)(2), the City Council has determined that:
(1) The military equipment is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety. (2) The proposed military equipment use policy will safeguard the public's welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.
(3) If purchasing the equipment, the equipment is reasonably cost effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety. (4) Prior military equipment use complied with the military equipment use policy that was in effect at the time, or if prior uses did not comply with the accompanying military Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 7, Packet Page 168 equipment use policy, corrective action has been taken to remedy nonconforming uses and ensure future compliance; and.
WHEREAS, the City of Monterey determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines), Article 20, Section 15378). In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project.
Because the matter does not cause a direct or any reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change on or in the environment, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that the above recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as if fully set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MONTEREY that it hereby renews the Military Equipment Purchase and Use Ordinance – Monterey City Code, Chapter 27, Article 3, Section 27-10.
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, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 8, Packet Page 169 Policy
706
Monterey Police Department
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/03/13, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department ***DRAFT*** Military Equipment - 1 Military Equipment
706.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This policy governs the use of military equipment, as defined in Government Code § 7070, as may be amended. The Monterey Police Department (MPD) and its members will comply with provisions of Government Code §§ 7071, 7072, and with otherwise applicable department policies, with respect to military equipment.
706.1.1 DEFINITIONS
This policy adopts the following definitions set forth in Government Code § 7070 (c)(1) through § 7070 (e)(16) as may be amended or superseded:
Governing body – The elected or appointed body that oversees the Department.
Military equipment –
1. Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered aerial or ground vehicles.
2. Mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles or armored personnel carriers.
However, police versions of standard consumer vehicles are specifically excluded from this subdivision.
3. High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV), commonly referred to as Humvees, two-and-one-half-ton trucks, five-ton trucks, or wheeled vehicles that have a breaching or entry apparatus attached.
4. Tracked armored vehicles that provide ballistic protection to their occupants and utilize a tracked system instead of wheels for forward motion.
5. Command and control vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units.
6. Weaponized aircraft, vessels, or vehicles of any kind.
7. Battering rams, slugs, and breaching apparatuses that are explosive in nature.
However, items designed to remove a lock, such as bolt cutters, or a handheld ram designed to be operated by one person, are specifically excluded from this subdivision.
8. Firearms of.50 caliber or greater. However, standard issue shotguns are specifically excluded from this subdivision.
9. Ammunition of.50 caliber or greater. However, standard issue shotgun ammunition is specifically excluded from this subdivision.
10. Specialized firearms and ammunition of less than_.50 caliber, including assault weapons as defined in sections § 30510 and § 30515 of the Penal Code, with the exception of standard issue service weapons and ammunition of less than.50 caliber that are issued to officers, agents, or employees of a law enforcement agency or a state agency.
11. Any firearm or firearm accessory that is designed to launch explosive projectiles.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 9, Packet Page 170 Monterey Police Department
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/03/13, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department ***DRAFT*** Military Equipment - 2
12. "Flashbang" grenades and explosive breaching tools, "tear gas," and "pepper balls," excluding standard, service issued handheld pepper spray.
13. TASER® Shockwave, microwave weapons, water cannons, and the Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD).
14. The following projectile launch platforms and thier associated munitions: 40mm projectile launchers, "bean bag," rubber bullet, and specialty impact munition (SIM) weapons.
15. Any other equipment as determined by a governing body or a state agency to require additional oversight.
16. Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) through (15), "Military Equipment" does not include general equipment not designated as prohibited or controlled by the Federal Defense Logistics Agency.
706.2 POLICY
It is the policy of the Monterey Police Department that members of this department comply with the provisions of Government Code § 7071 with respect to military equipment. Use of military equipment should safeguard public welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties. 706.3 MILITARY EQUIPMENT COORDINATOR
The Chief of Police designates the Assistant Chief of Police to act as the military equipment coordinator. The responsibilities of the military equipment coordinator include but are not limited to:
(a) Acting as liaison to the governing body for matters related to the requirements of this policy.
(b) Identifying department equipment that qualifies as military equipment in the current possession of the Department, or the equipment the Department intends to acquire that requires approval by the governing body.
(c) Conducting an inventory of all military equipment at least annually. (d) Collaborating with any allied agency that may use military equipment within the jurisdiction of Monterey Police Department (Government Code § 7071). (e) Preparing for, scheduling, and coordinating the annual community engagement meeting to include:
1. Publicizing the details of the meeting.
2. Preparing for public questions regarding the department's funding, acquisition, and use of equipment.
(f) Preparing the annual military equipment report for submission to the Chief of Police and ensuring that the report is made available on the department website (Government Code § 7072).
(g) Coordinating the process for a person to register a complaint, concern, or question about the use of a type of military equipment. The Department will respond in a timely manner.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 10, Packet Page 171 Monterey Police Department
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/03/13, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department ***DRAFT*** Military Equipment - 3 A complaint, concern or question related to Military Equipment utilization by the Monterey Police Department can be made through any of the below listed methods:
Email: [email protected]
Web:https://www.monterey.org/city_hall/police/inside_mpd/ commendations_or_complaints.php
By phone: (831) 646-3830
By mail: Monterey Police Department; Attn: Military Equipment Use Coordinator; 351 Madison Street, Monterey, CA 93940
706.4 APPROVAL
This policy, and any subsequent amendments, will be available on the department website at least 30 days prior to any public hearing concerning the military equipment at issue. No later than May 1, 2022, this policy will be submitted to the City Council for approval, and will remain in effect only if it is approved within 180 days of submission. Approval of this policy or any subsequent amendments requires adoption by ordinance at an open session of a regular meeting providing for public comment. The department will cease use of any military equipment if its use, or the policy for its use, is not approved. An approved military equipment use policy is required prior to engaging in any of the following (Government Code § 7071):
(a) Requesting military equipment made available pursuant to 10 USC § 2576a. (b) Seeking funds for military equipment, including but not limited to applying for a grant, soliciting or accepting private, local, state, or federal funds, in-kind donations, or other donations or transfers.
(c) Acquiring military equipment either permanently or temporarily, including by borrowing or leasing.
(d) Collaborating with another law enforcement agency in the deployment or other use of military equipment within the jurisdiction of this department. (e) Using any new or existing military equipment for a purpose, in a manner, or by a person not previously approved by the governing body.
(f) Soliciting or responding to a proposal for, or entering into an agreement with, any other person or entity to seek funds for, apply to receive, acquire, use, or collaborate in the use of military equipment.
(g) Acquiring military equipment through any means not provided above. 706.5 COORDINATION WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Military equipment used by other jurisdictions providing aid to MPD shall comply with their respective military equipment use policies. MPD is a participating member of the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit (MPRSRU) in collaboration with other law enforcement agencies on the Monterey Peninsula. MPRSRU provides capabilities to address specific law enforcement issues, such as active shooter incidents, hostage situations, barricaded subject ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 11, Packet Page 172 Monterey Police Department
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Military Equipment
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/03/13, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department ***DRAFT*** Military Equipment - 4 incidents, etc. MPD also collaborates and works with the Monterey County Sheriff's Department and other local, state and federal law enforcement agencies that may provide aid to MPD.
Military equipment owned by other jurisdictions that may be used by MPRSRU inside the City of Monterey's jurisdiction is listed in Section Two of the Military Equipment Inventory. MPD is authorized to use that military equipment in connection with MPRSRU activities/responses. 706.6 ANNUAL REPORT
Within one year of approval of the military equipment use policy, and annually thereafter, the Chief of Police or the authorized designee will submit a military equipment report for each type of approved military equipment for as long as the military equipment is available for use. The annual military equipment report will be publicly available on the department website for as long as the military equipment is available for use. The report shall include all information required by Government Code § 7072 for the preceding calendar year for each type of military equipment. 706.7 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Within 30 days of submitting and publicly releasing the annual report, the Department shall hold at least one well-publicized and conveniently located community engagement meeting, at which the public may discuss and ask questions regarding the funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment.
706.8 MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY
Attached is the Annual Military Equipment Report (May 2023 to May 2024) which includes the Military Equipment and is divided into three sections.
• Section One - lists qualifying equipment that is owned and/or utilized by the Monterey Police Department.
• Section Two - lists qualifying equipment that is not owned by the Monterey Police Department, but which is known to be owned and/or utilized by law enforcement agencies which the Monterey Police Department collaborates and/or participates with as part of the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit (MPRSRU) for law enforcement purposes.
• Section Three - lists qualifying equipment that the Monterey Police Department will be procuring, with anticipated dates of procurement.
See attachment: 2026 - 481 Equipment Inventory.pdf
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 12, Packet Page 173 Monterey PD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/03/13, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department ***DRAFT*** Attachments - 5 Attachments
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 13, Packet Page 174 Attachment
Monterey PD Policy Manual
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2026/03/13, All Rights Reserved.
Published with permission by Monterey Police Department ***DRAFT*** 2026 - 481 Equipment Inventory.pdf - 6 2026 - 481 Equipment Inventory.pdf
2026 - 481 Equipment Inventory.pdf
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 14, Packet Page 175
SECTION ONE
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT
OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE
MONTEREY POLICE
DEPARTMENT
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 15, Packet Page 176
SECTION ONE - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT AB 481 Category
Govt Code §7070(c):
(10) Specialized firearms and ammunition of less than .50 caliber, including assault weapons as defined in Sections 30510 and 30515 of the Penal Code, with the exception of standard issue service weapons and ammunition of less than .50 caliber that are issued to officers, agents, or employees of a law enforcement agency or a state agency
(1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment
Description: Semiautomatic Rifles and Ammunition
Quantity (existing): 61
Capabilities: The Colt semiautomatic rifle is capable of firing 5.56mm projectile bullet.
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's
description:
The Colt features the railed forend. The rail system features the patented bolt-up attachment system. The Colt Tactical semiautomatic rifle is unmatched in size, weight, and performance. (2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized
Use:
Officers may deploy the patrol rifle in any circumstance where the officer can articulate a reasonable expectation that the rifle may be needed. Examples of some general guidelines for deploying the patrol rifle may include but are not limited to:
(1) Situations where the member reasonably anticipates an armed encounter. (2) When a member is faced with a situation that may require accurate and effective fire at long range. (3) Situations where a member reasonably expects the need to meet or exceed a suspect's firepower. (4) When a member reasonably believes that there may be a need to fire on a barricaded person or a person with a hostage.
(5) When a member reasonably believes that a suspect may be wearing body armor. (6) When authorized or requested by a supervisor.
(7) When needed to euthanize an animal.
(3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: Approximately $115,000
Annual costs: Approximately $6,000 (ammunition, repair parts, batteries, etc.) (4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: CA Penal Code 33220(b). All other applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing short-barreled rifles and police use of force.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 300 (Use of Force), 306 (Firearms), 412 (Rapid Response and Deployment) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training: CA POST certified 16-hour patrol rifle course & 4 hours annually / qualification annually Other Notes: These rifles are standard issue service weapons for MPD officers and as a result, exempted from the Military Equipment Use Policy per CA Gov’t Code §7070 (c)(10). They have been included in this document for transparency.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 16, Packet Page 177
SECTION ONE - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c): (14) The following projectile launch platforms and their associated munitions: 40mm projectile launchers, “bean bag,” rubber bullet, and specialty impact munition (SIM) weapons (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment
Description: 40mm Less Lethal Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions Quantity (existing): 14
Capabilities: The 40mm Less Lethal Launcher is capable of firing 40mm Kinetic Energy Munitions, known as sponge projectiles.
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description:
Penn Arms 40mm Multi-Shot launchers are manufactured using 4140 hardened steel, 6061-T6 mil-spec anodized aluminum, and DuPont super tough glass-filled nylon. These launchers are lightweight, versatile, and used worldwide by police and corrections officers. The 40mm launcher is available in both pump-action advance and single shot versions.
(2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: The 40mm Less Lethal Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions are intended for use as a less-lethal use of force option.
(3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $41,000
Annual costs: $6,000 (includes sponge projectiles for training) (4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 306 (Firearms), 303 (Control Devices and Techniques) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training: Two (2) hours of initial training and (2) hours every (2) years (includes qualification) Other: MPD has two (2) pump-action 40mm multi-shot launchers and twelve (12) single shot launcher ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 17, Packet Page 178
SECTION ONE - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c): (14) The following projectile launch platforms and their associated munitions: 40mm projectile launchers, “bean bag,” rubber bullet, and specialty impact munition (SIM) weapons (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment
Description: Remington 870 Shotgun and Kinetic Energy Munitions Quantity (existing): 2 (Assigned to the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) (MPRSRU) Capabilities: The shotgun Less Lethal platform is capable of firing CSI “Super-Sock” Kinetic Energy Munitions, which are fiber bean bag projectiles.
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description:
The Remington Shotgun is milled from a single block of steel. The stock and fore grip are comprised of fiberglass-reinforced polymer with a rubber over-molding. This shotgun is a U.S.-made pumpaction shotgun. The magazine tube holds 6 less-lethal rounds. (2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: The shotgun Less Lethal platform and Kinetic Energy Munitions are intended for use as a less-lethal use of force option.
(3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $1,200
Annual costs: $250 (includes fiber bean bag projectiles) (4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 306 (Firearms), 303 (Control Devices and Techniques) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training: Two hours of initial training and two (2) hours every two (2) years (includes qualification) Other:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually. MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment 4 hours annually.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 18, Packet Page 179
SECTION ONE - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c):
(7) Battering rams, slugs, and breaching apparatuses that are explosive in nature. However, items designed to remove a lock, such as bolt cutters, or a handheld ram designed to be operated by one person, are specifically excluded from the subdivision. (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment
Description: Remington 870 Shotgun and Breaching Munitions Quantity (existing): 3 (Assigned to Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit (MPRSRU) / MPD) Capabilities: Remington 870 12 gauge shotgun modified with pistol grip and barrel standoff designed for breaching doors or other points of entry.
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description:
The Remington Shotgun is milled from a single block of steel. The stock and fore grip are comprised of fiberglass-reinforced polymer with a rubber over-molding. This shotgun is a U.S.-made pumpaction shotgun. (2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
A breaching shotgun can be deployed any time tactical operators determine that it is necessary to complete a lawful breaching, and other breaching methods are determined to be ineffective.
Shotgun breaching generally needs to be supported by exigent circumstances necessitating immediate access for public safety.
(3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $1,800 (3 re-purposed from less lethal shotgun, 1 assigned to SRU, 2 to MPD) Annual costs: $1,000 (includes breaching munitions)
(4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force.
Procedural:
MPD Policies - 306 (Firearms), 303 (Control Devices and Techniques), 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit)
(5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually. MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment 4 hours annually.
Other:
Only MPRSRU trained personnel are authorized to use the breaching shotgun.
Two (2) are assigned to the MPD and (1) is assigned to the MPRSRU ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 19, Packet Page 180
SECTION ONE - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c): (14) The following projectile launch platforms and their associated munitions: 40mm projectile launchers, “bean bag,” rubber bullet, and specialty impact munition (SIM) weapons (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment
Description: 37mm Less Lethal Launcher and Oleoresin Capsicum “OC” munitions Quantity (existing): 2
Capabilities:
The 37mm Less Lethal Launcher is capable of firing barricade penetrating “OC” rounds which disperse .02 ounces of OC powder into a defined space. These munitions are designed to dislodge barricaded subjects from confined areas.
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description: The Federal 37 mm Less Lethal Launcher is a single-shot break-open platform designed to fire 37mm less lethal oleoresin capsicum munitions.
(2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: The 37mm Less Lethal Launchers and “OC” Munitions are intended for use as a less-lethal use of force option.
(3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $3,000
Annual costs: $100 (includes munitions)
(4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force and crowd control.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 306 (Firearms), 303 (Control Devices and Techniques) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training: Two hours of initial training and two (2) hours every two (2) years (includes qualification) Other:
Only Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit (MPRSRU) trained personnel and Less Lethal Instructors are authorized to use the 37mm Less Lethal launcher. All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 20, Packet Page 181
SECTION ONE - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT AB 481 Category
Govt Code §7070(c):
(14) The following projectile launch platforms and their associated munitions: 40mm projectile launchers, “bean bag,” rubber bullet, and specialty impact munition (SIM) weapons (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment
Description: Pepper Ball Launcher
Quantity (sought): 2
Capabilities: The Pepperball VKS Pro is a less lethal launcher designed to use compressed air to launch .68 caliber plastic pepperballs containing powdered OC
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's
description:
Pepperball VKS Pro is a less lethal launcher with a magazine containing 15 rounds with a maximum effective range of 150 feet using compressed air from a HPA buttstock 13ci tank. Live-X pepper balls are 0,68 caliber sphere contain 5% PAVA (pelargonic acid vanillylamide) pepper powder (2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized
Use:
Less-lethal stand-off intervention with armed and/or violent individuals, suicidal individuals, individuals believed to possess or have immediate access to a deadly weapon or driving suspects from confined spaces or vehicles. (3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: Approximately $6,306
Annual costs: Approximately $450 (training rounds and maintenance) (4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force.
Procedural: MPD Policies -300-(Use of Force) 306 (Firearms), 303 (Control Devices and Techniques) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training: Two (2) hours of initial training and (2) hours every (2) years (includes qualification) ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 21, Packet Page 182
SECTION ONE - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c):
(10) Specialized firearms and ammunition of less than .50 caliber, including assault weapons as defined in Sections 30510 and 30515 of the Penal Code, with the exception of standard issue service weapons and ammunition of less than .50 caliber that are issued to officers, agents, or employees of a law enforcement agency or a state agency (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment
Description: Desert Tech SRS M2 Precision Rifle
Quantity (existing): 2
Capabilities: The Desert Tech SRS M2 is a bolt action rifle capable of firing a .308 caliber projectile bullet.
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description:
The SRS-M2 adds the ability to make fast and easy adjustments to accessories mounted on the forearm through the integrated Area 419 Arcalock rail. The full-length 30 MOA tapered top rail minimizes optical visual displacement when moving between day and night scopes. (2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
This rifle is authorized for use by Precision Rifle/Observer SWAT Operator(s) only. It is deployed in conjunction with the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team during highrisk incidents. (3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $10,000 (rifle, scope, attachments/equipment) Annual costs: $2,000 (includes ammunition and cleaning supplies) (4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force.
Procedural:
MPD Policies - 300 (Use of Force), 306 (Firearms), 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit), 412 (Rapid Response and Deployment)
(5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually. MPRSRU Precision Rifle/Observers must also complete a 40 Post certified SWAT precision rifle/observer course and attend 120 hours of training annually.
Other: N/A
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 22, Packet Page 183
SECTION ONE - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT AB 481 Category Govt Code
§7070(c): (1) Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered aerial or ground vehicles (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment
Description: Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)
Quantity (existing): 7 (2 DJI Mini 3 Pros and 2 DJI Mavic 3 Pro, 2 DJI Avata 2, 1 Skydio X10) Capabilities: UAS are capable of being remotely navigated to provide scene information and intelligence in the form of video and still images transmitted to first responders.
Expected lifespan: 5 Years
Manufacturer's description:
DJI Mini 3 Pro / 3 mini features both an infrared sensing system and forward, backward, and downward vision systems. This allows for hovering and flying indoors as well as outdoors and for automatic return to home while avoiding obstacles from the front, back, and below. DJI Mini 3 Pro also boasts a foldable and compact design, weighing less than 249 g. The aircraft has a maximum flight speed of 36 mph (57.6 kph), a maximum flight time of 34 minutes when using an intelligent flight battery, and a maximum flight time of 47 minutes when using an intelligent flight battery plus.
The Skydio X10 is an advanced enterprise drone that combines AI-powered autonomy with highquality imaging capabilities, making it ideal for various applications such as public safety, infrastructure inspection, and security.
The DJI Avata 2 is a compact, agile drone designed for first-person view flying using accompanying goggles. It features a new, lighter airframe, upgrade remote control, and large image sensor for its wide-angle camera. The drone offers longer flying times and improved video capabilities, including 4k 4:3 60fps video recording with RockSteady Stabilization (2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
To enhance the safety of potentially dangerous situations by providing first responders with the ability to monitor video feed from UAS cameras of hazardous areas prior to, or in lieu of, sending in personnel. UAS/Drone/Ariel platforms may be used for search and rescue; suspect apprehension, crime scene documentation; tactical operations; scene security; hazard monitoring; identification and mitigation; response to emergency calls; crisis communications; legally authorized surveillance.
(3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $39,160.80 (Skydio + DJI Drones Total)
Annual costs: $2,000 (batteries, propellers, and other parts) (4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal:
All applicable State, Federal and Local laws. Any use of UAS/Drone platforms will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. All drone operators will be FAA Part 107 certified.
Procedural: MPD Policies – 606 Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Operations (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 23, Packet Page 184 Required training:
Prior to piloting any UAS/Drone, staff members must secure an FAA Remote Pilot License (Part 107) and complete training required by FAA COA. Program Supervisor(s) and Commander(s) will attend a California P.O.S.T. UAS Operators Course (48 hours). UAS Pilots will attend a California P.O.S.T. UAS Basic Pilots Course (32 hours). All members of the UAS Team will attend the California POST approved FAA 107 Ground School (8 hours).
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 24, Packet Page 185
SECTION TWO
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT
OWNED/UTILIZED BY LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THE
MPD COLLABORATES AND/OR
PARTICIPATES WITH AS PART
OF THE MPRSRU FOR LAW
ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 25, Packet Page 186
SECTION TWO - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THE MPD COLLABORATES AND/OR
PARTICIPATES WITH AS PART OF THE MPRSRU FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES AB 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c): (1) Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered aerial or ground vehicles (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment
Description: Unmanned, remotely piloted, powered aerial and ground vehicles Quantity (existing):
0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team and Sheriff's Bomb Squad)
Capabilities:
Vehicles are capable of being remotely navigated to provide scene information and intelligence in the form of video and still images transmitted to first responders.
Expected lifespan: 5 years
Manufacturer's description:
Remotely operated land vehicles to support various mission areas such as explosive device remediation, hazardous materials operations, tactical law enforcement operations, search & rescue, and surveillance/detection. Examples include, but are not limited to rovers, scout vehicles, and surveillance platforms. Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) comprises an unmanned aircraft and the equipment necessary for the safe and efficient operation of that aircraft. The system generally includes a fixed or rotary-wing (tethered or non-tethered) aircraft and a ground control station.
(2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
To enhance the safety of potentially dangerous situations by providing first responders with the ability to monitor video feed from vehicle cameras of hazardous areas prior to, or in lieu of, sending in personnel. Remotely piloted ground vehicles may be used to investigate and mitigate potential explosive devices. UAS/Drone/Arial platforms may be used for search and rescue; suspect apprehension crime scene documentation; tactical operations; scene security; hazard monitoring; identification and mitigation; response to emergency calls; crisis communications; legally authorized surveillance.
(3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
(4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal:
All applicable State, Federal and Local laws. Any use of UAS/Drone platforms will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training:
MPRSRU SWAT Team provides internal training for staff members prior to allowing them to operate the ground vehicle equipment. All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually. Prior to piloting any UAS/Drone staff members must secure an FAA Remote Pilot License and complete training required by FAA COA.
Other:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). The Monterey County Sheriff's Office also provides the regional explosive mitigation team "bomb squad." This equipment is owned and operated by MPRSRU SWAT and the Monterey County Sheriff's Department. While the Monterey Police Department does not own this equipment, it could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT or the Monterey County Sheriff's Department if they are deployed to an incident within city limits.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 26, Packet Page 187
SECTION TWO - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THE MPD COLLABORATES AND/OR
PARTICIPATES WITH AS PART OF THE MPRSRU FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES AB 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c):
(3) High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles (HMMWV), commonly referred to as Humvees, two and one-half-ton trucks, five-ton trucks, or wheeled vehicles that have a breaching or entry apparatus attached. However, unarmored all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and motorized dirt bikes are specifically excluded from this subdivision (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment
Description: MPRSRU Rescue Vehicle (Lenco Bearcat Armored Vehicle) Quantity (existing): 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: Capable of transporting personnel and equipment while providing them with armored protection. Also has a breaching apparatus that can be attached.
Expected lifespan: 10 years
Manufacturer's description:
The Lenco BearCat is the standard tactical armored vehicle for special operations units within the US Law Enforcement community. Since the early 2000s, agencies such as LAPD, LASD SEB, NYPD ESU, Boston PD and hundreds of Federal, State and Local Law Enforcement agencies have made the BearCat part of their standard operating procedure. The Bearcat has excellent on-road driving characteristics and maneuverability in tight urban settings. The large floor plan seats 10 – 12 fully equipped officers.
(2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
The SRU Rescue Vehicle (Lenco Bearcat Armored Vehicle) is intended for use during critical incidents including, but not limited to: (a) Hostage situations; (b) Barricaded subject incidents; (c) Active shooter situations; (d) High risk arrest and search warrants; (e) Any threat of explosive devices; (f) Other situations where ballistic protection is necessary for the protection of personnel. The SRU Rescue Vehicle will not be deployed for situations such as peaceful protests or demonstrations where violence is not threatened toward the public, property or law enforcement personnel. When deploying the vehicle one must consider how its use or misuse could create fear or distrust in the community and take steps to mitigate those negative effects. The SRU Rescue vehicle may be deployed for exhibition at community based events for the purpose of educating and familiarizing the public with its use and purpose. (3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
(4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training:
The SRU Rescue Vehicle is driven by approved personnel who have received training in the vehicle’s operation. The training includes both classroom and practical driving exercises.
Operators also receive scenario-based training to include the decision-making process as to how it should and should not be deployed. Scenario based training includes constitutional and community policing principles as it relates to SRU Rescue Vehicle deployment. All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST Certified 80-hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually.
Other:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment is registered to the Marina Police Department and utilized by MPRSRU SWAT. It could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits. It may also be used in Monterey at community events for educational and familiarization purposes.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 27, Packet Page 188
SECTION TWO - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THE MPD COLLABORATES AND/OR
PARTICIPATES WITH AS PART OF THE MPRSRU FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES AB 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c): (5) Command and control vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units
(1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment
Description: Workhorse Commercial Van
Quantity (existing): 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: Vehicle is modified to facilitate the control and direction of public safety units.
Expected lifespan: Unknown
Manufacturer's description: Unavailable
(2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: Workspace for commanding/supervising personnel during critical incidents. Also utilized for community outreach events such as National Night Out, Public Safety Outreach, etc. (3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
(4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training:
MPRSU SWAT Team provides internal training for staff members prior to allowing them to operate these vehicles. All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80-hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually.
Other:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment is registered to the Seaside Police Department and operated by MPRSRU SWAT. While the Monterey Police Department does not own this equipment, it could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 28, Packet Page 189
SECTION TWO - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THE MPD COLLABORATES AND/OR
PARTICIPATES WITH AS PART OF THE MPRSRU FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES AB 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c): (12) “Flashbang” grenades and explosive breaching tools, “tear gas,” and “pepper balls,” excluding standard, service-issued handheld pepper spray (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment Description: Flashbang Grenades, Explosive Breaching Tools, Tear Gas and Pepper Balls Quantity (existing): 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: Capable of breaching doors, gates, windows, and other points of entry, creating explosive distractions, and/or deploying tear gas or pepper chemical.
Expected lifespan: Unknown
Manufacturer's description:
Defense Technology® offers a complete range of less lethal products and solutions to law enforcement professionals. A full-line manufacturer, Defense Technology’s premier product lines are grouped into five categories including aerosols, impact munitions, distraction devices, chemical munitions and launchers. We are committed to manufacturing the safest possible products and providing comprehensive training for detectives, patrol and tactical officers.
(2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: Breaching doors, gates, windows, and other points of entry, creating explosive distractions, and/or deploying tear gas or pepper chemicals.
(3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
(4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80-hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training biannually. MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment for 10 hours annually.
Other:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment is owned and operated by MPRSRU SWAT. While the Monterey Police Department does not own this equipment, it could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 29, Packet Page 190
SECTION TWO - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THE MPD COLLABORATES AND/OR
PARTICIPATES WITH AS PART OF THE MPRSRU FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES AB 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c): (7) Battering rams, slugs, and breaching apparatuses that are explosive in nature.
However, items designed to remove a lock, such as bolt cutters, or a handheld ram designed to be operated by one person, are specifically excluded from the subdivision. (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment Description: Remington 870 Breaching Shotgun
Quantity (existing/sought): 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: Remington 870 12-gauge shotgun modified with pistol grip and barrel standoff designed for breaching doors or other points of entry.
Expected lifespan: Unknown
Manufacturer's description:
The Remington Shotgun is milled from a single block of steel. The stock and fore grip are comprised of fiberglass-reinforced polymer with a rubber over-molding. This shotgun is a U.S.-made pump-action shotgun. The magazine tube holds 6 less-lethal rounds. (2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
A breaching shotgun can be deployed any time tactical operators determine that it is necessary to complete a lawful breaching, and other breaching methods are determined to be ineffective. Shotgun breaching generally needs to be supported by exigent circumstances necessitating immediate access for public safety. (3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
(4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training biannually. MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment 4 hours annually.
Other:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment is registered to the Seaside Police Department and operated by MPRSRU SWAT. While the Monterey Police Department does not own this equipment, it could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 30, Packet Page 191
SECTION TWO - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THE MPD COLLABORATES AND/OR
PARTICIPATES WITH AS PART OF THE MPRSRU FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES AB 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c): (14) The following projectile launch platforms and their associated munitions: 40mm projectile launchers, “bean bag,” rubber bullet, and specialty impact munition (SIM) weapons
(1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment Description: 37mm Less Lethal Launcher and Oleoresin Capsicum “OC” munitions Quantity (existing): 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: The 37mm Less Lethal Launcher is capable of firing barricade penetrating “OC” rounds which disperse .02 ounces of OC powder into a defined space. These munitions are designed to dislodge barricaded subjects from confined areas.
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description: The Federal 37 mm Less Lethal Launcher. Is a single-shot break-open platform designed to fire 37mm less lethal oleoresin capsicum munitions.
(2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: The 37mm Less Lethal Launchers and “OC” Munitions are intended for use as a less-lethal use of force option.
(3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
(4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually.
MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment 4 hours annually.
Other:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment is owned and operated by MPRSRU SWAT. While the Monterey Police Department does not own this equipment, it could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 31, Packet Page 192
SECTION TWO - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THE MPD COLLABORATES AND/OR
PARTICIPATES WITH AS PART OF THE MPRSRU FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES AB 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c): (14) The following projectile launch platforms and their associated munitions: 40mm projectile launchers, “bean bag,” rubber bullet, and specialty impact munition (SIM) weapons (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment Description: 40mm Less Lethal Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions Quantity (existing): 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: The 40mm Less Lethal Launcher is capable of firing 40mm Kinetic Energy Munitions, known as sponge projectiles
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description:
Penn Arms 40mm Multi-Shot launchers are manufactured using 4140 hardened steel, 6061- T6 mil-spec anodized aluminum, and DuPont super tough glass-filled nylon. These launchers are lightweight, versatile, and used worldwide by police and corrections officers. The 40mm launcher is available in both pump-action advance and single shot versions (2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: The 40mm Less Lethal Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions are intended for use as a lesslethal use of force option. (3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
(4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80-hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually.
MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment for 4 hours annually.
Other:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment is registered to the Sand City Police Department for use by MPRSRU SWAT. While the Monterey Police Department does not own this equipment, it could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 32, Packet Page 193
SECTION TWO - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THE MPD COLLABORATES AND/OR
PARTICIPATES WITH AS PART OF THE MPRSRU FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES AB 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c): (5) Command and control vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units. (1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment Description: LDV Inc. Custom Specialty Vehicles - Crisis Negotiation Team Command Vehicle Quantity (existing): 1 (owned by MPD for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: Vehicle is modified to act as a Negotiations Operations Center at critical incidents Expected lifespan: 20 years
Manufacturer's description: 2022 Ford E-450 Cutaway - Emergency Response Vehicle - Mobile Command Vehicle (2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
This vehicle will provide a designated Negotiations Operations Center (NOC) in a constant state of operational readiness for the MPRSRU Crisis Negotiations Team (CNT) that will aid in the resolution of crisis incidents. Also utilized for community outreach events such as National Night Out, Public Safety Outreach, etc.
(3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost:
$200,000 initial outlay to be reimbursed through the Homeland Security Grant Program - Urban Areas Security Initiative.
Annual costs: $2,500 / year maintenance and upkeep
(4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) (5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training: All MPRSRU Crisis Negotiations Team (CNT) members will receive internal training on operating the vehicle.
Other:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit CNT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment will be registered to the Monterey Police and operated by MPRSRU CNT. This equipment could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU CNT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits.
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 33, Packet Page 194
SECTION THREE
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT THAT
THE MPD INTENDS TO
ACQUIRE WITH ANTICIPATED
DATES OF PROCUREMENT
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 34, Packet Page 195
SECTION THREE - QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT THAT THE MPD INTENDS TO ACQUIRE WITH ANTICIPATED DATES OF PROCUREMENT 481 Category Govt Code §7070(c): (5) Command and control vehicles that are either built or modified to facilitate the operational control and direction of public safety units
(1) A description of each type of military equipment, the quantity sought, its capabilities, expected lifespan, and product descriptions from the manufacturer of the military equipment Description: Supervisor Command Vehicle
Quantity (sought): 2 sought
Capabilities:
A specialized law enforcement vehicle utilized by patrol supervisors for daily field operations. The platform is designed to function as a mobile Incident Command Post (ICP), facilitating the implementation of the Incident Command System (ICS) during critical incidents and Unified Command operations with Fire and EMS.
Expected lifespan: 10 Years
Manufacturer's description: Police Rated Pick-Up Truck or Full Size SUV, similar to a Ford F-150 or Chevrolet Tahoe (2) The purposes and authorized uses for which the law enforcement agency or the state agency proposes to use each type of military equipment
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
The Department seeks approval to acquire and utilize a dedicated command vehicle platform (e.g., Ford F-150 or Chevrolet Tahoe) to serve as a primary mobile Incident Command Post (ICP).
Unlike standard patrol sedans, this vehicle is specifically configured to support the Incident Command System (ICS) during critical incidents, natural disasters, and high-risk operations. It provides a centralized, weather-protected environment where an Incident Commander or Watch Commander can effectively manage resources, maintain a strategic overview of the scene, and coordinate multi-agency responses. The acquisition of this vehicle aligns with established public safety standards, mirroring the operational capabilities currently utilized by the Fire Department for Division Chiefs to manage fireground operations.
Field supervisors are required to carry a significantly higher volume of specialized equipment than standard patrol officers, including tactical breaching tools, extended medical kits, rigorous protective equipment, and incident management boards. The proposed utility platform offers the necessary payload and cargo capacity to safely store and organize this essential gear, ensuring it is immediately accessible upon arrival. A standard patrol vehicle lacks the physical space to accommodate this load-out without compromising the safe operation of the vehicle or the rapid deployment of the supervisor.
A critical component of this command vehicle is its enhanced communications suite, designed to bridge the gap between field units and dispatch during chaotic events. The vehicle will be upfitted with additional radio transceivers and command infrastructure, allowing the supervisor to monitor and transmit across multiple frequencies, including tactical channels, mutual aid frequencies, and fire/EMS operational channels. This capability is vital for ensuring seamless interoperability and officer safety during complex incidents. There is no reasonable alternative to this specialized vehicle that provides the same level of command-and-control capability, equipment accessibility, and communications redundancy required to safeguard the community and officers during critical events.
(3) The fiscal impact of each type of military equipment, including the initial costs of obtaining the equipment and estimated annual costs of maintaining the equipment
Initial cost: $150,000 per vehicle
Annual costs: $15,000 / year maintenance and fuel
(4) The legal and procedural rules that govern each authorized use Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing the use of vehicles Procedural: MPD Policies - 703 (Vehicle Use)
(5) The training, including any course required by the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, that must be completed before any officer, agent, or employee of the law enforcement agency or the state agency is allowed to use each specific type of military equipment to ensure the full protection of the public’s welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties and full adherence to the military equipment use policy
Required training: No additional training needed
ATTACHMENT 2
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 35, Packet Page 196 1 | Page
Monterey Police Department
Annual Military Equipment Report
(May 2025 to May 2026)
California Government Code §§ 7070, 7071, and 7072
On September 30, 2021, California Assembly Bill 481 (AB 481) was signed into law. California Government Code §§ 7070, 7071, and 7072 codify the requirements established by AB 481 for law enforcement’s acquisition, use, and funding of “military equipment.”
In enacting AB 481, the Legislature stated the public has a right to know about any funding, acquisition, or use of military equipment by state or local government officials to increase transparency, accountability, and oversight. The same applies to the public’s right to participate in any government agency’s decision to fund, acquire, or use such equipment.
The bill required law enforcement agencies that seek to continue the use of military equipment acquired prior to January 1, 2022, to receive approval from their governing body prior to May 1, 2022. The Monterey City Council approved MPD Policy 706 – Military Equipment and the Military Equipment Inventory by ordinance (3649). The policy and inventory list are located on the Monterey Police Department’s website – www.montereypolice.org.
California Government Code § 7072 requires law enforcement agencies to prepare annually, a Military Equipment Report. The annual Military Equipment Report is required to contain the following. • A summary of how the military equipment was used and the purpose of its use; • A summary of any complaints or concerns received concerning the military equipment; • The results of any internal audits, any information about violations of the military equipment use policy, and any actions taken in response;
• The total annual cost for each type of military equipment, including acquisition, personnel, training, transportation, maintenance, storage, upgrade, and other ongoing costs, and from what source funds will be provided for the military equipment in the calendar year following submission of the annual military equipment report;
• The quantity possessed for each type of military equipment; and • If the law enforcement agency intends to acquire additional military equipment in the next year, the quantity sought for each type of military equipment.
This annual Military Equipment Report satisfies the reporting requirements outlined in California Government Code § 7072.
A complaint, concern or question related to Military Equipment utilization by the Monterey Police Department can be made through any of the below listed methods:
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 36, Packet Page 197 2 | Page
Email: [email protected]
Web:https://monterey.gov/your_city_hall/departments/police/inside_mpd/commendations_or_c omplaints.php
By phone: (831) 646-3830
By mail: Monterey Police Department; Attn: Military Equipment Use Coordinator; 351 Madison Street, Monterey, CA 93940
The following is a summary of the Military Equipment owned and maintained by the Monterey Police Department as defined by California Government Code §7070:
Item Quantity Owned Gov’t Code Subsection
Semi-Automatic Patrol Rifles
61 7070(c)(10)
Unmanned Aircraft Systems
7 7070(c)(1)
Remington 870 Less Lethal Shotgun
2 7070(c)(14)
Remington 870 Breaching Shotgun
3 7070(c)(7)
40mm Less Lethal Single + Multi Launcher
14 7070(c)(14)
37mm Less Lethal Launcher
2 7070(c)(14)
Desert Tech SRS M2 Precision Rifle
2 7070(c)(10)
Pepper Ball Launcher
2 7070(c)(14)
LDV – Crisis Negotiation Team Command Vehicle
1 7070(c)(05)
7071(a)(1)(D)
The following is a summary of the Military Equipment used by the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit. The Monterey Police Department does not own or maintain this equipment; however, the military equipment may be used by members of the MPRSU (SWAT) during a critical incident in the City of Monterey. (California Government Code §7071(a)(1)(D) Item Gov’t Code Subsection
Unmanned, Remotely Piloted, Powered Ground Vehicle
7070(c)(1)
7071(a)(1)(D)
Rescue Vehicle (Lenco Bearcat Armored Vehicle)
7070(c)(3)
7071(a)(1)(D)
Workhorse Commercial Van
7070(c)(5)
7071(a)(1)(D)
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 37, Packet Page 198 3 | Page
The following is a summary of Military Equipment the Monterey Police Department intends to purchase. (California Government Code §7072(a)(6)
Flashbang Grenades, Explosive Breaching Tools, Tear Gas, and Pepper Balls
7070(c)(12)
7071(a)(1)(D)
Remington 870 Breaching Shotgun
7070(c)(10)
7071(a)(1)(D)
37mm Less lethal Launcher
7070(c)(14)
7071(a)(1)(D)
40mm Less Lethal Launcher
7070(c)(14)
7071(a)(1)(D)
Item Quantity
Sought
Gov’t Code
Section
Note
Police Supervisor Command Vehicle 2 7070(c)(5)
7072(a)(6)
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 38, Packet Page 199 Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
Semiautomatic Rifles and Ammunition
Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
The patrol rifles were deployed within the guidelines set force in MPD Policy 306. Over the past 12 months, MPD officers deployed the rifle, but not fired, in circumstances outlined in MPD Policy 306.
There were no reportable incidents in the City of Monterey.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: The MPD conducted an audit of the equipment and accounted for all of the rifles. There were no violations of the military equipment use policy.
Total Annual Cost:
Acquisition: $19,510.13 (Replaced 8 rifles in 2025)
Training: $6,000 (ammunition, targets, magazines, etc.,) Other: $500 (parts, e.g. batteries, other spare parts)
Funding Source: Police Budget
Quantity: 53
Intention to acquire more: No
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT CODE §7070(c)(10)
Description: Semiautomatic Rifles and Ammunition
Quantity (existing): 61
Capabilities: The Colt semiautomatic rifle is capable of firing 5.56mm projectile bullet Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description: The Colt semiautomatic rifle features the railed forend. The rail system features the patented bolt-up attachment system. The Colt semiautomatic rifle is unmatched in size, weight, and performance.
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
Officers may deploy the patrol rifle in any circumstance where the officer can articulate a reasonable expectation that the rifle may be needed. Examples of some general guidelines for deploying the patrol rifle may include but are not limited to:
(1) Situations where the member reasonably anticipates an armed encounter. (2) When a member is faced with a situation that may require accurate and effective fire at long range.
(3) Situations where a member reasonably expects the need to meet or exceed a suspect's firepower.
(4) When a member reasonably believes that there may be a need to fire on a barricaded person or a person with a hostage.
(5) When a member reasonably believes that a suspect may be wearing body armor. (6) When authorized or requested by a supervisor.
(7) When needed to euthanize an animal.
Initial cost: Approximately $115,000
Annual costs: Approximately $6,000 (ammunition, repair parts, batteries, etc.) Legal: CA Penal Code 33220(b). All other applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing short-barreled rifles and police use of force
Procedural: MPD Policies - 300 (Use of Force), 306 (Firearms), 412 (Rapid Response and Deployment) Required training: CA POST certified 16-hour patrol rifle course & 4 hours annually / qualification annually Other Notes:
These rifles are standard issue service weapons for MPD officers and as a result exempted from the Military Equipment Use Policy per CA Gov’t Code §7070 (c)(10). They have been included in this document for transparency.
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 39, Packet Page 200
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT CODE § 7070(c)(1)
Description: Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)
Quantity (existing): 7 (2 DJI Mini 3 Pros and 2 DJI Mavic 3 Pro, 2 DJI Avata 2, 1 Skydio X10) Capabilities: UAS are capable of being remotely navigated to provide scene information and intelligence in the form of video and still images transmitted to first responders.
Expected lifespan: 5 Years
Manufacturer's description:
DJI Mini 3 Pro / 3 mini features both an infrared sensing system and forward, backward, and downward vision systems. This allows for hovering and flying indoors as well as outdoors and for automatic return to home while avoiding obstacles from the front, back, and below. DJI Mini 3 Pro also boasts a foldable and compact design, weighing less than 249 g. The aircraft has a maximum flight speed of 36 mph (57.6 kph), a maximum flight time of 34 minutes when using an intelligent flight battery, and a maximum flight time of 47 minutes when using an intelligent flight battery plus.
The Skydio X10 is an advanced enterprise drone that combines AI-powered autonomy with high-quality imaging capabilities, making it ideal for various applications such as public safety, infrastructure inspection, and security.
The DJI Avata 2 is a compact, agile drone designed for first-person view flying using accompanying goggles. It features a new, lighter airframe, upgrade remote control, and large image sensor for its wide-angle camera. The drone offers longer flying times and improved video capabilities, including 4k 4:3 60fps video recording with RockSteady Stabilization Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
To enhance the safety of potentially dangerous situations by providing first responders with the ability to monitor video feed from UAS cameras of hazardous areas prior to, or in lieu of, sending in personnel. UAS/Drone/Ariel platforms may be used for search and rescue; suspect apprehension, crime scene documentation; tactical operations; scene security; hazard monitoring; identification and mitigation; response to emergency calls; crisis communications; legally authorized surveillance.
Initial cost: $39,160.80 (Skydio + DJI Drones Total)
Annual costs: $2,000 (batteries, propellers, and other parts) Legal:
All applicable State, Federal and Local laws. Any use of UAS/Drone platforms will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. All drone operators will be FAA Part 107 certified.
Procedural: MPD Policies – 606 Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Operations Required training:
Prior to piloting any UAS/Drone, staff members must secure an FAA Remote Pilot License (Part 107) and complete training required by FAA COA. Program Supervisor(s) and Commander(s) will attend a California P.O.S.T. UAS Operators Course (48 hours). UAS Pilots will attend a California P.O.S.T. UAS Basic Pilots Course (32 hours). All members of the UAS Team will attend the California POST approved FAA 107 Ground School (8 hours).
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 40, Packet Page 201 Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)
Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
To enhance the safety of potentially dangerous situations by providing first responders with the ability to monitor video feed from vehicle cameras of hazardous areas prior to, or in lieu of, sending in personnel. Remotely piloted ground vehicles may be used to investigate and mitigate potential explosive devices.
1. 04-02-25 – Assist SRU with Support in King City
2. 05-17-25 – Wanted domestic violence suspect was believed to have been barricaded inside the residence. Drone used to clear the house on Alcalde
3. 06-08-25 – Search for wanted Robbery suspects near Del Monte beach
4. 06-14-25 – Assisted Pacific Grove PD with an at-risk missing person search
5. 06-25-25 – Deployed to provide perimeter inspections of the Pride Parade
6. 07-04-25 - Deployed to provide perimeter inspections of the 4th of July Parade
7. 07-11-25 – Deployed to assist an SRU operation in Salinas
8. 07-16-25 – Deployed to assist an SRU operation in Castroville
9. 07-26-25 – Deployed to assist patrol with juveniles throwing objects from the downtown parking garages
10. 07-29-25 – Deployed to assist the Community Action Team with an illegal encampment search in the wooded area off Iris Canyon
11. 07-31-25 – Deployed to assist officers with a search of a building that was burglarized
12. 08-29-25 – Deployed to assist officers with a brandishing of a firearm on Tenth Street
13. 09-02-25 – Deployed to assist the Sheriff’s Office with the search of a wanted person in the County area of Salinas (Paradise Road / Avery Lane)
14. 09-08-25 – Deployed to assist officers during a building search of a burglary alarm in the 2100 block of North Fremont
15. 09-10-25 – Deployed to assist SRU in the City of Marina (Tallmon Avenue)
16. 09-18-25 – Deployed to assist officers with a search of a subject who fled from officers in the 300 block of Lighthouse
17. 09-27-25 – Deployed to assist officers with a search of a burglary suspect from 900 block of Fremont
18. 11-09-25 – Deployed to assist officers with a search of a residence in the 300 block of Prescott
19. 11-15-25 – Deployed to assist the Seaside Police Department with a search of a barricaded felon in the 2300 block of North Fremont
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 41, Packet Page 202
20. 11-18-25 – Deployed to assist officers with a search of a building left unsecured in the 3000 block of Monterey Salinas Highway
21. 11-25-25 – Deployed to assist the Sheriff’s office with an at-risk missing juvenile in the 5000 block of Grey Goose Gulch, Carmel
22. 12-06-25 – Deployed to assist the California Highway Patrol in search of a subject who had possibly been ejected from a vehicle collision on California Highway 1 South
23. 12-18-25 – Deployed to assist the SRU in the 1900 block of Grandview
24. 12-21-25 – Deployed to assist officers during a search of a possible burglary investigation on Upper Ragsdale
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: The MPD conducted an audit of the equipment and accounted for all of the UAS’. There were no violations of the military equipment use policy.
Total Annual Cost:
Acquisition: $30,503.56 (1 Skydio + 2 DJI Avata)
Training: $800
Other: $2,000 (equipment, cases, batteries, light)
Funding Source: Police Budget
Quantity: 7
Intention to acquire more: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 42, Packet Page 203
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT CODE § 7070(c)(14)
Description: Remington 870 Shotgun and Kinetic Energy Munitions Quantity (existing): 2 (Assigned to the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) (MPRSRU) Capabilities: The shotgun Less Lethal platform is capable of firing CSI “Super-Sock” Kinetic Energy Munitions, which are fiber bean bag projectiles
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description:
The Remington Shotgun is milled from a single block of steel. The stock and fore grip are comprised of fiberglass-reinforced polymer with a rubber over-molding. This shotgun is a U.S.- made pump-action shotgun. It holds 6 less-lethal rounds.
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: The shotgun Less Lethal platform and Kinetic Energy Munitions are intended for use as a lesslethal use of force option Initial cost: $1,200
Annual costs: $500 (includes fiber bean bag projectiles) Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force Procedural: MPD Policies - 306 (Firearms), 303 (Control Devices and Techniques) Required training: Two hours of initial training and two (2) hours every two (2) years (includes qualification) Other:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually.
MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment 4 hours annually.
Note:
Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
Remington 870 Shotgun and Kinetic Energy Munitions
Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
This equipment is used primarily in situations where officers encounter a subject armed with a weapon other than a firearm. The less lethal munitions are used to disarm violent individuals from a safe distance. The less lethal shotguns are owned by the MPD and assigned to the MPRSRU. There were no reportable incidents in the City of Monterey.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: The MPD conducted an audit of the equipment and accounted for all of the Remington 870 less lethal shotguns. There were no violations of the military equipment use policy.
Total Annual Cost:
Acquisition: $0 (no new shotguns were acquired)
Training: $500
Others: $0
Funding Source: Police Budget
Quantity: 2
Intention to acquire more: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 43, Packet Page 204
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT CODE § 7070(c)(14)
Description: Pepper Ball Launcher
Quantity (existing): 2
Capabilities: The Pepperball VKS Pro is a less lethal launcher designed to use compressed air to launch .68 caliber plastic pepperballs containing powdered OC
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description:
Pepperball VKS Pro is a less lethal launcher with a magazine containing 15 rounds with a maximum effective range of 150 feet using compressed air from a HPA buttstock 13ci tank. LiveX pepper balls are 0,68 caliber sphere contain 5% PAVA (pelargonic acid vanillylamide) pepper powder
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
Less-lethal stand-off intervention with armed and/or violent individuals, suicidal individuals, individuals believed to possess or have immediate access to a deadly weapon or driving suspects from confined suspects or vehicles.
Initial cost: $6,306
Annual costs: $450 (training rounds and maintenance)
Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force Procedural: MPD Policies -300-(Use of Force) 306 (Firearms), 303 (Control Devices and Techniques) Required training: Two (2) hours of initial training and (2) hours every (2) years (includes qualification) Other: N/A
Note: N/A
Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
Pepper Ball Launcher
Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
This equipment is used primarily in situations where officers encounter a subject armed with a weapon other than a firearm. The less lethal munitions are used to disarm violent individuals from a safe distance.
● 3-27-25 – Used during a search for a wanted attempted murder suspect that crashed his vehicle in Marina fled into a field.
● 05-02-25 – Suspect fled from officers and refused to show his hands when cornered and acted as if he had a weapon.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: The MPD conducted an audit of the equipment and accounted for all of the Pepper Ball launchers. There were no violations of the military equipment use policy.
Total Annual Cost:
Acquisition: $0.00 (No Pepper ball launchers were acquired during the reporting period) Training: $450
Others: $0
Funding Source: Police Budget
Quantity: 2
Intention to acquire more: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 44, Packet Page 205
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT CODE § 7070(c)(7)
Description: Remington 870 Shotgun and Breaching Munitions Quantity (existing): 1 (1 Assigned to the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) (MPRSRU) Capabilities: Remington 870 12 gauge shotgun modified with pistol grip and barrel standoff designed for breaching doors or other points of entry.
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description:
The Remington Shotgun is milled from a single block of steel. The stock and fore grip are comprised of fiberglass-reinforced polymer with a rubber over-molding. This shotgun is a U.S.- made pump-action shotgun.
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
A breaching shotgun can be deployed any time tactical operators determine that it is necessary to complete a lawful breaching, and other breaching methods are determined to be ineffective.
Shotgun breaching generally needs to be supported by exigent circumstances necessitating immediate access for public safety.
Initial cost: $600
Annual costs: $250 (includes breaching munitions)
Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force Procedural:
MPD Policies - 306 (Firearms), 303 (Control Devices and Techniques), 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit)
Required training: Two hours of initial training and two (2) hours every two (2) years (includes qualification) Other:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually. MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment 4 hours annually.
Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
Remington 870 Breaching Shotgun
Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
Can be deployed any time tactical operators determine that it is necessary to complete a lawful breaching, and other breaching methods are determined to be ineffective. There were no reportable incidents in the City of Monterey.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: The MPD conducted an audit of the equipment and accounted for all of the Remington 870 breaching shotguns. There were no violations of the military equipment use policy.
Total Annual Cost:
Acquisition: $0 (no new shotguns were acquired)
Training: $250
Others: $0
Funding Source: Police Budget
Quantity: 1
Intention to acquire more: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 45, Packet Page 206
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT CODE § 7070(c)(7)
Description: Remington 870 Shotgun and Breaching Munitions Quantity (existing): 2 (assigned to MPD)
Capabilities: Remington 870 12 gauge shotgun modified with pistol grip and barrel standoff designed for breaching doors or other points of entry.
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description:
The Remington Shotgun is milled from a single block of steel. The stock and fore grip are comprised of fiberglass-reinforced polymer with a rubber over-molding. This shotgun is a U.S.- made pump-action shotgun.
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
A breaching shotgun can be deployed any time tactical operators determine that it is necessary to complete a lawful breaching, and other breaching methods are determined to be ineffective.
Shotgun breaching generally needs to be supported by exigent circumstances necessitating immediate access for public safety.
Initial cost: $1,200 of Remington 870 shotgun
Annual costs: $500 (includes fiber bean bag projectiles) Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force Procedural:
MPD Policies - 306 (Firearms), 303 (Control Devices and Techniques), 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit)
Required training: Two hours of initial training and two (2) hours every two (2) years (includes qualification) Other:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually. MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment 4 hours annually.
Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
Remington 870 Breaching Shotgun
Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
Can be deployed any time tactical operators determine that it is necessary to complete a lawful breaching, and other breaching methods are determined to be ineffective. The MPD did not have a reportable use of the breaching shotgun. Only trained personnel are authorized to use the breaching shotgun. There were no reportable incidents in the City of Monterey.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: The MPD conducted an audit of the equipment and accounted for all of the Remington 870 breaching shotguns. There were no violations of the military equipment use policy.
Total Annual Cost:
Acquisition: $0
Training: $500
Others: $300 (conversion from regular shotgun to breaching shotgun) Funding Source: Police Budget
Quantity: 2
Intention to acquire more: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 46, Packet Page 207
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT CODE § 7070(c)(14)
Description: 40mm Less Lethal Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions Quantity (existing): 14
Capabilities: The 40mm Less Lethal Launcher is capable of firing 40mm Kinetic Energy Munitions, known as sponge projectiles
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description:
Penn Arms 40mm Multi-Shot launchers are manufactured using 4140 hardened steel, 6061-T6 mil-spec anodized aluminum, and DuPont super tough glass-filled nylon. These launchers are lightweight, versatile, and used worldwide by police and corrections officers. The 40mm launcher is available in both pump-action and single shot versions.
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: The 40mm Less Lethal Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions are intended for use as a lesslethal use of force option Initial cost: $41,000
Annual costs: $6,000 (includes sponge projectiles for training) Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force Procedural: MPD Policies - 306 (Firearms), 303 (Control Devices and Techniques) Required training: Two (2) hours of initial training and (2) hours every (2) years (includes qualification) Other:
MPD has two (2) pump-action 40mm multi-shot launchers and twelve (12) single shot launcher; one less lethal launcher for each patrol vehicle. The single shot launchers replaced the less lethal shotguns.
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 47, Packet Page 208 Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
40mm Less Lethal Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
This equipment is used primarily in situations where officers encounter a subject armed with a weapon other than a firearm. The less lethal munitions are used to disarm violent individuals from a safe distance. There were no reportable incidents in the City of Monterey.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: The MPD conducted an audit of the equipment and accounted for all of the 40mm less lethal launchers. There were no violations of the military equipment use policy.
Total Annual Cost:
Acquisition: $0.00
Training: $6,000
Others: $0
Funding Source: Police Budget
Quantity: 14
Intention to acquire more: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 48, Packet Page 209
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT CODE § 7070(c)(14)
Description: 37mm Less Lethal Launcher and Oleoresin Capsicum “OC” munitions Quantity (existing): 2
Capabilities:
The 37mm Less Lethal Launcher is capable of firing barricade penetrating “OC” rounds of OC powder into a defined space. They are designed to dislodge barricaded subjects from confined areas.
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description: The Federal 37 mm Less Lethal Launcher is a single-shot break-open platform designed to fire 37mm less lethal oleoresin capsicum munitions
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: They are intended for use as a less-lethal use of force option Initial cost: $3,000
Annual costs: $100 (includes munitions)
Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force and crowd control Procedural: MPD Policies - 306 (Firearms), 303 (Control Devices and Techniques) Required training: Two (2) hours of initial training and two (2) hours every two (2) years Other: Only Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit (MPRSRU) trained personnel and Less Lethal Instructors are authorized to use this Less Lethal launcher.
Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
37mm Less Lethal Launcher and Oleoresin Capsicum “OC” munitions Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
The 37mm less lethal launcher and “OC” munition is used for firing penetrating “OC” rounds of “OC” powder into a defined space. They are designed to dislodge barricaded subjects from confined areas. There were no reportable incidents in the City of Monterey.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: The MPD conducted an audit of the equipment and accounted for all of the 37mm launchers.
There were no violations of the military equipment use policy.
Total Annual Cost:
Acquisition: $0
Training: $100 (munitions)
Others: $0
Funding Source: Police Budget
Quantity: 2
Intention to acquire more: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 49, Packet Page 210
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT OWNED/UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT CODE § 7070(c)(10)
Description: Desert Tech SRS M2 Precision Rifle
Quantity (existing): 2
Capabilities: The Desert Tech SRS M2 is a bolt action rifle capable of firing a .308 caliber projectile bullet.
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description:
The SRS-M2 adds the ability to make fast and easy adjustments to accessories mounted on the forearm through the integrated Area 419 Arcalock rail. The full-length 30 MOA tapered top rail minimizes optical visual displacement when moving between day and night scopes.
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
This rifle is authorized for use by Precision Rifle/Observer SWAT Operator(s) only. It is deployed in conjunction with the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team during highrisk incidents.
Initial cost: $10,000 (rifle, scope, attachments/equipment) Annual costs: $2,000 (includes ammunition and cleaning supplies) Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force.
Procedural:
MPD Policies - 300 (Use of Force), 306 (Firearms), 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit), 412 (Rapid Response and Deployment)
Required training:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually. MPRSRU Precision Rifle/Observers must also complete a 40 Post certified SWAT precision rifle/observer course and attend 120 hours of training annually.
Other: N/A
Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
Desert Tech SRS M2 Precision Rifle
Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
This rifle is authorized for use by Precision Rifle/Observer SWAT Operator(s) only. It is deployed in conjunction with the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team during highrisk incidents. There were no reportable incidents in the City of Monterey.
Complaints or Concerns:
The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: The MPD conducted an audit of the equipment and accounted for the rifle. There were no violations of the military equipment use policy.
Total Annual Cost:
Acquisition: $0.00
Training: $1,800 (ammunition)
Other: $200 (cleaning supplies, optic batteries, parts) Funding Source: Police Budget
Quantity: 2
Intention to acquire more: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 50, Packet Page 211
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT USED AS PART OF THE MPRSRU GOVERNMENT CODES § 7070(c)(1) and 7071(a)(1)(D)
Description: Unmanned, Remotely Piloted Powered Aerial and Ground Vehicles Quantity (existing):
0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team and Sheriff's Bomb Squad)
Capabilities:
Vehicles are capable of being remotely navigated to provide scene information and intelligence in the form of video and still images transmitted to first responders.
Expected lifespan: 5 years
Manufacturer's Description:
Remotely operated land vehicles to support various mission areas such as explosive device remediation, hazardous materials operations, tactical law enforcement operations, search & rescue, and surveillance/detection. Examples include, but are not limited to rovers, scout vehicles, and surveillance platforms. Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) comprises an unmanned aircraft and the equipment necessary for the safe and efficient operation of that aircraft. The system generally includes a fixed or rotary-wing (tethered or non-tethered) aircraft and a ground control station.
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
To enhance the safety of potentially dangerous situations by providing first responders with the ability to monitor video feed from vehicle cameras of hazardous areas prior to, or in lieu of, sending in personnel. Remotely piloted ground vehicles may be used to investigate and mitigate potential explosive devices. UAS/Drone/Arial platforms may be used for search and rescue; suspect apprehension crime scene documentation; tactical operations; scene security; hazard monitoring; identification and mitigation; response to emergency calls; crisis communications; legally authorized surveillance.
Initial Cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual Costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
Legal:
All applicable State, Federal and Local laws. Any use of UAS/Drone platforms will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit), 606 (Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Operations)
Required Training:
MPRSRU SWAT Team provides internal training for staff members prior to allowing them to operate the ground vehicle equipment. All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually. Prior to piloting any UAS/Drone staff members must secure an FAA Remote Pilot License and complete training required by FAA COA.
Other:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). The Monterey County Sheriff's Office also provides the regional explosive mitigation team "bomb squad." This equipment is owned and operated by MPRSRU SWAT and the Monterey County Sheriff's Department. While the Monterey Police Department does not own this equipment, it could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT or the Monterey County Sheriff's Department if they are deployed to an incident within city limits.
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 51, Packet Page 212 Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
Unmanned, Remotely Piloted, Powered Aerial and Ground Vehicles Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
To enhance the safety of potentially dangerous situations by providing first responders with the ability to monitor video feed from vehicle cameras of hazardous areas prior to, or in lieu of, sending in personnel. Remotely piloted ground vehicles may be used to investigate and mitigate potential explosive devices.
1. 05-17-25 – Wanted domestic violence suspect was believed to have been barricaded inside the residence. Drone used to clear the house on Alcalde Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: This equipment is not owned or maintained by the Monterey Police Department Total Annual Cost: There is no cost to the Monterey Police Department Quantity: 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team and Sheriff's Bomb Squad)
Intention to Acquire More: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 52, Packet Page 213
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT USED AS PART OF THE MPRSRU GOVERNMENT CODES §7070(c)(3) and 7071(a)(1)(D)
Description: MPRSRU Rescue Vehicle (Lenco Bearcat Armored Vehicle) Quantity (existing): 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: Capable of transporting personnel and equipment while providing them with armored protection.
Also has a breaching apparatus that can be attached.
Expected Lifespan: 10 years
Manufacturer's Description:
The Lenco BearCat is the standard tactical armored vehicle for special operations units within the US Law Enforcement community. Since the early 2000s, agencies such as LAPD, LASD SEB, NYPD ESU, Boston PD and hundreds of Federal, State and Local Law Enforcement agencies have made the BearCat part of their standard operating procedure. The Bearcat has excellent on-road driving characteristics and maneuverability in tight urban settings. The large floor plan seats 10 – 12 fully equipped officers.
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
The SRU Rescue Vehicle (Lenco Bearcat Armored Vehicle) is intended for use during critical incidents including, but not limited to: (a) Hostage situations; (b) Barricaded subject incidents; (c) Active shooter situations; (d) High risk arrest and search warrants; (e) Any threat of explosive devices; (f) Other situations where ballistic protection is necessary for the protection of personnel. The SRU Rescue Vehicle will not be deployed for situations such as peaceful protests or demonstrations where violence is not threatened toward the public, property or law enforcement personnel. When deploying the vehicle one must consider how its use or misuse could create fear or distrust in the community and take steps to mitigate those negative effects. The SRU Rescue vehicle may be deployed for exhibition at community based events for the purpose of educating and familiarizing the public with its use and purpose.
Initial Cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual Costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) Required Training:
The SRU Rescue Vehicle is driven by approved personnel who have received training in the vehicle’s operation. The training includes both classroom and practical driving exercises. Operators also receive scenario based training to include the decision making process as to how it should and should not be deployed. Scenario based training includes constitutional and community policing principles as it relates to SRU Rescue Vehicle deployment. All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST Certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually.
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 53, Packet Page 214 Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
MPRSRU Rescue Vehicle (Lenco Bearcat Armored Vehicle)
Summary of how the
military equipment was used
and the purpose of its use:
The MPRSRU Rescue Vehicle (Lenco Bearcat Armored Vehicle) is intended for use during critical incidents including, but not limited to: (a) Hostage situations; (b) Barricaded subject incidents; (c) Active shooter situations; (d) High risk arrest and search warrants; (e) Any threat of explosive devices; (f) Other situations where ballistic protection is necessary for the protection of personnel.
1. 05-17-25 – Wanted domestic violence suspect was believed to have been barricaded inside the residence. Bearcat was used to provide protection for officers near the door.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: This equipment is not owned or maintained by the Monterey Police Department.
Total Annual Cost: There is no cost to the Monterey Police Department.
Quantity: 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Intention to Acquire More: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 54, Packet Page 215
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT USED AS PART OF THE MPRSRU GOVERNMENT CODES § 7070(c)(5) and 7071(a)(1)(D)
Description: Workhorse Commercial Van
Quantity (existing): 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: Vehicles modified to facilitate the control and direction of public safety units.
Expected Lifespan: Unknown
Manufacturer's Description: Unavailable
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: Workspace for commanding/supervising personnel during critical incidents and utilized community outreach events, such as National Night Out, Public Safety Outreach, etc.
Initial Cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual Costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) Required Training:
MPRSU SWAT Team provides internal training for staff members prior to allowing them to operate these vehicles. All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually.
Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
Workhorse Commercial Van
Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
Workspace for commanding/supervising personnel during critical incidents and utilized community outreach events, such as National Night Out, Public Safety Outreach, etc. No reportable events in the City of Monterey.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Internal Audits, Violations,
Actions: This equipment is not owned or maintained by the Monterey Police Department.
Total Annual Cost: There is no cost to the Monterey Police Department.
Quantity: 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT) Intention to Acquire More: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 55, Packet Page 216
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT USED AS PART OF THE MPRSRU GOVERNMENT CODES § 7070(c)(12) and 7071(a)(1)(D)
Description: Flashbang Grenades, Explosive Breaching Tools, Tear Gas and Pepper Balls Quantity (existing): 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: Capable of breaching doors, gates, windows, and other points of entry, creating explosive distractions, and/or deploying tear gas or pepper chemical.
Expected Lifespan: Unknown
Manufacturer's Description:
A full-line manufacturer, Defense Technology’s premier product lines are grouped into five categories including aerosols, impact munitions, distraction devices, chemical munitions and launchers.
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: Breaching doors, gates, windows, and other points of entry, creating explosive distractions, and/or deploying tear gas or pepper chemicals.
Initial Cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual Costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) Required Training:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually. MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment 10 hours annually.
Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
Flashbang Grenades, Explosive Breaching Tools, Tear Gas and Pepper Balls Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment is owned and operated by MPRSRU SWAT. While the Monterey Police Department does not own this equipment, it may be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits.
There were no reportable incidents in the City of Monterey.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: This equipment is not owned or maintained by the Monterey Police Department.
Total Annual Cost: There is no cost to the Monterey Police Department.
Quantity: 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Intention to Acquire More: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 56, Packet Page 217
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT USED AS PART OF THE MPRSRU GOVERNMENT CODES § 7070(c)(7) and 7071(a)(1)(D)
Description: Remington 870 Breaching Shotgun
Quantity (existing): 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: Remington 870 12 gauge shotgun modified with pistol grip and barrel standoff designed for breaching doors or other points of entry
Expected Lifespan: Unknown
Manufacturer's Description:
The Remington Shotgun is milled from a single block of steel. The stock and fore grip are comprised of fiberglass-reinforced polymer with a rubber over-molding. This shotgun is a U.S.-made pump-action shotgun. It holds 6 less-lethal rounds.
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
Can be deployed any time tactical operators determine that it is necessary to complete a lawful breaching, and other breaching methods are determined to be ineffective. Shotgun breaching generally needs to be supported by exigent circumstances necessitating immediate access for public safety.
Initial Cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual Costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) Required Training:
All MPRSRU members complete a certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually. MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment 4 hours annually.
Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
Remington 870 Breaching Shotgun
Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment is owned and operated by MPRSRU SWAT. While the Monterey Police Department does not own this equipment, it may be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits. There were no reportable incidents in the City of Monterey.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: This equipment is not owned or maintained by the Monterey Police Department.
Total Annual Cost: There is no cost to the Monterey Police Department.
Quantity: 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team Intention to Acquire More: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 57, Packet Page 218
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT USED AS PART OF THE MPRSRU GOVERNMENT CODES § 7070(c)(14) and 7071(a)(1)(D)
Description: 37mm Less Lethal Launcher and Oleoresin Capsicum “OC” munitions Quantity (existing): 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: The 37mm Less Lethal Launcher is capable of firing barricade penetrating “OC” rounds which disperse .02 ounces of OC powder into a defined space. These munitions are designed to dislodge barricaded subjects from confined areas.
Expected Lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's Description: The Federal 37 mm Less Lethal Launcher. Is a single-shot break-open platform designed to fire 37mm less lethal oleoresin capsicum munitions.
Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: The 37mm Less Lethal Launchers and “OC” Munitions are intended for use as a less-lethal use of force option
Initial Cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual Costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) Required Training:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually. MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment 4 hours annually.
Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
37mm Less Lethal Launcher and Oleoresin Capsicum “OC” munitions Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment is owned and operated by MPRSRU SWAT. While the Monterey Police Department does not own this equipment, it could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits. There were no reportable uses of the 37mm Less Lethal Launcher by the MPRSRU in the City of Monterey.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: This equipment is not owned or maintained by the Monterey Police Department.
Total Annual Cost: There is no cost to the Monterey Police Department.
Quantity: 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT) Intention to Acquire More: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 58, Packet Page 219
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT USED AS PART OF THE MPRSRU GOVERNMENT CODES § 7070(c)(14) and 7071(a)(1)(D)
Description: 40mm Less Lethal Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions Quantity (existing): 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: The 40mm Less Lethal Launcher is capable of firing 40mm Kinetic Energy Munitions, known as sponge projectiles
Expected lifespan: 15 years
Manufacturer's description:
Penn Arms 40mm Multi-Shot launchers are manufactured using 4140 hardened steel, 6061- T6 mil-spec anodized aluminum, and DuPont super tough glass-filled nylon. These launchers are lightweight, versatile, and used worldwide by police and corrections officers. The 40mm launcher is available in both pump-action advance and single shot versions Purpose(s)/Authorized Use: The 40mm Less Lethal Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions are intended for use as a lesslethal use of force option.
Initial cost: $0 (not owned by MPD)
Annual costs: $0 (not maintained by MPD)
Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) Required training:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually.
MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment 4 hours annually.
Other:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment is registered to the Sand City Police Department for use by MPRSRU SWAT. While the Monterey Police Department does not own this equipment, it could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits.
Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
40mm Less lethal Launchers and Kinetic Energy Munitions Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit SWAT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment is owned and operated by MPRSRU SWAT. While the Monterey Police Department does not own this equipment, it could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU SWAT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits. There were no reportable uses of the 40mm Less Lethal Launcher by the MPRSRU in the City of Monterey.
Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: This equipment is not owned or maintained by the Monterey Police Department.
Total Annual Cost: There is no cost to the Monterey Police Department.
Quantity: 0 (owned by collaborating law enforcement agency for MPRSRU SWAT) Intention to Acquire More: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 59, Packet Page 220
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT UTILIZED BY THE MONTEREY POLICE DEPARTMENT USED AS PART OF THE MPRSRU GOVERNMENT CODES § 7070(c)(5) and 7071(a)(1)(D)
Description: LDV Inc. Custom Specialty Vehicles - Crisis Negotiation Team Command Vehicle Quantity (existing): 1 (owned by MPD for MPRSRU SWAT Team) Capabilities: Vehicle is modified to act as a Negotiations Operations Center at critical incidents Expected lifespan: 20 years
Manufacturer's description: 2022 Ford E-450 Cutaway - Emergency Response Vehicle - Mobile Command Vehicle Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
This vehicle will provide a designated Negotiations Operations Center (NOC) in a constant state of operational readiness for the MPRSRU Crisis Negotiations Team (CNT) that will aid in the resolution of crisis incidents. Also utilized for community outreach events such as National Night Out, Public Safety Outreach, etc.
Initial cost:
$200,000 initial outlay to be reimbursed through the Homeland Security Grant Program - Urban Areas Security Initiative.
Annual costs: $2,500 / year maintenance and upkeep
Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing police use of force.
Procedural: MPD Policies - 404 (Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit) Required training:
All MPRSRU members are required to complete an initial POST certified 80 hour basic SWAT course, 120 hours of annual training, and 24 hours of SWAT update training bi-annually.
MPRSRU members train on this piece of equipment 4 hours annually.
Other:
The Monterey Police Department participates in the Monterey Peninsula Regional Special Response Unit CNT Team (MPRSRU). This equipment will be registered to the Monterey Police and operated by MPRSRU CNT. This equipment could be used in Monterey by MPRSRU CNT if they are deployed to an incident within city limits.
Government Code Section § 7072 – Annual Report:
Crisis Negotiation Team Command Vehicle
Summary of how the military
equipment was used and the
purpose of its use:
The vehicle was used at all of the MPSRU call-outs for the hostage negotiators.
1. 04-02-25 – Assist SRU with Support in King City
2. 05-17-25 – Wanted domestic violence suspect was believed to have been barricaded inside a residence in Monterey.
3. 07-11-25 – Deployed to assist an SRU operation in Salinas
4. 07-16-25 – Deployed to assist an SRU operation in Castroville
5. 09-10-25 – Deployed to assist an SRU operation in the City of Marina (Tallmon Avenue)
6. 12-18-25 – Deployed to assist an SRU operation in the 1900 block of Grandview Complaints or Concerns: The MPD did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding this military equipment.
Audits, Violations, Actions: No violations of use policy.
Total Annual Cost: $2,500 / year maintenance and upkeep Quantity: 1 (For MPRSRU SWAT)
Intention to Acquire More: No
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 60, Packet Page 221
QUALIFYING EQUIPMENT ACQUISITION REQUEST
GOVERNMENT CODE § 7070(c)(5)
Description: Supervisor Command Vehicle
Quantity: 2 sought
Capabilities:
A specialized law enforcement vehicle utilized by patrol supervisors for daily field operations. The platform is designed to function as a mobile Incident Command Post (ICP), facilitating the implementation of the Incident Command System (ICS) during critical incidents and Unified Command operations with Fire and EMS.
Expected lifespan: 10 years
Manufacturer's description: Police Rated Pick-Up Truck or Full Size SUV, similar to a Ford F-150 or Chevrolet Tahoe Purpose(s)/Authorized Use:
The Department seeks approval to acquire and utilize a dedicated command vehicle platform (e.g., Ford F-150 or Chevrolet Tahoe) to serve as a primary mobile Incident Command Post (ICP). Unlike standard patrol sedans, this vehicle is specifically configured to support the Incident Command System (ICS) during critical incidents, natural disasters, and high-risk operations. It provides a centralized, weather-protected environment where an Incident Commander or Watch Commander can effectively manage resources, maintain a strategic overview of the scene, and coordinate multiagency responses. The acquisition of this vehicle aligns with established public safety standards, mirroring the operational capabilities currently utilized by the Fire Department for Division Chiefs to manage fireground operations.
Field supervisors are required to carry a significantly higher volume of specialized equipment than standard patrol officers, including tactical breaching tools, extended medical kits, rigorous protective equipment, and incident management boards. The proposed utility platform offers the necessary payload and cargo capacity to safely store and organize this essential gear, ensuring it is immediately accessible upon arrival. A standard patrol vehicle lacks the physical space to accommodate this loadout without compromising the safe operation of the vehicle or the rapid deployment of the supervisor.
A critical component of this command vehicle is its enhanced communications suite, designed to bridge the gap between field units and dispatch during chaotic events. The vehicle will be upfitted with additional radio transceivers and command infrastructure, allowing the supervisor to monitor and transmit across multiple frequencies, including tactical channels, mutual aid frequencies, and fire/EMS operational channels. This capability is vital for ensuring seamless interoperability and officer safety during complex incidents. There is no reasonable alternative to this specialized vehicle that provides the same level of command-and-control capability, equipment accessibility, and communications redundancy required to safeguard the community and officers during critical events.
Initial cost: $150,000 per vehicle
Annual costs: $15,000 / year maintenance and fuel
Legal: All applicable State, Federal and Local laws governing the use of vehicles Procedural: MPD Policies - 703 (Vehicle Use)
Required training: No additional training needed
Other: N/A
Note: N/A
ATTACHMENT 3
Council Regular Meeting, 4/7/2026, Item No. 18., Item Page 61, Packet Page 222