MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
CITY OF MONTEREY
Tuesday, May 5, 2026
4:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBER, 580 PACIFIC ST.
MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
Councilmembers
Present: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson
Absent: Smith
City Staff
Present:
City Manager, City Attorney, Assistant City Manager, Community Development Director, Finance Director, Parks and Recreation Director, Public Works Director, City Clerk, Police Lieutenant, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer, Housing Manager, Management Analyst (City Manager's Office), HCD Coordinator, Environmental Relations Analyst 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.
AFTERNOON SESSION
Presentations (Afternoon)
1. Receive Presentation from the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability at Hopkins Marine Station (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Received presentation
Bill Sherrod of Stanford University’s Doerr School of Sustainability gave the Hopkins Marine Station presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions. Public comment was received from Nina Beety, who asked questions relating to the effects of Fukushima radiation and U. S.
Naval equipment on sealife. On question from the Council, Mr. Sherrod said that the work at Hopkins overlapped with, but did not directly address, those specific subjects.
General Public Comments
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from: Dan Turner, Jeffrey Glickman of Congregation Beth Israel, Sabrina Hiltunen of the Old Monterey Business Association, and Nina Beety.
Consent Agenda
Public comment on the Consent Items was solicited but not received.
On a motion by Councilmember Barber, seconded by Councilmember Garcia, and carried by the following vote, the City Council approved the Consent Agenda:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
City Council Minutes May 5, 2026
2 Consent: Approval of Minutes
2. April 21, 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: Other
3. Appoint Agency Negotiators for Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8; Property: A Portion of Land North of 731 Dry Creek Road (Assessor's Parcel No. 014-031-003-000); Agency Negotiators: Andrea Renny and Andrew Easterling; Negotiating Parties: Shad Thielman (California-American Water Company); Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Granting Easement (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Appointed agency real property negotiators Renny and Easterling (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
4. Authorize the Mayor to Sign Letter of Support Regarding Assembly Bill 1821 (Pacheco) - California Public Records Act: Agency Response Time (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Authorized letter (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent) End of Consent Agenda
Afternoon Session Items
Public Hearing (Afternoon)
5. Open a Public Hearing to Receive Protests of Proposed Stormwater Utility Fees and Adopt a Resolution Directing a Mailed Ballot Proceeding if a Majority Protest Does Not Exist (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) -- This item will be heard during the afternoon session at 4:00 p.m. and continued to 7:00 p.m., which is the time noticed for the hearing. The public hearing will be opened at 4:00 but it will not be closed until this item is considered at 7:00 p.m.
Action: Opened public hearing, received public feedback, continued to the evening session (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
Environmental Regulations Analyst Baggott gave a verbal staff presentation.
The public hearing was opened and public comment was received from: Bob Faulis, who said he would need to research the proposed fee; Fred Menezes, and Rick Heuer of Monterey Peninsula Taxpayers Association, who both spoke against the proposed fee, citing concerns about affordability and the City's budgeting choices; Marta Kraftzeck, who expressed concerns about properties being assessed identically regardless of permeability levels of properties; and Erica Walker, who spoke against the proposed fee and its proposed inclusion in the tax roll.
The Council discussed the matter. On question, City Engineer/Deputy Public Works Director Easterling explained that the fees had not been increased in over twenty years, that the amount ratepayers were paying was higher than the proposed new fee rate, and that the City was conducting a rate study. He detailed the allowable uses of Measure P & S funds and clarified that those funds allowed for rehabilitation and maintenance of existing facilities, but not expansion or City Council Minutes May 5, 2026
3 addition of facilities, and detailed the allowable uses of funds collected through a stormwater utility fee if it were to pass. He provided an account of the recent town hall meeting on the subjects of the City budget, sales tax measure, and the proposed stormwater fee. Environmental Regulations Analyst Baggott noted that the proposed fee would cover two-thirds of the operations and maintenance cost. She clarified that County Assessor parcel ownership data was used for the notice mailing.
The Council expressed gratitude for the feedback received, and emphasized that they were listening to the community. It was stressed that decisions on how to resolve the City's budget issues would be difficult and would require input and participation from the community. A brief overview of the City's budget history was provided, and focus was placed on a past lack of dedicated funding for maintenance of existing infrastructure and how this had strained the resources of the general fund. It was noted that the City had been making progress by putting away funds into reserve accounts and by investing in needing infrastructure such as by replacing aging fire trucks. It was noted that the City was not only looking for new revenue sources but also had cut expenditures, and was considering canceling its grants program, and that there was concern about finding balance in this process, citing the risk of businesses and events leaving the City. It was stressed that increasing a fee would not resolve the City's budget woes, and appreciation was expressed for the community's analysis and assistance in trying to find creative solutions.
On a motion by Mayor Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following vote, the City Council continued the matter to the evening session:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
6. Conduct a Public Hearing and Receive Public Comments on the Draft Fiscal Year 2026- 2027 Annual Action Plan for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds, Authorize Submittal to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Authorize the City Manager to Make Administrative Changes Requested by HUD, and Authorize Staff to Amend the Public Services Budget to Meet the CDBG 15% Funding Cap (Exempt from NEPA per 24 CFR Part 58 and from CEQA per Article 19, Section 15301, Class1, 15306, Class 6 and 15326, Class 26)
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-059 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent) Housing and Community Development Verania gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions together with Housing Manager Wyatt and Community Development Director Cole. The public hearing was opened and public comment was solicited but not received.
On a motion by Councilmember Rasch, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-060 C.S.:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
Public Appearance (Afternoon)
7. Issue Two (2) Storefront Retail Cannabis Business Permits, Contingent on Obtaining a Zone Clearance, to Waitlisted Applicants 1) Infinity Assets Monterey LLC and 2) Monterey Organic LLC (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
City Council Minutes May 5, 2026
4 Action: Adopted Resolution Nos. 26-060 and 26-061 C.S. (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
Management Analyst Ackermann gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions. Public comment was received from: Chris Hester, of Infinity Assets Monterey LLC, who let the Council know that he was present in the meeting remotely.
On a motion by Councilmember Rasch, seconded by Councilmember Garcia, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution Nos. 26-061 and 26-062 C.S.:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
8. Conduct a Drawing to Determine the Commercial Cannabis Zones for Infinity Assets Monterey, LLC and Monterey Organic LLC to Operate Retail Cannabis Businesses (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: Adopted the results of the random drawing through which the order was selected from which the applicants would have their choice of available zones: 1) First choice of zone to Monterey Organic LLC, 2) Remaining zone, if desired, to Infinity Assets Monterey LLC (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent) Management Analyst Ackermann gave a brief verbal staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions. Public comment was not received.
Pursuant to the stipulations of City Code section 7-7.07(c), Community Development Director Cole conducted the drawing. The process began with the two applicants selected by the Council during Item 7 of this meeting. Each applicant's name was drawn by Community Development Director Cole at random from a glass vase, to determine the order in which they would have their choice of the following two available storefront retail cannabis zones (the Wave Street area/CB3, and North Fremont Street/CB4 as defined in Monterey City Code section 38-99.8(B)(1)). The applicants were drawn in the following order: 1. First choice of zone to Monterey Organic LLC; and 2.
Remaining zone, if desired, to Infinity Assets Monterey LLC.
On a motion by Mayor Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Barber, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted the results of the drawing:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
Requests from Councilmembers to Agendize New Matters
9. Mayor Williamson’s Request to Agendize a Discussion Regarding Review of the Council Governance Policy: Agendizing Process and Meeting Efficiency (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378, and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) Action: Directed staff to agendize the matter on May 27, 2026 (4-0-1, Councilmember Smith absent)
Mayor Williamson gave a brief verbal presentation supporting his request, and answered Councilmembers' questions. He suggested that adding an additional Council meeting per month could help with meeting management.
City Council Minutes May 5, 2026
5 Public comment was received from: Erica Walker, who expressed concern about a potential lack of transparency associated with Council's private coordination with staff; Alice Wik-Crosby, who said that the public would appreciate more explanatory agenda materials and more opportunity to provide input on agenda items; Rick Heuer, who said that less editorializing by the Council after public comments would shorten meeting time; and Lori Mazzuca, who suggested the Council hold a meeting on the governance policy and urged adopting a code of conduct.
The Council expressed an interest in discussing other aspects of the governance policy, to include Council's communication protocols with City staff, the use of letterhead outside of approved policy, and comments by Council toward members of the public. Interest was expressed in managing the timing for bringing forward requested topics that had already been approved by the Council but had not yet been agendized.
City Manager Hall said that it was the City staff's goal to be as transparent as possible but that a lot of staff work took place outside of Council meetings. He provided context for the timing of agenda production. He asked the Council to keep staff's timeline in mind, referencing statutory requirements.
Support was expressed for agendizing the discussion. It was stated that this topic being agendized would be a good opportunity to share information with the public about how these processes work internally. Support was expressed for scheduling a study session or "deep dive" into the Council's governance policy in full. The request was made to agendize discussion already approved for agendization before newer discussions approved for agendization.
On a motion by Mayor Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Garcia, and carried by the following vote, the City Council approved agendization of the requested discussion on the special meeting on May 27, 2026:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
Adjourn to Closed Session
Public comment on the closed session was solicited but not received. The Council adjourned to closed session at 6:09 p.m.
Closed Session (Afternoon)
10. Closed Session Conference with Real Property Negotiators Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Property: A Portion of Land North of 731 Dry Creek Road (Assessor’s Parcel No. 014-031-003-000)
Agency Negotiators: Andrea Renny and Andrew Easterling
Negotiating Parties: Shad Thielman (California-American Water Company) Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment for Granting an Easement (Not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3 CEQA Guidelines Article 20, Section 15378)
Action: No reportable action taken
11. Conference with Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1): Stronghold Engineering, Inc. v. City of Monterey (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 18CV329015) (Not a Project under CEQA Article 20, Section 15378 and under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061)
Action: No reportable action taken
City Council Minutes May 5, 2026
6 The Council recessed at 6:56 p.m. and reconvened at 7:02 p.m.
EVENING SESSION AGENDA
Pledge of Allegiance
Councilmember Rasch led the Pledge.
General Public Comments, Continued
Public comment on non-agendized matters was received from Hans Jannasch.
Evening Session Items
Public Hearing (Evening)
12. Continued Public Hearing to Receive Protests of Proposed Stormwater Utility Fees and Adopt a Resolution Directing a Mailed Ballot Proceeding if a Majority Protest Does Not Exist (Not a Project Under CEQA per Article 20, Section 15378 and Under General Rule Article 5, Section 15061) -- This item is continued from 4:00 p.m.
Action: Adopted Resolution No. 26-062 C.S., 4-0-1 (Councilmember Smith absent) For the continuation of Item 5 in the afternoon session, Environmental Regulations Analyst Baggott gave the staff presentation and answered Councilmembers' questions.
The public hearing was reopened and further public comment was received from: Char Carter, who spoke against the proposed fee, citing concerns about the City's budgeting choices and about the potential to the fee on the tax roll; Jody Schisel, who expressed indecision, stressing that the whole Monterey Bay area should work together to preserve the bay's health, but expressing concern about potential uses of the fee's dedicated fund; and Tom Reeves, who asked a few questions.
On question from the Council, City Engineer/Deputy Public Works Director Easterling explained that staff had lowered the proposed rate to the two-thirds cost recovery level based on the level of support shown in the community survey, and that the rate study, which was currently available in draft form on the City website, would be approved in July after the vote.
The Council made remarks similar to those made in the afternoon discussion, regarding infrastructure deferred maintenance funding issues over the City's past history, and reserve accounts that were intended to prevent this issue from recurring. It was noted that the stormwater fee was previously paid by ratepayers, but was removed, which had contributed to the City's budget deficit. It was stressed that the reinstated fee, if approved, would be at a lower rate than what ratepayers paid previously.
At the conclusion of the public hearing, pursuant to the provisions in Resolution 26-037 C.S., City Clerk Klein reported to the Council that the number of protests had been received was substantially fewer than the number required to constitute a majority protest, and that therefore a majority protest had not been received.
On a motion by Mayor Williamson, seconded by Councilmember Rasch, and carried by the following vote, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 26-062 C.S.:
AYES: 4 COUNCILMEMBERS: Barber, Garcia, Rasch, Williamson NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: (None)
ABSENT: 1 COUNCILMEMBERS: Smith
City Council Minutes May 5, 2026
7 Council Comments
Councilmember Barber spoke about SB 1893 and gave residents advance notice that the State of California was planning upcoming efforts to increase compliance with food waste recovery requirements.
City Manager Reports
City Manager Hall invited all to the Planning Division's upcoming community workshop for the Open Space and Conservation Element, and shared that there was a Have Your Say Monterey outreach webpage on the City's website about the General Plan process.
Adjournment
The Council adjourned at 7:27 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted, Approved,
Clementine Bonner Klein Tyller Williamson
City Clerk Mayor