Agenda packet — Mount Shasta City Council, April 27, 2026

“Our mission is to maintain the character of our “small town” community while striking an appropriate balance between economic development and preservation of our quality of life. We help create a dynamic and vital City by providing quality, cost-effective municipal services and by forming partnerships with residents and organizations in the constant pursuit of excellence.”
Page Item STANDING AGENDA ITEMS

1. Call to Order and Flag Salute

2. Roll call

3. Special Presentations & Announcements

4. Public Comment:

This time is set aside for citizens to address the City Council on matters listed on the Consent Agenda as well as other items not included on the Regular Agenda. If your comments concern an agenda item noted on the regular agenda, please address the Council when that item is open for public comment. Each speaker is allocated three (3) minutes to speak. Speakers may not cede their time. Comments should be limited to matters within the jurisdiction of the City. Council discussion or action cannot be taken on items not listed on the agenda other than to receive comments. If you have documents to present to members of Council, please provide a minimum of seven (7) copies to the Deputy City Clerk.

5. Council and Staff Comments

6. Committee Updates:
a) Downtown Enhancement Advisory Committee
b) Library Tax Advisory Committee
c) Beautification Committee
d) Active Transportation Committee
There are currently several vacancies on advisory committees: one vacancy on the Planning Commission, two vacancies on the Beautification Committee, and one vacancy on the Downtown Enhancement Advisory Committee.

Mt. Shasta City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
Mt. Shasta City Park Upper Lodge, 1315 Nixon Rd.

Monday, Apri l 27th , 2 026, 5:30 p.m.

The meeting can also be viewed online at the
following link: MountShasta.22Ave.tv

CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS

7. Consent Agenda - The City Manager recommends approval of the following Consent Agenda items. All Resolutions and Ordinances on this agenda, or added hereto, shall be introduced or adopted, as applicable, by title only, and the full reading thereof is hereby waived. a. Approval of Minutes: April 13, 2026 regular City Council meeting b. Approval of Disbursements: Accounts Payable 4/13/26, 4/15/26, and 4/20/2026; Total Gross Payroll and Taxes: For the Period Ending 4/16/2026 c. Monthly Investment Report
d. Purchase and Outfitting of Patrol Vehicle using Proposition 64 Grant Funds e. Approval of Contract: Cellular Services

8. Community Partners Presentations
Background: As the City prepares the 2026/27 Fiscal Year budget, staff has invited community partners to speak on behalf of their organizations.

Report By: Malisa Dodd, Finance Director
Recommended Council Action: Staff requests that the Council receive the reports prepared by Mount Shasta’s community partners.

9. Discussion/Report: Mobile Home Park Rent Control
Background: Residents of Shasta Horizon Mobile Home Park have raised concerns regarding rising rent and utility costs.

Report By: Todd Juhasz, City Manager
Recommended Council Action: Staff requests that the Council review research prepared by staff and consider whether the situation warrants the preparation of an applicable ordinance.

10. Staff Report: State Revenue and Taxation Finance Committee Background: Staff will provide an overview of the discussions which took place at the January and March 2026 State Revenue and Taxation Finance Committee meetings.

Report By: Todd Juhasz, City Manager
Recommended Council Action: Receive report.

Packet

Page 5 ends

Packet

Page 53 ends

Packet

Page 154 ends

Packet

Page 168 ends

11. Closeout of Fund 70
Background: Fund 70 has been used to fund projects recommended by the Beautification Committee.

Report By: Malisa Dodd, Finance Director
Recommended Council Action: Staff recommends that the Council approve the closing out of Fund 70 – Beautification Projects Fund, allowing the budget to be managed as a department of the General Fund.

CITY COUNCIL/STAFF REPORTING PERIOD

12. Council Reports on Attendance at Appointed/Outside Meetings

13. Future Agenda Items (Appearing on the agenda within 60-90 days): None a. Master Fee Schedule Review
b. Mobile Home Rent Stabilization
c. 2026 Sales Tax Ballot Measure
Future Agenda Items Over 90 Days: None

14. Adjourn
Availability of Public Records: All public records related to an open session item on this agenda, which are not exempt from disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act, that are distributed to a majority of the legislative body will be available for public inspection at City Hall located at 305 North Mt. Shasta Blvd., Mt. Shasta, CA at the same time the public records are distributed or made available to the members of the legislative body. Agenda related writings or documents provided to a majority of the legislative body after distribution of the Agenda packet will be available for public review within a separate binder at City Hall at the same time as they are made available to the members of the legislative body.

The City of Mt. Shasta does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, religion, age or disability in employment or provision of services. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons requiring accommodations for a disability at a public meeting should notify the City Clerk or Deputy City Clerk at least 48 hours prior to the meeting at
(530) 926-7516 in order to allow the City sufficient time to make reasonable arrangements to accommodate participation in this meeting.

Packet

Page 173 ends

Contents
Consent Agenda…………………………………………………………………….....5
Approval of Minutes: April 27, 2026 Regular Meeting………….……….…………….5 Disbursements………………….………………...…….………………………...8
Monthly Investment Report……….………….…….…………….……………….14
Patrol Vehicle Expenditure……….………….…….…………….……………….22
Cellular Services……….………….…….…………….………………………...32
Community Partners Presentations…………………………………………………...53 Mt. Shasta Sisson Museum……………………….……….……………………...53
Siskiyou Outdoor Recreation Alliance……………………………………………..64 The Ascension……….………………………………………………………….78
Siskiyou Humane Society……….………….…….………………………………90
Chamber of Commerce……….………….…….……………….………………106
Collier Rest Stop Visitor’s Center……….………….…….…………….………… 141 Mobile Home Park Rent Control…………………………………………………….154
Staff Report………………………………….……….…………………………154
Rent Control Jurisdictions…………………………………………………………160
Staff Report: State Revenue and Taxation Finance Committee……………………….168 Staff Report………………………………….……….………………………….168
Closeout of Fund 70…………………………………………………………………...173
Staff Report………………………………….……….………………………….173
Balance Sheet General Ledger………………………………….……….…………174
Page Item STANDING AGENDA ITEMS

1. Call to Order and Flag Salute: At the hour of 5:30pm, Mayor Glaubman called the meeting to order and led the audience in the flag salute.

2. Roll call:

Council Members Present: Collings, Clure, Stackfleth, Redmond, Glaubman Council Members Absent: None

3. Special Presentations & Announcements: None

4. Public Comment
Tatiana Gonzalez – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Councilmember Collings – Asks clarifying question regarding written public comment.

Mayor Glaubman – Asks clarifying question regarding written public comment.

Shianna Freeman – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Annastasia Stevens – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Rael Irshaan – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Addison Errigo – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Brandon Cash – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Julie Alantoff – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Kim Daniel – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Evan Drake – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits, invites the public on behalf of Siskiyou Housing Alliance to attend the Earth Day celebration.

Ennana – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Hamit – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Darius Oliver – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Kevin – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Nicky Eve Aarons – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Kathleen Amira Majdelly – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Christine Schubert – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Member of the Public – Comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits.

Afa – Thanks commenters, comments in support of resolution banning chemtrails within City limits, thanks Council and staff, invites the public to attend nonprofit fundraiser.

Aurea – Thanks commenters, invites public to attend business event.

Mt. Shasta City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
Mt. Shasta City Park Upper Lodge, 1315 Nixon Rd.

Monday, Apri l 13
th , 2 026, 5:30 p.m.
5 5. Council and Staff Comments
Mayor Glaubman – Thanks members of the public for participating in public comment.

Councilmember Collings – Addresses citizen concerns regarding chemtrails.

Robert Gibson, Chief of Police – Comments regarding acquisition of police vehicle funded by Proposition 64 Grant funds, recognizes dispatchers.

Malisa Dodd, Finance Director – Provides update regarding fee collections, business license renewals, notes upcoming budget year community partners presentations.

Todd Juhasz, City Manager – Addresses citizen concerns regarding chemtrails, provides update on Enhanced Infrastructure Finance District reporting, comments regarding development efforts at the Landing, notes upcoming townhall meeting, notes upcoming Library Expansion Project cost estimate report.

6. Committee Updates:
a) Downtown Enhancement Advisory Committee
b) Library Tax Advisory Committee
c) Beautification Committee
d) Active Transportation Committee
Mayor Glaubman – Notes committee vacancies.

CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS

7. Consent Agenda - The City Manager recommends approval of the following Consent Agenda items. All Resolutions and Ordinances on this agenda, or added hereto, shall be introduced or adopted, as applicable, by title only, and the full reading thereof is hereby waived. a. Approval of Minutes: March 23, 2026 regular City Council meeting b. Approval of Disbursements: Accounts Payable 3/23/2026, 3/27/26, and 4/8/26; Total Gross Payroll and Taxes: For the Period Ending 4/2/2026 c. Police Department Monthly Report
MOTION TO APPROVE: Councilmember Stackfleth
SECOND: Councilmember Clure
AYES: Collings, Clure, Stackfleth, Redmond, Glaubman
NAYES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

8. Library, Business Improvement, and Enterprise Funds Update Malisa Dodd, Finance Director – Provides report on City funds. 6 9. Anniversary of the Founding of the United States and of the Naming of the City of Mount Shasta Todd Juhasz, City Manager – Provides report on summer celebrations and marketing campaign.

10. Building Plan Check Contract
Kim Fowler, Planning Director – Comments regarding need for commercial plan checkers, answers Council questions.

Todd Juhasz, City Manager – Comments regarding need for multiple plan checkers.

MOTION: Councilmember Stackfleth moves to authorize the City Manager to execute four professional service agreements with consultant building checkers for a combined not-to-exceed amount of $30,000 through June 30, 2027.

SECOND: Clure
AYES: Collings, Clure, Stackfleth, Redmond, Glaubman
NAYES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None

CITY COUNCIL/STAFF REPORTING PERIOD

11. Council Reports on Attendance at Appointed/Outside Meetings Councilmember Stackfleth – Reports on Collier Interpretive Information Center meeting.

Mayor Glaubman – Reports on Coffee with the Mayor event, League of Local Agencies meeting, notes upcoming California City Leaders Summit.

12. Future Agenda Items (Appearing on the agenda within 60-90 days): None a. Master Fee Schedule Review
b. Mobile Home Rent Stabilization
c. 2026 Sales Tax Ballot Measure
d. State Revenue and Taxation Finance Committee Report
Future Agenda Items Over 90 Days: None

13. Adjourn: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:36pm.

Respectfully Submitted By: Rachel Agron, Deputy City Clerk 7 City Council Agenda Item #7b
Staff Report
Meeting Date: April 27, 2026
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Malisa Dodd, Finance Director
Subject: Approval of Warrants and Payroll
Recommendation:

Staff requests the Mayor and City Council Approve warrants paid including payroll benefits and withholding, and payroll distribution, in the amount of $594,902.03 Background & Summary:

Approval of Check Numbers 54977-55033 $ 446,944.62
Total Payroll Distribution $ 83,883.03
Total EFTPS – CalPERS, Nationwide $ 28,173.14
Total Payroll EFTPS Taxes $ 35,901.24
$ 594,902.03
Financial Impacts:

Expenditures are consistent with current level spending as reviewed with City Council.

Attachments:

1.) Check Registers – 4/13/26, 4/15/26, 4/20/26

2.) ACH Payroll Distribution – 4/16/26

3.) EFTPS Reports – Payroll/CalPERS – 4/16/26
Regular
x Consent
Closed
Presentation
8 Accounts Payable
User:

Printed:
[email protected]
4/21/2026 12:25 PM
Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
54977 10404 AT&T 04/13/2026 542.79
54978 10402 AT&T MOBILITY FIRSTNET 04/13/2026 1,884.29
54979 11156 YOLANDE DIEDRE BELL 04/13/2026 128.28
54980 300157 California Municipal Advisors, LLC 04/13/2026 1,650.00 54981 12200 CALIFORNIA SAFETY COMPANY 04/13/2026 225.00 54982 12213 CAL-ORE COMMUNICATIONS 04/13/2026 1,580.93
54983 13241 DOWN RANGE 04/13/2026 1,043.63
54984 300244 Julio Escamilla 04/13/2026 375.00
54985 15030 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, INC. #1423 04/13/2026 3,200.08 54986 15221 FRIENDS OF THE MT SHASTA LIBRARY04/13/2026 13,281.00 54987 16030 GANNETT CALIFORNIA LOCALIQ 04/13/2026 325.00 54988 16045 GEOCON CONSULTANTS INC 04/13/2026 165.00
54989 300139 The Good Year Tire & Rubber Company 04/13/2026 1,742.46 54990 300243 Iconic Machinery 04/13/2026 58,885.87
54991 22140 KENNY & NORINE 04/13/2026 4,350.88
54992 300173 KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC 04/13/2026 1,635.89 54993 22352 MES SERVICE COMPANY LLC 04/13/2026 905.00
54994 22121 MOTION & FLOW CONTROL PRODUCTS INC 04/13/2026 395.44 54995 300242 MSC Landscape 04/13/2026 3,120.00
54996 22200 MT. SHASTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE04/13/2026 12,500.00 54997 22317 MT. SHASTA VALERO 04/13/2026 58.07
54998 11140 PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES LLC 04/13/2026 937.40 54999 25080 PACIFIC POWER & LIGHT 04/13/2026 201.88
55000 28000 S.C.O.R.E. 04/13/2026 105,093.47
55001 28378 SISKIYOU COUNTY GENERAL SERVICES04/13/2026 929.61 55002 32060 SOLANOS INC 04/13/2026 373.29
55003 300154 The Ascension Aesthetic 04/13/2026 9,600.00 55004 30004 U.S. BANK EQUIPMENT FINANCE 04/13/2026 666.96 55005 30069 US BANK CORPORATE PAYMENT SYS 04/13/2026 6,252.73 55006 31031 VESTIS 04/13/2026 861.42
55007 32055 WECO INDUSTRIES LLC 04/13/2026 1,662.46
55008 32140 WESTERN BUSINESS PRODUCTS 04/13/2026 82.99
55009 300208 WM CORPORATE SERVICES, INC 04/13/2026 28.68 55010 34055 YREKA TRANSFER, LLC 04/13/2026 4,600.00
55011 10143 AIRPORT CHEVROLET GMC CADILLAC04/15/2026 49,183.63 55012 300246 Shannamar Dewey 04/15/2026 7,599.78
55013 10229 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 04/20/2026 718.52
55014 10338 APEX TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT 04/20/2026 8,606.79 55015 300248 Autel New Energy US Inc. 04/20/2026 14,844.40 55016 11156 YOLANDE DIEDRE BELL 04/20/2026 200.40
55017 300247 Lance Folley 04/20/2026 1,447.15
55018 300173 KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES INC 04/20/2026 18,319.70 55019 21155 LITHIA MOTORS 04/20/2026 339.01
55020 22135 MELO EXCAVATION 04/20/2026 60,000.00
55021 300242 MSC Landscape 04/20/2026 3,120.00
55022 28120 NAPA AUTO PARTS 04/20/2026 10.66
55023 23023 NATIVE GROUNDS NURSERY AND LANDSCAPE INC 04/20/2026 625.35 AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (4/21/2026 12:25 PM) Page 1 9 Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount 55024 25020 PACE ENGINEERING INC 04/20/2026 28,710.00
55025 27000 RAMSHAW'S ACE HARDWARE INC 04/20/2026 106.56 55026 300238 Robertson-Bryan, Inc. 04/20/2026 2,833.00
55027 28340 SISKIYOU COUNTY AUDITOR 04/20/2026 3,038.04 55028 28372 SISKIYOU COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL 04/20/2026 3,000.00 55029 28475 SISKIYOU FIRE EQUIPMENT 04/20/2026 243.00
55030 32060 SOLANOS INC 04/20/2026 267.18
55031 29011 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 137 04/20/2026 1,718.92
55032 31031 VESTIS 04/20/2026 220.03
55033 32036 WALLACE ENTERPRISES 04/20/2026 2,507.00
Report Total (57 checks): 446,944.62
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (4/21/2026 12:25 PM) Page 2 10 From: Tri Counties Bank
To: Malisa Dodd
Subject: Tri Counties Bank - ACH Payment Status Change Notification Date: Wednesday, April 15, 2026 8:00:32 AM
ACH Notification
Report Date/Time 04/15/26 08:00:16 PDT
This transaction has been successfully completed.

Transaction Number: ACH-02036092
ACH Company: City Mt Shasta
Company Entry Description: PAYROLL
Payment Date: 04/16/2026
Total Credits: $83,883.03 (44)
Total Debits: $0.00 (0)
Status: Completed
11 User:

Printed: 04/20/2026 - 8:33AM
[email protected]
Computer Check Proof List by Vendor
Accounts Payable
Batch: 00005.04.2026 - 03/30/26-04/12/26 Payroll
Invoice No Description Amount Pmt Date Acct Number Reference Vendor: 300160 CalPERS Check Sequence: 1 ACH Enabled: True PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Police PEPRA 3,422.97 04/14/2026 10-000-2150 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Police PEPRA PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Miscellaneous Classic 778.51 04/14/2026 10-000-2150 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Miscellaneous Classic PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Fire PEPRA 1,567.23 04/14/2026 10-000-2150 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Fire PEPRA PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Police Classic 722.08 04/14/2026 10-000-2150 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Police Classic PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS FIre PEPRA 1,540.34 04/14/2026 10-000-2150 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS FIre PEPRA PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Police Classic 1,641.47 04/14/2026 10-000-2150 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Police Classic PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Deferred Comp PERS 951.36 04/14/2026 10-000-2155 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Deferred Comp PERS PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Miscellaneous PEPRA 5,323.37 04/14/2026 10-000-2150 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Miscellaneous PEPRA PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Miscellaneous PEPRA 5,467.61 04/14/2026 10-000-2150 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Miscellaneous PEPRA PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Police PEPRA 3,364.25 04/14/2026 10-000-2150 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Police PEPRA PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Miscellaneous Classic 447.80 04/14/2026 10-000-2150 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 PERS Miscellaneous Classic Check Total: 25,226.99
Vendor: 300177 EDD ACH Check Sequence: 2 ACH Enabled: True PR Batch 00001.04.2026 State Income Tax 4,218.13 04/14/2026 10-000-2130 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 State Income Tax PR Batch 00001.04.2026 State Disability Insurance 1,515.47 04/14/2026 10-000-2140 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 State Disability Insurance Check Total: 5,733.60
Vendor: 300159 Expertpay Check Sequence: 3 ACH Enabled: True PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Garnishment 346.15 04/14/2026 10-000-2184 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Garnishment Check Total: 346.15
Vendor: 300158 IRS Check Sequence: 4 ACH Enabled: True
PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Federal Income Tax 10,906.98 04/14/2026 10-000-2120 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Federal Income Tax PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Medicare Employee Portion 1,825.37 04/14/2026 10-000-2110 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Medicare Employee Portion AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (04/20/2026 - 8:33 AM) Page 1 12 Invoice No Description Amount Pmt Date Acct Number Reference PR Batch 00001.04.2026 FICA Employee Portion 7,804.96 04/14/2026 10-000-2110 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 FICA Employee Portion PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Medicare Employer Portion 1,789.62 04/14/2026 10-000-2110 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Medicare Employer Portion PR Batch 00001.04.2026 FICA Employer Portion 7,652.08 04/14/2026 10-000-2110 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 FICA Employer Portion PR Batch 00001.04.2026 FICA Employer Portion 152.88 04/16/2026 10-000-2110 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 FICA Employer Portion PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Medicare Employer Portion 35.75 04/16/2026 10-000-2110 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Medicare Employer Portion Check Total: 30,167.64
Vendor: 300161 Nationwide Check Sequence: 5 ACH Enabled: True PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Deferred Comp Nationwide 50 1,400.00 04/14/2026 10-000-2155 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Deferred Comp Nationwide PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Deferred Comp Nationwide 725.00 04/14/2026 10-000-2155 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 Deferred Comp Nationwide Check Total: 2,125.00
Vendor: 28815 STERLING HEALTH ADMINISTRATION Check Sequence: 6 ACH Enabled: True PR Batch 00001.04.2026 HSA Deduction 475.00 04/14/2026 10-000-2161 PR Batch 00001.04.2026 HSA Deduction Check Total: 475.00
Total for Check Run:

Total of Number of Checks:
64,074.38
6 AP-Computer Check Proof List by Vendor (04/20/2026 - 8:33 AM) Page 2 13 City Council Agenda Item # 7c
Staff Report
Meeting Date: April 27, 2026
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Malisa Dodd, Director of Finance
Subject: Revenue Status Update, Monthly Investment and Financial Report Recommendation:

Staff respectfully request the City Council review the provided information regarding the City’s revenue and investments.

Background & Summary:

Sales Tax Revenue:

The city sales tax receipts total $964,505 through February 2025 for fiscal year 25-26. The budgeted amount for fiscal year 25-26 is $1,500,000 with 64.30% collected, while 66.67% of the way through the year. At this point I would revise the projection to $1,485,000 or $15,000 less than the adopted amount.

Current Year 25-26 Sales Tax Information
Budget Projection Jul-Feb Expected Jul-Feb Received 25-26 Deficit $1,500,000 $985,000 $964,505 ($20,495)
Prior Year 24-25 Sales Tax Information
YTD Received Jul-Feb Received CY vs PY difference
$1,522,870 $970,642 ($6,137)
Transient Occupancy Tax:

The city started collecting TOT revenue monthly in July of 2025 and receipts through March 2026 are $1,110,493 for fiscal year 25-26 with 68.77% of the budget collected. The budgeted amount for fiscal year 25-26 is $1,614,800.

Current Year 25-26 Transient Occupancy Tax Information
Budget Projection Jul-Mar Received Apr-Jun Needed
$1,614,800 $1,110,493 $504,307
Prior Year 24-25 Transient Occupancy Tax Information
YTD Received Jul-Mar Received CY vs PY difference Apr-Jun Received $1,596,668 $1,096,480 $14,013 $500,188
Regular
X Consent
Closed
Presentation
14 2
Property Tax and Vehicle License Fees:

The city property tax receipts total $479,704 through April 2026 for fiscal year 25-26. The budgeted amount for fiscal year 25-26 is $849,745 with 58.35% collected. Although the current property tax received is higher than the prior year, we will not likely receive the budget projection. At this point I would revise the projection to $818,446 or $31,299 less than the adopted amount.

Current Year 25-26 Property Tax Information
Budget Projection Jul-Feb Expected Jul-Feb Received Excess /(Deficit) Property Tax $849,745 $492,852 $479,704 ($13,148)
License Fees $442,828 $221,414 $223,701 $2,287
Prior Year 24-25 Property Tax Information
YTD Received Jul-Feb Received CY vs PY difference
Property Tax $783,591 $457,191 $22,513
License Fees $417,976 $208,988 $14,713
As of March 31, 2026, the combined funds the City of Mt. Shasta had invested in the Local Agency Investment Fund (L.A.I.F.) totaled $277,670.85. The statement is attached, along with the performance data as of April 15, 2026. Most surplus funds over which the City has control are currently invested in Concourse with a balance of $1,165,528.55. A money market account was set up with Tri Counties Bank for the Housing and Community Development funds received for the funding of the Mountain Townhomes project with DANCO and has a balance of $5,007,065.07. The balance of the City’s cash funds are held in a pooled account with Tri Counties Bank with a balance as of $5,847,542.57 plus reserve accounts.

Current investment rates are:

L.A.I.F. February 28, 2026 3.826%
Treasury Note – 3 month January 30,2026 3.66%
Treasury Note – 2 Yr. January 30,2026 3.38%
Treasury Note – 5 Yr. January 30,2026 3.50%
Treasury Note – 10 Yr. January 30,2026 3.94%
Treasury Note – 30 Yr. January 30,2026 4.61%
Bloomberg as reported by Chandler Asset Management
The LAIF average decreased slightly from last month; most notes had a decrease. We continue to anticipate the LAIF rate to continue a slow decline. The LAIF rate remains the best available rate that meets the City’s requirement for liquidity and safety. 15 3

Financial Impact:

The investments are in compliance with the City’s investment policy and provides for meeting the City’s cash flow needs for the next month and 6 month periods.

Attachments:
• LAIF Monthly Statement
• LAIF Performance Report
• LAIF Monthly Balances
• Chandler Asset Management
16

!
"

# $#%&%'("(

# )*#
%
+
,

,
-
.* !
/.,/
+
/ 0
12!/1
33!2 (
'31/+,/
+
/40 ,/
+
/ !%
%5 67789:;<9=>?@A
"5"'5 ,-
%

/
/
) 0 B*
**
67789:;C9==D@E /0 )*F

*

F 55 %5

' /G*-HF

2 *

F 55 %5

'
17 March 3.826
February 3.871
January 3.931
December 4.025
November 4.096
October 4.150
PMIA Average Life(1): 261
LAIF Fair Value Factor(1): 0.999980831
PMIA Daily(1): 3.82
PMIA Quarter to Date(1): 3.92
LAIF Apportionment Rate(2): 3.98
LAIF Earnings Ratio(2): 0.00010906180047888
LAIF Administrative Cost(1)*: TBD
Treasuries

56.86%
Agencies

21.79%
Certificates of
Deposit/Bank Notes

10.77%
Time
Deposits

3.31%
Commercial
Paper

6.52%
Corporate
Bonds

0.59%
Loans

0.16%
Notes: The apportionment rate includes interest earned on the CalPERS Supplemental Pension Payment pursuant to Government Code 20825 (c)(1) .
*The percentage of administrative cost equals the total administrative cost divided by the quarterly interest earnings. The law provides that administrative costs are not to exceed 5% of quarterly EARNINGS of the fund. However, if the 13-week Daily Treasury Bill Rate on the last day of the fiscal year is below 1%, then administrative costs shall not exceed 8% of quarterly EARNINGS of the fund for the subsequent fiscal year.

Source:
(1) State of California, Office of the Treasurer
(2) State of California, Office of the Controller
PMIA Average Monthly
Effective Yields(1)
PMIA/LAIF Performance Report
as of 04/15/26
Daily rates are now available here. View PMIA Daily Rates Quarterly Performance
Quarter Ended 03/31/26
Chart does not include $829,000.00 in mortgages, which equates to 0.001%. Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.

Pooled Money Investment Account
Monthly Portfolio Composition (1)
3/31/26
$165.3 billion
18 Carrying Cost Plus
Description Accrued Interest Purch. Amortized Cost Fair Value Accrued Interest United States Treasury:

Bills $ 44,722,522,982.34 $ 45,041,222,236.88 $ 45,033,151,400.00 NA Notes $ 49,292,258,674.55 $ 49,271,989,419.91 $ 49,320,696,150.00 $ 406,254,298.00 Federal Agency:

SBA $ 284,735,106.47 $ 284,670,977.29 $ 282,270,088.95 $ 954,910.41 MBS-REMICs $ 828,976.21 $ 828,976.21 $ 834,536.98 $ 3,616.34 Debentures $ 4,170,836,653.34 $ 4,170,836,653.34 $ 4,169,747,640.00 $ 33,432,528.40 Debentures FR $ - $ - $ - $ -
Debentures CL $ 2,450,000,000.00 $ 2,450,000,000.00 $ 2,447,226,000.00 $ 31,675,185.50 Discount Notes $ 18,589,440,826.53 $ 18,748,772,124.99 $ 18,737,614,500.00 NA Supranational:

Debentures $ 4,234,413,202.81 $ 4,234,289,244.48 $ 4,225,099,790.00 $ 34,129,170.50 Debentures FR $ - $ - $ - $ -
Debentures CL $ 300,000,000.00 $ 300,000,000.00 $ 300,916,000.00 $ 2,155,555.00 Discount Notes $ 5,996,263,597.22 $ 6,051,445,319.44 $ 6,048,424,000.00 NA CDs and YCDs FR $ - $ - $ - $ -
Bank Notes $ 400,000,000.00 $ 400,000,000.00 $ 399,517,809.83 $ 3,603,472.22 CDs and YCDs $ 17,400,000,000.00 $ 17,400,000,000.00 $ 17,390,638,342.15 $ 180,555,958.37 Commercial Paper $ 10,784,921,083.25 $ 10,855,911,297.17 $ 10,853,096,291.64 NA Corporate:

Bonds FR $ - $ - $ - $ -
Bonds $ 973,660,364.24 $ 973,256,676.74 $ 970,809,904.00 $ 9,472,413.81 Repurchase Agreements $ - $ - $ - $ -
Reverse Repurchase $ - $ - $ - $ -
Time Deposits $ 5,472,000,000.00 $ 5,472,000,000.00 $ 5,472,000,000.00 NA PMIA & GF Loans $ 266,015,740.00 $ 266,015,740.00 $ 266,015,740.00 NA TOTAL $ 165,337,897,206.96 $ 165,921,238,666.45 $ 165,918,058,193.55 $ 702,237,108.55 Fair Value Including Accrued Interest $ 166,620,295,302.10 Repurchase Agreements, Time Deposits, PMIA & General Fund loans, and Reverse Repurchase agreements are carried at portfolio book value (carrying cost).

The value of each participating dollar equals the fair value divided by the amortized cost (0.999980831) As an example: if an agency has an account balance of $20,000,000.00, then the agency would report its participation in the LAIF valued at $19,999,616.63 or $20,000,000.00 x0.999980831 State of California
Pooled Money Investment Account
Market Valuation
3/31/2026
19 20
21 City Council Agenda Item #7d
Staff Report
Meeting Date: April 27th, 2026
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Robert Gibson, Chief of Police
Subject: Expenditure of Prop 64 Grant Funds
Recommendation:

Staff respectfully requests the City Council Adopt Resolution CCR-26-XX, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Mount Shasta expending Proposition 64 Cohort 3 Grant Funds for the purchase of a new patrol vehicle, including complete outfitting.

Background & Summary:

In May of 2022, the City of Mount Shasta successfully was awarded a Proposition 64 Cohort 3 grant. As part of the grant, during the third year a new patrol vehicle, including lights, sirens, graphics and other necessary outfitting was budgeted. The total funds approved for the above items was $94,666.00. Bids were sent out with Airport Chevrolet having the best value for a new 2026 Chevrolet Silverado. The California Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) who administer our grant have approved all the expenditures. There is no cost to the City for the below expenditures.

Staff respectfully request City Council Adopt the resolution authorizing the Police Department to expend $83,008.00 of the Grant funds.

Attachments:

Quoted vehicle and outfitting (Attachment “A”)
Resolution CCR-26-XX
Regular
X Consent
Closed
Presentation
22 Attachment “A”
010>

CHEV-FI WAQ
Quote Number:
1) contract Date:
2) Fin Inst:

Quote worksheet - Purchase fumeo 3393
159099 17) APR:
04/13/26 18) TERM:

ALLYl
3) Stock Number: A2162 19) Total Tax Amount: $ 4,753.68 4) cust Name:
5) Vehicle Price:
6) SALE PRICE:
7) Balloon Rt/Amt:
8) REBATE:
9) CASH DOWN:
10) Total Trade Allow:
11) Trade 1 Payoff: 12) Trade 2 Payoff: 13) Total Trade Net:
14) FEES (W):
15) OWE:
16) SERVICE CONT:
command(?):
20) CL/A&H Code/Amt: NO
$ 48,650.00 21) CL Premium:
$ 47,145.95 22) A&H Premium:
23) Level Life code/Amt:
$ 3,000.00 24) Odd Days:
25) DaysTo/lstPmtDate: 04/13/26
26) MONTHLY PAYMENT: $ 49,183.63
sale subtotal: $ 44,145.95
Total Financed: $ 49I 18,3 63 _..,,.._
$ 284.00
Enter a command, a field number, or press a function key. Enter? for help. F3=SV/Ex F5=RRecall F6=Cust F7=Veh F8=Trd F10=Misc SFll=> 23 BIG SIGN FX
yo1.11:..s1e,rr sf.lot 1ws1rress tAtrrre,:..

BiG sign fx sent you an estimate
Estimate expires on May 16, 2026
We look forward to working with you!
Show full details v
2026 Chevrolet Silverado
Art & Design $240.00
($120.00/hr) x 2.00
Art Design
Recreating badge
Vinyl Film $1,291.50
($25.83/Sq ft) X 50
Custom Printing on Vinyl Films
Vehicle Grade (1105) ($10.73/sq ft)
+ No Extra Ink Passes
+ Cast Gloss ($8.35/sq ft)
+ CC W M P ($6.75/sq ft)
Wrap Installation $750.00
($750.00/job) x 1
Installation of vinyl wraps are performed by one of our trusted installation partners. All wraps are printed, prepared, and quality-checked in-house by BIG SIGN FX, then delivered to our partner for professional installation. We maintain close coordination throughout the process to ensure high-quality standards are met. 2 SF 50-74 (20%)
Subtotal
(B Text us
$2,023.20
24 Total $2,023.20
BiGsignfx
4865 Airway Dr
Unit 101
Central Point, OR 97502
[email protected]
+1(541) 499-0531
© 2026 Block, Inc.

Square Privacl Policl I Securitl I Cookie �references
C::J Square
lH
25 Motorola and Customer, then Motorola's Standard Terms of Use and Motorola's Standard Terms and Conditions of Sales and Supply shall govern the purchase of the Products.

Motorola Solutions, Inc.: 500 West Monroe, United States - 60661 - II: 36-1115800

Page 1 ends

• MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS QUOTE-3565873
APX8500_QTY_ 1
Billing Address: Shipping Address: Quote Date:03/27 /2026 MT SHASTA POLICE MT SHASTA POLICE Expiration Date:05/26/2026 303 N MT SHASTA BLVD 303 N MT SHASTA BLVD Quote Created By:

Mount Shasta, CA 96067 MOUNT SHASTA, CA 96067 Matthew Weinberger us us Senior Wireless Systems Sales
[email protected]
(530) 440-9030
End Customer:

MT SHASTA POLICE
Stephen Goldsberry
[email protected]
(530) 524-0575
Delivery Address:

DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS
3669 AVIATION WAY
End Customer Address:

MT SHASTA POLICE
303 N MT SHASTA BLVD
Contract: 39809 - SOURCEWELL 020625-
MOT
MEDFORD, OR 97504
us
Mount Shasta, CA 96067
us
APX™ 8500
M37TXS9PW1 CN
1a G831AD
APX8500 ALL BAND HP
MOBILE
ADD: SPKR 15WWATER

RESISTANT
$7,728.00
$71.00

27.0% $5,641.44

27.0% $51.83
$5,641.44
$51.83
----····---------- --- -- -
ANTENNA (7/8/V/U) ----- -----·---·--------·-- --···-·-··--------- - - --·---·----··- ---·----·-------·- 1e GA05507AA DEL: DELETE 7/800MHZ
BAND
-$800.00 0.0% -$584.00 -$584.00
-·-----------
1f GA05509AA
1g GA01606AA
0 DEL: DELETE UHF BAND
ADD: NO BLUETOOTH/

WIFI/GPS ANTENNA
NEEDED
-$800.00
$0.00

0.0%

0.0%
-$584.00
$0.00
-$584.00
$0.00
Any sales transaction following Motorola's quote is based on and subject to the terms and conditions of the valid and executed written contract between Customer and Motorola (the ""Underlying Agreement"") that authorizes Customer to purchase equipment and/or services or license software (collectively ""Products""}. If no Underlying Agreement exists between 1b GA00255AF ADD: SY ESSENTIAL

ACCIDENTAL DAMAGE
$670.00 0.0% $670.00 $670.00
1c G48BB SOFTWARE LICENSE ENH:

CONVENTIONAL

OPERATION APX
$942.00 27.0% $687.66 $687.66
1d GA01513AB ADD: ALL BAND MOBILE $112.00 27.0% $81.76 $81.76 26 Motorola and Customer, then Motorola's Standard Terms of Use and Motorola's Standard Terms and Conditions of Sales and Supply shall govern the purchase of the Products.

Motorola Solutions, Inc.: 500 West Monroe, United States - 60661 - II: 36-1115800

Page 2 ends

• MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS QUOTE-3565873
APX8500_QTY_ 1
1h G843AH ADD: AES ENCRYPTION

AND ADP
1 $560.00 27.0% $408.80 $408.80
-
1i G444AH ADD: APX CONTROL HEAD 1 $0.00 0.0% $0.00 $0.00

SOFTWARE
1j GA01517AA DEL: NO J600 ADAPTER 1 $0.00 0.0% $0.00 $0.00

CABLE NEEDED
1k G806BL SOFTWARE LICENSE ENH: 1 $607.00 27.0% $443.11 $443.11 ASTRO DIGITAL CAI OP APX -··---·-·--------------
11 GA01670AA ADD: APX ES CONTROL 1 $767.00 27.0% $559.91 $559.91 HEAD
1m W22BA ADD: STD PALM 1 $85.00 27.0% $62.05 $62.05

MICROPHONE APX
-----·-·--·--·-··- --·---------------�----�------· ---- ---�-------�---- ----------------------�-------..-- - 1n QA09113AB ADD: BASELINE RELEASE
SW
1 $0.00 0.0% $0.00 $0.00
- ---·-----------··--------·----�-- -----..----··-·----·------· -----··--··--- - -- ..-----·--·----------·---··-·--·· 1o W969BG SOFTWARE LICENSE ENH: 1 $388.00 27.0% $283.24 $283.24

MULTIKEY OPERATION
Product Services . ----------------------------·----·------------ ------- --------- ,, --------------·- 2 LSV00Q00202A DEVICE PROGRAMMING 1 $71.43 0.0% $71.43 $71.43 - --·-·-.·-··--·--------···-----··--------·- .··------·--·-····-····-····---·--·--···- -----�--- Subtotal $7,793.23
Estimated Tax $534.24
Grand Total $8,327.47(USD)
Notes:

Any sales transaction following Motorola's quote is based on and subject to the terms and conditions of the valid and executed written contract between Customer and Motorola (the 11"Underlying Agreement""} that authorizes Customer to purchase equipment and/or services or license software (co[lectively ""Products""}. If no Underlying Agreement exists between G 27 QU08389
·C·
Cascade Emergency Vehicles
8389 11th Street
White City, OR 97503
https://cascadefire.com/
(800) 654-7049
Quote
#QU08389
04/16/2026
Bill To
Mount Shasta Police Dept.
303 N. Mount Shasta Blvd
Mt Shasta CA 96067
United States
Ship To
Mount Shasta Police Dept.
303 N. Mount Shasta Blvd
Mount Shasta CA 96067
United States
Quote Expiration Quote Name
05/16/2026 2026 Chevy 1500
Sales Rep
Dylan Clark
Shipping Method
Will Call
Item QTY Rate Amount
QSOO
2026 Chevy 1500 vehicle upfit $21,836.00 $21,836.00
Subtotal $21,836.00
Shipping Cost $0.00
Tax Total(%) $1,637.70
Total $23,473.70
11111111111111111111111IIIll 1 of 2
28 QU08389
�c· Cascade Emergency Vehicles
8389 11th Street
White City, OR 97503
https://cascadefire.com/
(800} 654-7049
Quote
#QU08389
04/16/2026
Options:

SETINA PUSH BUMPER
• BK1001CHT221500 - setina push bumper with 4 forward lights, 2 side lights - $1362 • HK2273CHT221500 - headlight guard w/ PB9 wing wrap - $869 WHEl-EN EMERGENCY LIGHTING
• BB2DEDE - Liberty II lightbar - $3426
o C399 controller, CCTL7-21, C399SP
• CEM16 - $388
• CLBV2V - sync - $247
• SA315 - siren speaker - $208
• TSSOJCX - Ion smoked lens lights - $784
o (2) front fender, (4) under rear tailgate
• ARGES2 - Arges Profocus fender light - $608
• ARG47B2 - fender mount - $78
• ARGCH1 - control head/bail - $235
TROY INTERIOR+ TRANSe_QRJ
• CC-2251 -vehicle specific wide boy console - $684
• AC-INBHG - dual beverage holder -$46
• AC-TICK - shallow tray- $35
• FP-USBC - 12v/USBC ports - $65
• AC-MAG - magnetic mies (x2) - $97
• KT-GM-SGRF - Dual mount gun kit - $505
o shotgun closure, universal closure
• KIT-TP-SL6 - Full partition front partition kit - $906 • AC-CHV19 - side window guards (punched) - $195
• AC-CHV19 - rear window guard (punched) - $168
• DP-CHV19 - aluminum door panels - $256
• PS-2151-OSPS7 - prisoner transport system with drawers - $3475 • XG7 - decked drawer system (6'6" bed) - $1699
• misc. shop supplies (wire, loom, connectors, fuse panels, etc) - $500 • labor (40 hours) - $5000
11111 11111111111111111111111
2 of 2
29 RESOLUTION NO. CCR-26-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF MT. SHASTA AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDATURE OF PROPOSITION 64 GRANT FUNDS
WHEREAS, the City of Mount Shasta Police Department was awarded Proposition 64 Grant funding; and
WHEREAS, as part of the grant funding in the third year of the grant (2025) the purchase of a new patrol vehicle was budgeted; and
WHEREAS, the outfitting of the vehicle, including prisoner transportation, lights, sirens, insignia, secure patrol box and radio were budgeted; and WHEREAS, the budgeted expenditure was $94,666.00 and the actual quoted expenditure is $83,008.00, and
WHEREAS, all the monies are through the grant with no monies required to be spent from the general fund; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Board of State and Community Corrections, BSCC has authorized the below expenditures; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mt. Shasta that use of Proposition 64 Grant funds for the following expenses is approved:

1. Purchase of 2026 Chevrolet Silverado P/U from Airport Chevrolet $49,183.63

2. Graphic design by Big Sign FX $2023.20

3. APX 8500 Radio by Motorola Solutions $8,327.47

4. 2026 Chevrolet vehicle outfit by Cascade Emergency Vehicles $23,473.70 For a total expenditure of $83,008.00
The foregoing Resolution was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mt. Shasta on the 27th day of April, 2026 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED: April 27th, 2026
30 CITY OF MT. SHASTA
ATTEST:

Casey Glaubman, Mayor
Rachel Agron, Deputy City Clerk
CERTIFICATION:

Staff respectfully requests the City Council approve the Resolution CCR-26-XX approving the acceptance of the T-Mobile bid for citywide cellular services.

BACKGROUND & SUMMARY:

Over the past 6 months, Mt. Shasta Police Department conducted research into modern cellular service providers who could meet the safety needs of the City. An RFP was produced and sent out for bid (see Attachment A). The PD received two responses. Both responses were evaluated and one was found to be superior. T-Mobile met nearly all of the requested operative needs, including Starlink connectivity with their cell phones. T-Mobile’s bid also would reduce the monthly cost of our current provider by approximately $600.00 per month.

AT&T’s proposal would require a significant expenditure to obtain satellite and emergency hotspots and was not feasible.

Staff respectfully request the City Council approve the resolution accepting the T-Mobile Bid as the new cellular provider for the City.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A: Mt. Shasta Cell Service RFP
Attachment B: Resolution CCR-26-XX
Attachment C: T-Mobile Bid
Attachment D: AT&T Bid
Regular Session
X Special Session
Emergency
Session
Closed Session
32 Attachment “A”
Cellular and Satellite Internet Service Proposal Request City of Mount Shasta
Prepared for:

Robert Gibson, Chief of Police
Mount Shasta Police Department
Prepared by Amber Orrey
Police Services Manager
Mount Shasta Police Department
Purpose:

The City of Mount Shasta is seeking proposals from telecommunication providers for cellular service and satellite internet connectivity to support city-wide operations.

Reliable communication systems are critical to municipal operations, particularly for public safety personnel who must maintain connectivity during emergencies, disasters, and mutual aid responses.

Due to the region's rural and mountainous geography and the increasing frequency of wildfires, the city is evaluating options to improve communication reliability, enhance operational efficiency, and provide redundant connectivity, such as satellite internet, to ensure operational continuity.

The city is interested in solutions that will support existing users across departments while allowing for future scalability and improved network reliability.

Current city operational needs:

City staff, including police officers and other personnel, regularly operate both within city limits and throughout Siskiyou County during:
• Wildfire mutual aid responses
• Emergency management operations
• Regional law enforcement assistance
• Public works and infrastructure support
• Severe weather and storm-related incidents
33 These responses often occur in remote locations where cellular reception may be limited or unavailable.

Additionally, the region frequently experiences inclement weather conditions, including heavy snowfall, winter storms, and wildfire-related emergencies, which can disrupt traditional communication infrastructure.

As a result, the city is seeking vendors capable of providing reliable cellular coverage and satellite-based redundancy to ensure communication capabilities are maintained during emergencies, disasters, and severe weather events.

Current Service Overview:

Currently, the City of Mount Shasta maintains multiple cellular lines used by departments such as police, fire, and public works.

The city intends to transfer existing phone numbers to the selected provider while maintaining operational continuity. The city's current service includes 27 cellular devices and a hotspot, with a monthly cost of$ 1,616.55.

Requested Services:

Cellular voice, text, and data service: the selected provider must supply reliable cellular service that includes
• Voice, text, and data capabilities
• Reliable coverage within the city of Mount Shasta and the surrounding Siskiyou County area.
• Service capable of operating in rural and mountainous areas. • Government or public safety plan options.

Vendors should include coverage maps demonstrating service reliability in the region.

Number Portability: The selected vendor must be able to • Transfer all existing city phone numbers from the current carrier. • Ensure continuity of service during transition.
• Provide a clear implementation plan for transitioning services.

The proposal should include pricing for one additional cellular line to be added to the account.
34 Satellite Internet Connectivity (Starlink or Equivalent): The city is requesting proposals that include satellite-based internet connectivity, such as Starlink, to provide backup communication capabilities during emergencies, outages, or infrastructure failures.

Proposals should include:
• Hardware requirements
• Installation requirements
• Monthly service costs
• Expected performance and speed
• Maintenance and equipment replacement policies
Satellite connectivity will provide an additional communication pathway during emergencies, severe weather events, or when traditional cellular networks are unavailable.

Public Safety Priority Access: Vendors should indicate whether their services provide priority access for public safety users during emergencies or periods of high network congestion.

Mobile Hotspot Capability: Due to the operational needs of officers, firefighters, and staff working in the field, cellular plans should support mobile hotspot functionality for laptops and other devices when necessary.

Device Options: Proposals may include information regarding • Smartphone device options
• Rugged device options suitable for field operations
• Device upgrade options
• Compatibility with existing devices if the city elects to retain them.

Customer Support: The city is seeking vendors that provide • Dedicated government or public safety account representatives • Technical support
• Online Account Management and Billing
• Clear and transparent billing structures
Transition Costs and Incentives: The city of Mount Shasta requests that vendors identify any available transition assistance or incentives for switching providers. Proposals should 35 indicate whether the vendor offers programs that may offset costs associated with transitioning services, including but not limited to:
• Early termination fees with current provider
• Device pay off balances
• Activation or setup fees
• SIM card or device provisioning
• Equipment or installation costs related to satellite connectivity.

Vendors are encouraged to outline any government or public safety incentives that may assist the city in transitioning services in a cost-effective manner.

Proposal Submission Requirements:

Interested vendors should submit proposals that include:
• Company Overview
• Coverage maps for Siskiyou County and surrounding regions • Detailed pricing structure for cellular services
• Pricing for satellite internet service
• Device options and pricing
• Description of public safety service options
• Account management and customer support structure
• Estimated implementation time
Evaluation Criteria:

Proposals will be evaluated on:
• Network coverage and reliability
• Cost effectiveness and value
• Ability to transfer numbers
• Satellite connectivity capabilities
• Public Safety networl< features
• Customer service and support
Comparative Cost Analysis:

Vendors are encouraged to provide a cost comparison between their proposed services and the city's current telecommunications services, including any projected savings or operational improvements.

Proposals should be clearly outlined:
• Monthly service costs
36 • Equipment costs
• Installation costs
• Any variable government or public safety discounts
• Any incentives available for transitioning services
Providing a clear comparison will assist the city in evaluating overall value and cost effectiveness.

Reservation of Rights:

The city of Mount Shasta reserves the right to:
• Reject any or all proposals
• Request any additional information from vendors
• Negotiate pricing or service options
• Select the proposal that best meets the city's operational and financial needs.

Submission of a proposal does not oblige the city to enter into an agreement with any vendor.

Submission Information:

Proposals must be submitted no later than April 13, 2026. Proposals may be submitted electronically to:

Chief Robert Gibson
Mount Shasta Police Department
[email protected]
The city of Mount Shasta is committed to maintaining reliable and resilient communication systems that support municipal operations, public safety personnel, and emergency response efforts. The city welcomes proposals for innovative, cost-effective solutions that support both daily operations and critical incident responses in a rural, mountainous environment.
37 RESOLUTION CCR-26-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MT SHASTA FOR THE CONTRACTING WITH TMOBILE FOR CELLULAR PHONE SERVICE FOR THE CITY OF MT SHASTA WHEREAS, On April 13th , 2026, bidding closed for a contract for a cellular service provider for the City of Mt. Shasta, and;
WHEREAS, T-Mobil met or exceeded the requirements of the RFP and; WHEREAS, by switching to T-Mobile the City would see a reduction in the current monthly billing, as well as emergency telecommunication abilities, and; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mount Shasta does herby approve the contracting with T-Mobil to be the cellular service provider for the City of Mount Shasta, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mt. Shasta hereby as follows:
1: Contract with T-Mobile for cellular service as specified in bid dated 04/01/2026, prepared by Michael Lange and Ryan Barber.

The foregoing Resolution was approved this 27th day of April, 2026 by the following vote:

AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

DATED:

ATTEST: CITY OF MT. SHASTA
______________________________ ______________________________ Rachel Agron , Deputy City Clerk Casey Glaubman , Mayor CERTIFICATION:

I do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of a resolution duly and regularly adopted at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Mount Shasta held on April 27th, 2026. ___________________________________
Rachel Agron, Deputy City Clerk
38 One Time Credit
ATTACHMENT “B”
Date: 4/1/2026
Prepared by: Michael Lange/ Ryan Barber
Prepared for: City of Mt Shasta
Item Description Monthly Charge Quantity Total Monthly Charges T-Priority Advanced $39.50 27 $1,066.50
Includes: Unlimited Talk/Text/data, WPS for First
Responders, 41GBPriority Hotspot w/unlimited after
5G Network Slice and T-Satellite (Starlink) Direct to Cell Governement unlimited hotspot $29.75 1 $29.75
TOTAL MONTHLY COST(fees/taxes not included) $1,096.25
Item Description One Time Cost Quantity Total
Apple I-Phone 17 (256GB ( Retail $829.99) FREE 27 FREE
(TotalSavings: $22,1409.73)
Total One time Charges (Including Tax) $0.00
(taxes/fees not included)
�··Mobile·�
39 Introduction to T-Mobile - City of Mount Shasta, California T-Mobile is a national wireless communications provider committed to delivering reliable, secure, and cost-effective connectivity solutions to state and local governments across California. With extensive experience supporting municipalities of all sizes-includingrural and mountain communities-T-Mobile understands the operational, geographic, and budgetary considerations unique to cities such as Mount Shasta.

Network and Technology Leadership
T-Mobile operates a nationwide wireless network designed to provide broad coverage, strong performance, and built-in resilience. Continued investment in network infrastructure and spectrum enables dependable service in diverse terrains, supporting the City's need for consistent connectivity for municipal operations, field personnel, and essential services.

Solutions
For local governments, T-Mobile offers a comprehensive portfolio of solutions that can be scaled and tailored to meet specific community needs, including:
• Wireless voice and data services for city staff, public works, and mobile employees • Fixed Wireless Access (FWA) as a primary or backup broadband option for municipal facilities
• Internet of Things (loT) connectivity to support fleet tracking, asset monitoring, and infrastructure visibility
• Public safety-focused capabilities designed to prioritize reliability and continuity of communications
T-Mobile's solutions are designed to help municipalities modernize operations while maintaining predictable costs and simplified service management. Transparent pricing models, flexible contract options, and reduced operational complexity align with the City of Mount Shasta's focus on fiscal responsibility and service reliability. 40 Security
Security and service continuity are core principles of T-Mobile's network design. Layered security controls, continuous monitoring, and resilient architecture support the City's efforts to protect sensitive data and maintain uninterrupted access to critical systems.

T-Mobile approaches engagements with local governments as long-term partnerships.

Dedicated account teams work collaboratively with city stakeholders to understand operational goals, identify practical solutions, and deliver ongoing support. Through this partnership-driven approach, T-Mobile seeks to provide the City of Mount Shasta with dependable connectivity that enhances efficiency, supports community services, and adapts to future needs.

Coverage I Data Speeds
Network Rankings
T-Mobile: Named the "Best Mobile Network" by Ookla for 2025 and recognized as the leader in _Qgen Signal's January 2026 report. It won 12 out of 16 categories in the Open Signal 2026 Mobile Experience Awards, including top honors for download/upload speeds, 5G availability, and reliability experience.

Network in Siskiyou County
• The current coverage map for Siskiyou County is attached to this document. • Data speeds per OOl<LA for February 2026
(?) SPEEDTEST intelligence v
Dashboard Filters
localions
Si:;kiyou County, C.iliforni.>
Dale
1111
00 Gl 0
Performancev
v Compare All - Performance
Feb 2026
Metric Types 0 0
Mcdiiln
Providers Gl 0
0 T-Mobilc
0 AT&T
0 vc,izon
Provider v Top Providers (3%• sample share)
Minimum
Download Upload latency Sampfc Device
ProviderName Mbps Mbps ms Test Counl Counl Count
- All Providc,s Combined 77.'n 7.34 29 207 65 77
T-Mobilc 147.67 7.20 28 83 15 21
Devices
All Devices
Gl 0
Verizon 99.71 9.84 30 42 28 31
Mobile Technologies rn 0
All Network Gcncr.>tions
Legend 0
■ T-Mob;!e
■ AT&T
■ Verizon
AT&T 44.56 G.91 28 56 21 22
USccllular 40.77 G.85 111 9 2 2
1 of 1
41 NetWQJk Upgl1:ldes
• There are (2) New Towers and (2) Tower Upgrades scheduled for 2026/2027 in Siskiyou County
Price Plans
T-Mobile has a number of different Voice and Data Plans available for Government agencies. We are also able to mix and match a variety of different plans based on the needs of specific departments withing government agencies.

Attached to this document is a quote for out 2 most common plans used by public safety and city agencies
• T-Priority
o Unlimited Talk/Text /Data
o Wireless Priority Service
o Hotspot
o 5G Network slice for first responders
o T-Satellite - Starlink direct to cell
• Connecting Hero's Advanced/ Government Advanced
o Unlimited Talk/Text /Data
o Wireless Priority Service
o Hotspot
The most common DATA plans include:
• Unlimited Data
• Wireless Priority for First Responders (WPS)
Device Costs
• T-Mobile is the only carrier that does not charge sales tax for Free devices. Other carriers will provide free phones but charge sales tax. • T-Mobile plans will almost always offer a free device with all rate plans. • T-Mobile offers the entire selection of cellular devices 42 Public Safety Options
T-Mobile offers the following for public safety:
• Wireless Priority Service (WPS)
• T-Priority
o First ever 5G network slice dedicated for first responder's communications o Up to 2.5X faster speeds, 40% more capacity and more 5G coverage that the competitors during times of congestion
• Unlimited and unthrottled data
Account Management and Technical Support
• T-Mobile provides a dedicated account executive and account manager for each account. Specialists like public safety, education and solutions engineers are also part of every account team.
• Technical Support is available 24/7. For larger accounts, a technical account manager will be assigned.
• Each account will have access to an online portal for billing, troubleshooting and self-service ordering.

Transitioning to T-Mobile
• T-Mobile recognizes that transitioning to a new carrier can be challenge. We offer implementation services at no charge. Our team will come on-site if needed and can help with:
o Porting numbers
o Asset tagging
o Installing cases/screen protectors
o Mobile Device Management (MOM) setup
• To assist with early termination fees, T-Mobile has a variety of partners that will purchase your existing devices. The value can be provided as a credit on your TMobile account or as a check to your agency. • T-Mobile can customize a transition offer that will generally include some or all of the following:
o Device Upgrades
o Accessories (Cases, Screen Protectors, etc)
o Activation Credit
43 Satellite Connectivity
• T-Mobile has the exclusive partnership with StarlinI< to provide direct to cell capabilities.
o Over 650 Satellites currently in orbit providing virtually 100% coverage of the continental United States.
• T-Satellite is offered at no additional cost on our T-Priority First Responder Plans • Capabilities include
o Messaging over satellite
o Select data applications over satellite
o Voice Calls (currently scheduled for 2026)
44 Attachment “C”
Answered the questions in the proposal and provided a summary of everything

1. Cellular Service (Primary Need)
They want a provider that can deliver:
• Reliable voice, text, and data service
• Strong coverage in:
o City of Mount Shasta -Attached to the email
o Siskiyou County-Attached as well
o Rural and mountainous areas -Attached as well
• Government or public safety rate plans
• Coverage maps proving reliability in the region
• Support for mobile hotspot use for laptops and field devices -Sonim HPUE for FirstNet User attached to the email- Cost $99 per device one time costAttached for more information.

Current environment:
• 27 cellular devices + 1 hotspot
• Current monthly spend: $1,616.55
• They want to port all existing phone numbers with no service disruption - Easy and smooth for porting and no service disruption. To complete the port-in, we'll need the other provider's account number and transfer PIN, along with the user's name.
• Pricing requested for one additional line - If we add 25 new voice lines, each new line will be $30 per line under our custom pricing for unlimited talk, text and data of FirstNet Network, and all existing lines willremain at the same cost $30 a line as well.

2. Satellite Internet (Backup/ Redundancy)
They want satellite internet (Starlink or equivalent) to ensure connectivity during:
• Wildfires
• Severe weather
• Power outages
• Infrastructure failures
• Remote mutual-aid responses
Proposals must include:
• Hardware details
• Installation requirements
• Monthly service costs
• Expected speeds/performance
45 • Maintenance and replacement policies
This is specifically positioned as emergency and backup connectivity, not just convenience internet. Attached to the email

3. Public Safety Priority
Looking for
• Priority network access for police, fire, and emergency personnel during:
o Disasters
o High network congestion
o Mutual aid incidents

4. Devices
Optional but encouraged:
• Smartphone options-iPhone 17e $0.99-Samsung S26 $49.99-Samsung S25 FE $0.99
• Rugged devices for field use - Sonim XP Pro - $0.99-features as below • Features: FirstNet Ready/ FirstNet Certified
• Push-to-Talk (PTT) dedicated button
• MIL-SPEC rugged standards
• Designed specifically for public safety & field users • Upgrade paths - Most of the existing lines are under contract until 7/26, but we can always do early upgrades if needed.
• Compatibility with existing devices if keep them -yes

5. Support & Account Management
They want:
• Dedicated government/public safety support
• Technical support
• Online account and billing access
• Clear, transparent billing

6. Transition Assistance & Incentives
They want vendors to clearly outline:
• Help with early termination fees - Yes
• Device payoff assistance - Yes, we offer a buyback program for devices from other providers.
• Waived or reduced:
o Activation fees - No Fees
46 o SIM fees - No Fees
o Setup costs - No Fees for phone device, tablet or hotspots • Any incentives related to satellite equipment or installation - No • Any public safety or government discounts - Yes, there's a .$200 credit per line as an incentive for porting in or bringing your own device (BYOD) or new lines.

7. Cost Comparison
They are explicitly asking for:
• A side-by-side cost comparison vs. their current service • Clear breakdown of:
o Monthly costs - $30 Voice line - $20 Tablet - $30 Hotspot o Equipment costs - $0.99 iphone, Samsung, rugged phone Sonim o Installation costs - No installments
• Discounts and incentives - Buyback value for the existing phones, plus a $200 credit per line for voice lines and tablets.
• Identification of savings or operational improvements

8. Proposal Requirements
Submissions must include:
• Company overview
• Coverage maps (Siskiyou County+ surrounding areas)
• Detailed cellular pricing
• Satellite pricing
• Device options
• Public safety features
• Support model
• Estimated implementation timeline
Deadline: April 13, 2026
47 Full COW solution; trailer-hitch deployable; ideal for incidents & disasters Portable, single-person deployment; ideal for rapid response and small incidents Vehicle-mounted; fastest deployment; satellite included in base price 48 Compact Rapid Deployable {CRD) $98,999 Up to 2 miles radius Mini Compact Rapid Deployable {miniCRD) $34,950 Up to 1 mile radius Mobile Connectivity Hub {MCH) $86,999 Up to 2 miles radius 49 Starlink or ViaSat (sold separately)
Starlink (sold separately)
Starlink included (2 years, SOGB/month)
50 World's first HPUE mobile hotspot
Expanded coverage
FirstNet trusted™ device: Ensures secure,
prioritized network access for first responders,
delivering dependable communication during
emergencies or high-traffic events.
5G global bands (MegaRange™ PC1 on 814,
n14; PC2 on n77, n78): Extends 5G coverage
to remote locations such as deserts, mountains,
and woodlands and improves building penetration,
ensuring consistent connectivity for mission-critical
operations.

Dedicated 5G connection: Delivers stable,
high-speed network access, even in congested
areas, ideal for streaming large datasets or video
in real time.

Ethernet (2.5Gbps): Offers ultra-fast wired
connectivity for smooth data-intensive tasks such
as video uplinks or server operations in temporary
command centers.

Wi·Fi 7: Supports faster speeds and multiple
devices simultaneously, ensuring seamless
communication in dense setups like emergency
operation centers.

Qualcomm SDX75 chipset: Optimized
processing power guarantees reliable, high-speed
data handling for enterprise-level applications and
connectivity stability.

Low latency: Enables near real-time
responsiveness, essential for drone surveillance,
remote monitoring, or precision field operations.

Large battery (8000mAh) & use without a
battery: Provides extended runtime in off-grid
locations or continuous operation when connected
to external power, catering to long field missions.
'No Battery' and 'Battery Conservation' modes
ensure uninterrupted operation during outages.

SonimWare device management support-
(Future MR): Simplifies mass deployment and
updates, allowing IT teams to remotely manage
multiple devices with ease.

Sonim durability: Rated to withstand drops
and shocks, and resists dust, providing reliable
performance in demanding environments like
disaster zones or construction sites.

Up to 64 connected devices simultaneously:

Supports collaborative environments by managing
multiple users and devices, perfect for pop-up
clinics or emergency relief centers.

External antenna connectors: Boosts signal
strength in weak coverage areas with external
antennas, ensuring reliable performance in fringe
network areas.

Braves the elements
including drops, shocks and dust.

Quiet and built to work
While other mobile hotspots may struggle
with overheating and forced downtime during
heavy workloads, MegaConnect is built with
an advanced thermal management system
that ensures reliable anduninterrupted
performance, even during intensive use.

So you can stay focused on the task at hand.
@ 2025 SONIM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

V01051525
Designed for work that doesn't wait,
MegaConnect combines highly portable
1 devices, it'sready tomove at a moment's
MegaConnect supports AT&T's MegaRange™
which boosts transmissions by 6x. So whether
your team isoutin the wilderness, miles
from civilization or deep in a concrete-walled
basement, they can remain connected from
more places and encounter fewer dead zones
than ever before.

Prioritized connections
In addition toits MegaRangecapabilities,
MegaConnect is trusted by AT&T's secure
FirstNet network. Devoid of commercial traffic,
FirstNet is dedicated to first responders and
those whose mission is absolutely critical.
51 Partner Name Time
Requested
25-26 Allocation
Mt Shasta Sisson Museum 5 minutes $5,000
Siskiyou Outdoor Recreation Alliance 15 minutes $5,000
The Ascension Aesthetic 10 minutes $38,400
Siskiyou Humane Society 10 minutes $15,000
Contracted for $20,000 in 26-27
Mt Shasta Chamber of Commerce 5 minutes $75,000
Collier Visitor’s Center 15 minutes $1,000
City Beautification Committee 5 minutes $10,000
52 Document and share our history.

Offer community events.

We are a tourist destination.
53 Our museum opened its doors on July 4, 1983.

Ever since then, we have served our community.
54 Dedicated volunteers and generous donations
have made this museum what it is.
55 Changing Exhibits
spark interest and return visits.
56 Researching, Sharing, and Saving
the stories of our community
57 A center for
our community
A gathering place
to exchange ideas
58 Partnerships broaden our outreach.

Julie Cassidy and City Mayor, Casey
Glaubman, at Opening Day Celebration.

Thank you!
59 Fun for people of all ages
60 61
62 Our exhibits, utilities, and
the upkeep of our building
are continuing expenses.

Thank you for your continued support.
63 Welcome
SORA - Mt. Shasta City Council Presentation
64 Sustainable recreation balances land
stewardship, community well-being, and
economic benefits so people can continue
to enjoy outdoor spaces over time.
● Support local businesses and generate
tourism revenue
● Ensure equitable access for residents and
diverse users
● Reduce user conflict and align recreation
with community needs
● Steward recreation infrastructure and
landscapes for long-term sustainability
● Invest in maintenance, infrastructure, and
long-term economic resilience
What is Sustainable Outdoor Recreation?
65 Why sustainable recreation?
66 What would Mt. Shasta and
South Siskiyou County look
and feel like without
outdoor recreation?
Council Inquiry
Source: Jason Young, Discover Siskiyou
67 Mission: We are dedicated to
advancing rural economic
development and community
health through sustainable
outdoor recreation
Goal: Build a sustainable recreation
economy
About SORA
68 ● Overview of SORA’s Current
Programming Focus
○ Phase II Sustainable Recreation
Plan
○ Mt. Shasta Fourth of July Walk/Run
○ Mt. Shasta Nordic Center
○ Siskiyou Stewardship Corps
● Funding Needs
○ Fourth of July Walk/Run
○ Economic Impact Study
Presentation Overview
69 • Economic Development
• Equitable Access
• Climate and Fire Hazard
Mitigation
• Maintenance and Stewardship
• Land Ownership and Access
• Funding and Governance
South Siskiyou Sustainable Recreation & Trails Plan – Our Map & Compass
70 Community Votes
• Regional: Town-to-Town Trails
Concept
• Dunsmuir: Hedge Creek Falls to
Mossbrae Falls Access
• McCloud: Round the Mountain Route:

Mount Shasta Circumnavigation Trail
• Mt. Shasta: Lake Siskiyou Delta Bridge
Project
• Weed: Weed to Black Butte Trail
• Everitt Memorial Highway and Castle
Lake Winter Road Access
• Fire Mitigation and Trail Maintenance
and Development
Projects Programs
71 • Economic Development
• More Recreation Economic
Impact Analysis
• Fourth of July Walk/Run
• Mt. Shasta Nordic Center
• Land Ownership & Access
• Intersection Between Climate
and Fire Hazard Mitigation &
Trail Maintenance and
Stewardship
South Siskiyou Sustainable Recreation & Trails Planning Project Phase II – Our Path Forward
72 Sustainable Recreation Economic Impact Analysis
The Sustainable Recreation Plan identified recreation as a key driver of our local economy and highlighted the need for a more in-depth analysis.

We are seeking funding to begin an Economic Impact Study this year, building on our Siskiyou Stewardship Corps partnership with Mt. Shasta Trail Association and the Forest Service to efficiently gather meaningful data.
○ Tabling at Gateway Trailheads to learn about user demographics ○ Work with Discover Siskiyou to collect user demographic information and spending ○ Survey businesses about impacts of trails and winter recreation use ○ Partner with the Forest Service to deploy trail traffic counters in the Gateway System We’re happy to provide a detailed proposal upon request 73 Imagine the Fourth of July without the
Fourth of July Walk/Run?
Event Benefits
● Brings visitors to Mt. Shasta &
supports our tourism economy
● Community health
● Supports local non-profits
● Supports local youth organiations
This Long-Standing, Cherished Event Needs Support
74 Event Vulnerabilities:
● Rising event overhead and
operational expenses
● Decline in local volunteer
capacity, increasing labor costs
75 ● Invest in the initial phase of
SORA’s Sustainable Recreation
Impact Study
● Support the Mt. Shasta Fourth
of July Walk/Run
Opportunities for the City of
Mt. Shasta to Support a
Sustainable Recreation
Economy:
76 Thank you!
siskiyououtdooralliance.org
[email protected]
[email protected]
77 Digital Marketing
FY 2026–2027 Budget Presentation
The Ascension Aesthetic · Josh Thomas · April 27, 2026
78 HOW VISITORS DISCOVER MT. SHASTA
★
The Scroll Stops Here
A traveler in Portland opens
Instagram and sees a Reel of
Lake Siskiyou at golden hour.

They have never heard of Mt.

Shasta. Now they have. That
moment is where the trip
begins.
◎
Search Confirms the
Dream
After seeing our content,
visitors Google Mt. Shasta. Our
maintained website and SEO
presence ensures they land
somewhere that converts
curiosity into a booking.
◈
Concierges and
Communities
Our social presence gives local
concierges, hotels, and
businesses content to share.

Word-of-mouth is amplified
when there is a strong brand
behind it and a page worth
following.
▲
Awareness Drives
Revenue
Every overnight stay, restaurant
meal, and gear rental in Mt.

Shasta starts with someone
choosing to come. Active,
consistent marketing is what
puts Mt. Shasta on that
shortlist.
79 FOUR YEARS OF PARTNERSHIP
2022 Partnership with Visit Mt. Shasta starts — 2,644 FB / 3,285 IG followers
2023 Grew to 3,593 FB / 4,275 IG — e-commerce store
launched
2024 Major growth — 9,336 FB / 8,398 IG, 2.72M total
views
2025 11,810 FB / 18,960 IG followers, $0.16 avg CPC
achieved
2026 11,000+FB / 22,000+ IG followers, top SEO ranking for #1 keywords

WHAT WE DELIVER
Social Media Management (FB + IG)
Posts, Reels, & Stories
Paid Ad Campaigns
Website Maintenance & SEO
Influencer Engagement
YouTube Channel Management
Customer Relationship Engagement
Quarterly Analytics Reports
80 YOUR INVESTMENT AT A GLANCE
What $38,400 per year has produced for Mt. Shasta

ANNUAL INVESTMENT
$38,400
per year
$3,200 / month
$750 / month ad spend included
Active since October 2022
33,000+
Combined Followers
From 5,929 when we started
402K+
Peak Quarter Ad Reach
Q1 FY25, $0.07 avg CPC
$1.6M
TOT Revenue FY 24-25
Highest year on record

2.8M
Total Content Views
Year 3 alone
81 TOT REVENUE: THE DIRECT CONNECTION
* FY 25-26 partial — through March 2026 (8 of 12 months). On pace for ~$1.43M. +$342K
TOT growth since partnership began
FY 22-23 to FY 24-25
+27%
Total TOT revenue increase over 3 years
Despite rate change in FY 23-24

2.4%
TAA contract as % of total TOT growth
$38,400 of $342K in new revenue in
Note: TOT rate increased 10%→12% in FY 23-24. Adjusted for that, FY 24-25 represents 6% growth in overnight stays.
0 450000
900000
1350000
1800000
FY 22-23 FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26*
$951,784
$1,596,668
$1,290,177 $1,254,916
82 AUDIENCE GROWTH: 2022 – 2025
33,000+
Combined Followers
Jan 2026
+570%
Instagram Growth
2022 to 2026
+316%
Facebook Growth
2022 to 2026
0 5500
11000
16500
22000
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Facebook
Instagram
83 AD CAMPAIGNS: EXCEPTIONAL ROI
$0.07
Lowest CPC Achieved
Q1 FY25 — industry avg $0.50–$1.50
$0.16
Current Avg CPC
Q1 FY26 — still well below industry
402K
Peak Quarter Reach
Q1 FY25 — FB + IG combined
Industry Average
Industry Low
VMS Current (Q1 FY26)
VMS Best (Q1 FY25)
0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2
$0.07
$0.16
$0.50
$1.00
VMS Performance Industry Benchmark
84 WEBSITE PERFORMANCE
81K
Total Visits
+46% YoY
67K
Unique Visitors
+40% YoY
135K
Page Views
+43% YoY

68.93%
Bounce Rate
+0% YoY
📱 70%+ of visitors access the site on mobile — fast, intuitive mobile experience remains a priority as we maintain and evolve the site. 0 35000
70000
105000
140000
FY 23-24 FY 24-25 FY 25-26
Visits
Unique Visitors
Pageviews
85 FY 2026–2027 FUNDING REQUEST
⭐ RECOMMENDED
Option 1 – Expanded
$4,500 / month
$54,000 / year (0.009% increase in budget)
• 7 Posts/Reels + 40 Stories/Month
• High-Production Highlight Video (Yearly)
• $1,000/Month Growth Budget (Ads & Influencer
Partnerships)
• Dedicated Marketing Consultant
• YouTube + Website Maintenance
• Quarterly Analytics Reports

STANDARD PACKAGE
Option 2 – Standard
$3,500 / month
$42,000 / year (0.002% Increase in budget)
• 6 Posts/Reels + 30 Stories/Month
• Digital Ads at $750/Month
• Visitor's Center Integration
• YouTube + Website Maintenance
• Quarterly Analytics Reports
86 HOW WE STACK UP
Compared to regional tourism marketing peers
Visit Mt. Shasta Visit Redding Discover Siskiyou
Annual Budget $42,000 $1,000,000 ~$200,000
Instagram Followers 21,900 25,800 17,800
Total Posts 610 1,712 1,939
Cost Per Follower $1.75 ✓ $38.76 $10.79
Visit Mt. Shasta delivers competitive, often superior results at a fraction of comparable budgets. For every dollar invested in this contract, the city receives outsized visibility, audience growth, and demonstrable TOT impact. 87 WHAT HAPPENS WITHOUT ACTIVE MARKETING?
The cost of inaction is not zero
📉 Audience decay
Social accounts without active management lose relevance quickly.

Algorithms deprioritize inactive pages, follower counts stall, reach collapses, and years of audience building can erode within months. 🏔 Competitors fill the vacuum
See Siskiyou, Visit Redding, Shasta Cascade and other regional destinations are actively marketing. Without a presence, Mt. Shasta loses mindshare to destinations with bigger budgets and consistent output.
💰 TOT revenue at risk
TOT grew 27% over our partnership. Overnight stays don't happen by accident, they require awareness. Reduced visibility directly translates to fewer hotel bookings and less revenue for the city. 🌐 Website traffic declines
Our data shows a direct link between social activity, ad campaigns, and web visits. When social slows, web traffic follows. $42,000/ year in marketing helps protect our $1.6M revenue stream. 88 OVER FOUR YEARS IN.

THE RESULTS SPEAK.
33,000+ followers. $342K in TOT growth. A $0.16 cost per click avg. Mt. Shasta is on the map and we'd like to keep it there.

Josh Thomas · The Ascension Aesthetic
530.925.2734 · [email protected]
www.TheAscensionAesthetic.com
89 CITY PARTNERSHIP &

COMMUNITY IMPACT
90 WHY THIS PARTNERSHIP MATTERS
Siskiyou Humane Society partners with
the City of Mount Shasta to provide
essential animal services
These services support public safety,
legal compliance, and community
well-being
Our goal is to demonstrate the value
and cost-efficiency of this partnership
2 91

SUPPORTING MSPD & CITY OPERATIONS
Assisting Assisting with stray animal intake and holding Providing Providing housing, care and placement for animals Supporting Supporting city and county compliance with California animal Welfare Laws Serving Serving as a primary resource for the community 3 Our partnership goal is to allow MSPD to remain focused on public safety while we handle animal care and placement 92 CITY RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER CALIFORNIA
LAW
4 Rabies Control &
Licensing
Rabies vaccinations
and licensing must be
maintained
Cities must provide or
arrange rabies control
programs and clinics
Stray Animal Holding &
Care
Stray animals must be
held for 4–6 business
days
Shelters must provide
daily care, housing, and
monitoring
Must attempt owner
identification and
contact
Microchipping &
Reunification
Dogs and cats must be
microchipped prior to
release or adoption
Ownership must be
documented and
tracked
Records of owner
contact attempts must be
maintained
Placement & Outcomes
Animals must be made
available for reclaim,
adoption, or rescue
transfer
Required processes must
be followed before
euthanasia
(SHS is a NO KILL Shelter)
Siskiyou Humane Society fulfills these responsibilities on behalf of the City of Mount Shasta CA Health & Safety Code § 121690
CA Food & Ag Code § 31108
CA Food & Agricultural Code § 31108.3
CA Food & Agricultural Code § 31752.1
93 HOW SHS

SUPPORTS

COMPLIANCE
5 Intake and holding of stray animals
Daily care, feeding, and monitoring
Medical treatment, vaccinations
and clinics
Microchip scanning and owner
outreach
Spay/neuter and adoption
placement
Documentation and recordkeeping
94 SERVING MOUNT SHASTA AND SISKIYOU
COUNTY
30% of animals in
our care come from
the City of Mount
Shasta
2025 intake from
Mount Shasta:
• 120 cats
• 64 dogs (including
repeat offenders)
Dogs
17 from MSPD 46
Direct Public Intake
95 OUR IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY 2025
710
Animals Sheltered
Animals safely housed and
managed within the
community
485
Adoptions
Animals placed into
permanent homes, reducing
long-term population
65 Reunited with Owners
Direct reduction in stray- related cases
378
Spay & Neuter Surgeries
Preventing future stray
populations
100
Public Spay/Neuter
Vouchers
Supporting proactive
population control
7,100
Volunteer Hours
Equivalent labor support
reducing operational costs
1,315 lbs
Pet Food Distributed
Preventing owner surrenders
and intake
30 Outreach & Education Events
Promoting responsible pet
ownership and prevention
7 Each of these outcomes represents services
that would otherwise require City resources
96 PREVENTING

PROBLEMS

BEFORE THEY
START
Pet food and supply assistance reduces owner
surrenders
Spay/neuter programs reduce stray populations
Vaccine clinics reduce disease risk and bite incidents
Community outreach promotes responsible pet
ownership
8 Prevention reduces long-term costs and demand on City resources 97 What It Takes to
Provide Animal
Services
Cost Category Description Estimated Annual Cost
Staffing (1–3 employees
at minimum wage)
Minimum coverage for
daily care, cleaning,
feeding, adoptions,
recordkeeping, and
after-hours intakes
$48,000 – $125,000
Facility (rent/lease or
ownership costs)
Space for kennels,
quarantine, intake,
storage, admin
$25,000 – $55,000
Utilities
Power (heating/cooling),
water/sewer (heavy use),
waste disposal
$20,500 – $40,000
Insurance Liability, workers’ comp,
property insurance $20,000 – $30,000
Veterinary & Medical
Care
Vaccinations, exams,
emergency care,
spay/neuter (required),
medications
$35,000 – $100,000
Equipment & Supplies
Kennels, cleaning supplies,
PPE, laundry, food,
microchips, software,
enrichment items
$15,000 – $25,000

WHAT IT TAKES TO PROVIDE ANIMAL SERVICES
Staffing for daily
care, intake, and
after-hours needs
Facility space for
housing, quarantine,
and operations
Utilities for
sanitation, climate
control, and waste
Insurance and
liability coverage
Veterinary care and
required medical
services
Equipment, supplies,
and ongoing
operational support
98 THE REAL COST OF ANIMAL CARE
24-Hour care
and monitoring
Staffing and
daily care
Feeding,
cleaning, and
enrichment
Medical
treatment and
vaccinations
Facility
operations and
utilities
Intake,
recordkeeping,
and placement
From Intake
To Outcome
10 Operating Cost Annually $850,000
Average Length of Stay
Dogs
30 Days
Average Length of Stay
Cats
20 Days
Cost Per Day Per Animal $40
Cost Per Animal A Year $1,1147
99 WHAT HAPPENS

WITHOUT THIS

PARTNERSHIP
PRESENTATION TITLE 11
Animal care responsibilities shift to
City resources
Increased MSPD time spent on
animal-related calls
The City assumes responsibility for
housing, feeding, and care
Increased liability and public
safety concerns
Higher risk of repeat stray and
nuisance cases
100

A COST-SAVING

PARTNERSHIP FOR

THE CITY
SHS provides full-service animal care at a fraction of the cost of a city-run program
Reduces demand on City staffing and infrastructure
Minimizes liability and compliance risks
Prevents long-term increases in stray populations
PRESENTATION TITLE 12
101

WHAT MORE WE CAN

DO WITH INCREASED

SUPPORT
Increased animal control
support and city assistance
Support for licensing and
compliance
Expanded spay and neuter
programs
Increased capacity to respond
to community needs
13 Additional investment expands services that further reduce long-term costs and demand on City resources
102

COMMUNITY

SUPPORT IN ACTION
14 Additional investment expands services that further reduce long-term costs and demand on City resources
7,100 volunteer hours annually
Reduces operational costs
Expands services without
increasing City burden
103

A RESPONSIBLE AND

NECESSARY

INVESTMENT
15 Siskiyou Humane Society is not an optional
service
It is a necessary investment in the community
The City of Mount Shasta is
required to ensure animal
services are provided
SHS delivers these services
efficiently and professionally
This partnership reduces cost,
workload, and long-term
community impact
104

FOR THE LOVE IN THEM AND

THE HUMANE IN US
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140

COLLIER REST STOP

VISITOR CENTER
141
Background
Statistics
Tourism
Why Does It Matter
2 142

BACKGROUND
143
• Named for State Senator Randolph “Randy” Collier
• Leader in California transportation & infrastructure
• Located on I-5 near the Oregon border
• A key gateway into Siskiyou County
• More than a rest stop — a regional welcome point
4 A Vital First Impression for Siskiyou County
Collier Rest Area
144

STATISTICS
145

VISITOR NUMBERS
6 6,063
146

TOURISM
147
Connecting Travelers to Local
Businesses & Communities
Where Travelers Decide What’s Next
• Direct connection to local businesses
• Promotes lodging, dining, recreation & events
• Represents towns across the county
• Reaches visitors before their plans are made
Today:
• Some business partners engaged
• More opportunities to be discovered
8 148
Advertising Opportunities
9 What we’re seeing:
• Many local businesses recognize the value and
participate.
• However, many more still haven’t taken advantage of
this prime visibility.
• This means missed opportunities for both travelers and our communities.
• With thousands of people passing through each week, the potential economic impact is far greater than most realize. 149

WHY DOES IT MATTER
150
The Collier Visitor Center plays a quiet but significant role in supporting:

1. Tourism: By driving visitors into our towns, parks, trails, and attractions

2. Local economies: Through referrals that lead to overnight stays, meals, and retail spending

3. Public safety: By sharing wildfire, weather, and travel information year-round

4. Community awareness: By educating visitors on history, natural resources, recreation, agriculture, and more

5. County identity: By offering a unified “welcome” that reflects our values and landscapes
When Boards ask, “Why does this matter to my district?” the answer is simple:

Because this center represents your community even if a traveler never drives directly through it.
11 Big Impact from a Small Footprint
151
• Serves travelers headed across Siskiyou County and beyond • Often the first point of contact for Lake Siskiyou, Klamath Basin, Scott Valley, Shasta Valley & more
• Reaches visitors before they decide where to go or spend time • Nature Walk Interpretive Trail was added in 2025
• Expands visibility for local programs, destinations & services • Reflects the full diversity of Siskiyou County
• Stronger impact through collaboration
12 A Shared Region Opportunity

ENGAGING
THE

AUDIENCE
152
Rennie Cleland, Board President
530-260-1147
[email protected]
https://collierctr.org/
153
City Council Agenda Item #9
Staff Report
MEETING DATE: April 27, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Todd Juhasz, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Kim Fowler, Planning Director
SUBJECT: Mobile Home Parks Rent Stabilization

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommend that the City Council review the Shasta Horizons Mobile Home and RV Park rent data collected by Staff and determine whether rent and utility increases over the last three years merit the City considering adoption of a Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Ordinance.

POLICY DIRECTION
Based on the background information below and subsequent discussion, staff is seeking direction on whether to:

1. Develop a Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Ordinance;

2. Develop a lease agreement process by which City staff oversees an agreement between mobile homeowners and the Shasta Horizons Mobile Home and RV Park owner;

3. Allow current state regulations continue to dictate rent policy for mobile home parks; or,

4. Provide alternate direction(s) to Staff.

BACKGROUND
On November 24, 2025, Staff reviewed rent
increase documentation submitted by residents
within the Shasta Horizon Mobile Home and RV
Park (704 S. Old Stage Road) and discussed with
Council the legality of such rental rate increases.

It was determined at this meeting that since
rental increases did not exceed the cap
stipulated under the California Tenant
Protection Act, a rent stabilization ordinance
was not immediately necessary in Mt. Shasta.

X Regular
Consent
Closed
Presentation
154
2 Following this meeting, Staff again met with residents of the Shasta Horizon Mobile Home and RV Park to better understand the implications of not having rent stabilization measures in place and further researched how an ordinance could benefit the community.

On February 23, 2026, the City Council directed Staff to obtain more information and to explore whether the City should adopt rent stabilization that is more stringent than the current State regulations.

DISCUSSION
Staff has received a myriad of documents from the residents of the Shasta Horizons Mobile Home and RV park. Below is a summary of rent and utility invoices submitted to the city for one of the spaces. Note: Trash, sewer, and water were included with the “base rent” through 7/1/2023:

Date Base Rent Trash Sewer Water Rent Total
6/1/2022 $375.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $375.00
7/1/2022 $375.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $375.00
8/1/2022 $375.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $375.00
9/1/2022 $405.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $405.00
10/1/2022 $405.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $405.00
11/1/2022 $405.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $405.00
12/1/2022 $405.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $405.00
1/1/2023 $405.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $405.00
2/1/2023 $405.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $405.00
3/1/2023 $405.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $405.00
4/1/2023 $405.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $405.00
5/1/2023 $405.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $405.00
6/1/2023 $405.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $405.00
7/1/2023 $405.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $405.00
8/1/20231 $344.22 $21.76 $39.02 $0.00 $405.00
9/1/2023 $374.22 $21.76 $39.02 $0.00 $435.00
10/1/2023 $374.22 $21.76 $39.02 $0.00 $435.00
11/1/2023 $374.22 $21.76 $39.02 $0.00 $435.00
12/1/2023 $374.22 $21.76 $39.02 $0.00 $435.00
1/1/2024 $374.22 $21.76 $39.02 $0.00 $435.00
2/1/2024 $374.22 $21.76 $39.02 $0.00 $435.00
3/1/2024 $374.22 $28.00 $41.18 $0.00 $443.40
4/1/2024 $374.22 $28.00 $41.18 $0.00 $443.40
6/1/2024 $374.22 $28.00 $41.18 $0.00 $443.40
7/1/2024 $374.22 $28.00 $41.18 $0.00 $443.40
8/1/2024 $374.22 $28.00 $41.18 $0.00 $443.40
9/1/2024 $374.22 $28.00 $41.18 $0.00 $443.40
10/1/2024 $425.00 $28.00 $41.18 $0.00 $494.18
155
3 Date Base Rent Trash Sewer Water Rent Total
11/1/2024 $425.00 $28.00 $41.18 $0.00 $494.18
12/1/2024 $425.00 $28.00 $41.18 $0.00 $494.18
1/1/2025 $425.00 $28.00 $41.18 $0.00 $494.18
2/1/2025 $425.00 $28.00 $41.18 $0.00 $494.18
3/1/2025 $425.00 $28.00 $41.18 $0.00 $494.18
5/1/2025 $425.00 $28.00 $50.02 $0.00 $503.02
6/1/2025 $425.00 $28.00 $50.02 $0.00 $503.02
7/1/20252 $406.50 $28.00 $50.02 $18.50 $503.02
8/1/2025 $406.50 $28.00 $50.02 $18.50 $503.02
9/1/2025 $465.00 $28.00 $50.02 $18.50 $561.52
10/1/2025 $465.00 $48.76 $50.02 $18.50 $582.28
11/1/2025 $465.00 $32.23 $50.02 $18.50 $565.75
12/1/2025 $465.00 $32.23 $50.02 $18.50 $565.75
1/1/2026 $465.00 $32.23 $50.02 $18.50 $565.75
2/1/2026 $465.00 $32.23 $50.02 $18.50 $565.75 1 Beginning 8/1/2023, trash and sewer costs were billed as a separate line item. 2 Beginning 7/1/2025, water was billed as a separate line item.

Table 1 – Monthly Rent and Utility Payments from June 2022 through February 2026 As indicated in Table 1 above, data for the time period of June 1, 2022 through February 1, 2026 was collected. Rows highlighted in yellow indicate where the total monthly payment (rent plus utilities) increased from the month prior. In summary, base rents increased annually in September or October. Separately, utility bills (sewer and trash) have also increased over time.

Time Period Starting Rent Ending Rent Increase in
Dollars
Increase in
Percentage
11/1/2022 through 11/1/2023 $405.00 $435.00 $30.00 7%
11/1/2023 through 11/1/2024 $435.00 $494.18 $59.18 14%
11/1/2024 through 11/1/2025 $494.18 $565.75 $71.57 14%
Table 2 – Summary of Aggregated Rent and Utility Increases November 2022 through November 2025
Using November as a point of comparison, Table 2 above shows a 7% increase in rent in November 2023, an additional 14% increase in November 2024, and another 14% increase in November 2025.

Rent Increase Date Previous Rent New Rent Increase in
Dollars
Increase in
Percentage
9/1/2022 $375.00 $405.00 $30.00 8%
9/1/2023 $405.00 $435.00 $30.00 7%
10/1/2024 $443.40 $494.18 $50.78 11%
9/1/2025 $503.02 $561.52 $58.50 12%
Table 3 – Aggregated Rent and Utility Increases, Each Occurrence 156
4 Considering an alternate perspective, Table 3 above shows the percentage increase of each of the four rental increase occurrences. Aggregated rent and utility rates increased 8% in 2022, 7% in 2023, 11% in 2024 and another 12% in 2025.

The Mobile Home Park Homeowners Allegiance (www.mhphoa.com) (MHPHOA) website keeps a record of jurisdictions who have adopted Rent Stabilization Ordinances. As of this writing, there are currently 106 ordinances documented for 95 cities and 11 counties, including 265 unincorporated communities in the State of California that are protected by some form of Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Ordinance. The Table in its entirety is included as Attachment A.

In California, jurisdictions that have adopted rent stabilization ordinances typically have set a cap between 3% and 8%, with a Consumer Price Index (CPI) range of 66% to 100%. 73 (or 69%) of these jurisdictions include vacancy control measures. For example, the City of Arcata states the following:

Starting in 2018, on or after May 1 of each year, a Mobilehome Park Owner may impose a Rent Increase for a Mobilehome Space by one hundred percent (100%) of the percentage increase, if any, in the consumer price index (CPI) during the most recent twelve (12) month period ending in December of the prior year. Such Rent Increase may be imposed once in any twelve (12) month period. However, the Rent Increase shall not exceed five percent (5%) of the Rent charged for the Space in the preceding year, except as permitted by this Article in accordance with In-place Mobilehome transfers. CPI Cap Adjustment: If the change in the CPI exceeds five percent (5%) for two or more consecutive years, the cap shall automatically be adjusted to the increase in CPI during the years consecutively exceeding five percent. (Source: City of Arcata Ordinance No. 1487 Section 6920.6 Annual Rent Increases)
Below is a series of calculations demonstrating how rents would have been different if stabilization measures were in place in 2022:

Rent Increase Date Previous Rent New Rent Increase in
Dollars
Increase in
Percentage
9/1/2022 $375.00 $386.25 $11.25 3%
9/1/2023 $386.25 $397.84 $11.59 3%
10/1/2024 $398.84 $410.81 $11.97 3%
9/1/2025 $410.81 $423.13 $12.32 3%
Table 4 – Rent Modeled at 3% Cap Beginning in 2022
157
5 Rent Increase Date Previous Rent New Rent Increase in Dollars
Increase in
Percentage
9/1/2022 $375.00 $393.75 $18.75 5.%
9/1/2023 $393.75 $413.44 $19.69 5.%
10/1/2024 $413.44 $434.11 $20.67 5.%
9/1/2025 $434.11 $455.82 $21.71 5.%
Table 5 – Rent Modeled at 5% Cap Beginning in 2022
Rent Increase Date Previous Rent New Rent Increase in
Dollars
Increase in
Percentage
9/1/2022 $375.00 $401.25 $26.25 7%
9/1/2023 $401.25 $429.34 $28.09 7%
10/1/2024 $429.34 $459.39 $30.05 7%
9/1/2025 $459.39 $491.55 $32.16 7%
Table 6 – Rent Modeled at 7% Cap Beginning in 2022
Rent Increase Date Previous Rent New Rent Increase in
Dollars
Increase in
Percentage
9/1/2022 $375.00 $408.75 $33.75 9%
9/1/2023 $408.75 $445.54 $36.79 9%
10/1/2024 $445.54 $485.64 $40.10 9%
9/1/2025 $485.64 $529.35 $43.71 9%
Table 7 – Rent Modeled at 9% Cap Beginning in 2022
Rent Increase Date 3% 5% 7% 9% Actual
9/1/2022 $386.25 $393.75 $401.25 $408.75 $405.00
9/1/2023 $397.84 $413.44 $429.34 $445.54 $435.00
10/1/2024 $410.81 $434.11 $459.39 $485.64 $494.18
9/1/2025 $423.13 $455.82 $491.55 $529.35 $561.52
Table 8 – Composite of Tables 3 through 7
As demonstrated in Tables 8 above, had a 3% cap been implemented in 2022, residents would be paying $423.13 in rent and utilities as opposed to $561.52 in September 2025, a monthly savings of $138.39. Table 9 below shows September 2025 rent rates based on the various cap models:
3% 5% 7% 9% Actual
Rent Modeled on 9/1/2025 $423.13 $455.82 $491.55 $529.35 $561.52 Savings in Monthly Rent $138.39 $105.70 $69.97 $32.17 $0.00 Table 9 – Monthly Rent Savings Modeled at Various Caps
158
6 NEXT STEPS
Mobile Home Rent Stabilization Ordinance. If the City Council intends to move forward development of an ordinance, Staff can outline possible metrics for determination of appropriate CPI and cap percentage that would provide the framework for such an ordinance.

The City of Arcata conducted a “Mobile Home Study” and found that 48% of their respondents paid more than 30% of their income towards housing costs, with 14% paying more than 50%; and subsequently concluded that rent control was a viable strategy for maintaining affordable mobile home housing. The City of Calistoga conducted public hearings during which residents of the mobile home parks and owners of mobile home parks and their representatives expressed, and the Council considered, all of the expressed points of view, both oral and written, concerning property rights and the protection of public health, safety, and welfare. The City Council in Clovis created a Citizen’s Advisory Committee consisting of homeowners and park owners to meet and discuss the proposed ordinance. The meetings were conducted with the assistance of the offices of the City Manager, City Clerk, and City Attorney.

Lease Agreement Process. If the City Council intends to move forward development of a lease agreement process, Staff can review possible steps, including providing needed mediation services to resolve any disputes. A number of cities (San Dimas, Vista, Rancho Cucamonga, and Sunnyvale) have opted into management of long-term lease agreements between mobile homeowners and mobile home park owners. Unlike an ordinance, a long-term lease agreement would be voluntary between the park owners and the City of Mt. Shasta and would require collaboration from the homeowners within the Shasta Horizons Mobile Home and RV Park community.

Allow Current State Regulations to Dictate Rent Policy for Mobile Home Parks. This approach would leave residents vulnerable to arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable rent adjustments.

FISCAL IMPACT
None.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
The activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA does not apply where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment (CEQA, Article 5, Section 15061(b)(3)).
159
California Mobile Home Parks
California MHP () Rent Stabilization Ordinances (RSO aka SRSO) Note: The MHPHOA are currently in the process of verifying ALL California MHP () Rent Stabilization Ordinances. We have removed those ordinances that have been repealed. The number of Parks and Spaces may have changed based on 2025 data available. Resident Owned Communities (176) are excluded from the counts.

We currently have 106 ordinances documented for 95 Cities and 11 Counties (265 Unincorporated Communities) in the State of California that are protected by some form of Mobile Home Park Space Rent Stabilization Ordinance (SRSO).

Counties in California: 58, Cities in California: 482, Unincorporated Communities in California: 2,228 2025-06-12 Updates: Added County of Tuolumne, California 2025-05-26 Updates: Added City of Buellton, California
2025-04-21 Updates: Added City of Arcata, California
2025-02-26 Updates: Added City of San Leandro, California 2024-12-17 Updates: Added City of Mountain View, California California RSOs aka SRSOs (Space Rent Stabilization Ordinances) are NOT to be confused with Rent Control for home and apartment renters. When you see or hear the term “Rent Stabilization Ordinance” being used by residents of mobile/manufactured home parks in California, they do not include home or apartment renters. The laws are distinctly different between renters of homes and apartments vs. renters of mobile/manufactured home spaces and are usually not interchangeable.

Many mobile/manufactured home owners rent the land that the home occupies. For a homeowner, this is not the best situation to be in, especially in a park that is owned by a predatory company. Typically, under the predatory owner business model, as space rents increase above Fair Market Rates (FMRs), your mobile/manufactured home will depreciate in value (loss in equity) while the land value appreciates (gain in equity). The general industry rule of thumb is that for every $10 per month space rent increase, you lose $1,000 in mobile home equity.

Note: Our data is obtained from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), Codes and Standards Automated System (CASAS), and reflects total numbers for Parks and Spaces. In some instances, we may have received more accurate data from other resources. All Reference links have been manually verified and may be updated without notice.
# City County Date Notes Parks Spaces Increase Vacancy Control Ordinance Name Reference 1 Alameda
(County)
Alameda 1990-
09 6 UC 22 712 4% Cap No Mobile Home Park Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter

3.32 2 Arcata (City) Humboldt 2017-
12 6 587 100% CPI, 5%
Cap
Yes Mobilehome Rent
Stabilization Ordinance
 1487
3 Azusa Los
Angeles
1992-
01 7 588 75% CPI, 8% Cap Yes, 8% Rent Stabilization  Article XI, Division 2
4 Beaumont Riverside 1984-
10 8 387 Hearing Yes, Average Mobile Home Park Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter

13.21 5 Bell Gardens Los
Angeles
2022-
10 20 414 50% CPI, 4% Cap No Rent Stabilization and
Tenant Eviction
Protections
 925,
Chapters 5.62,

5.63 6 Benicia Solano 1978-
09 4 266 Hearing No
7 Buellton Santa
Barbara
1992-
11 2 308 75% CPI Yes, 10% Mobilehome Rent Control  Chapter

5.14 8 Calistoga Napa 1984-
08 5 673 100% CPI, 6%
Cap
Yes, 0% Mobile Home Park Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter

2.22 9 Camarillo Ventura 1981-
12 3 497 Rent Review
Mediation
No Rent Review Mediation  Chapter

10.50 10 Carpinteria Santa
Barbara
1982-
03 7 860 75% CPI Yes Rent Stabilization  Chapter

5.69 11 Carson Los
Angeles
1979-
08 19 2,199 75% CPI, 8% Cap Yes Mobilehome Space Rent
Control
 Chapter 7
Totals: 1,531 158,334
4/21/26, 11:31 PM California Mobile Home Park Space Rent Stabilization Ordinances (RSO, SRSO) https://mhphoa.com/ca/rso/ 1/8
160
# City County Date Notes Parks Spaces Increase Vacancy Control Ordinance Name Reference 12 Cathedral
City
Riverside 1982-
00 9 2,012 75% CPI Yes Mobile Home Rent
Control Ordinance
 48
13 Chino San
Bernardino
1983-
08 5 554 66% CPI No Mobilehome Park Rent
Regulation
 Chapter

2.68 14 Chula Vista San Diego 1997-
00 30 3,414 100% CPI < 3%,
75% CPI > 3%
No Mobilehome Park Space
Rent Review
 Chapter

9.50 15 Cloverdale Sonoma 1986-
08 5 174 Board Yes, 10% Rent Control in Mobile
Home Parks
 Chapter

5.36 16 Clovis Fresno 1978-
09 5 867 80% CPI < 5%,
52% CPI < 10%,
23% > 10%
Yes, 5% Mobile Home Rent
Review and Stabilization
 Chapter

5.13 17 Colton San
Bernardino
1990-
06 8 698 60% CPI No Mobilehome Park Rent
Stabilization
 Title 15,
Chapter 15.48
18 Concord Contra
Costa
1994-
01 11 1,412 80% CPI, 5% Cap Yes, 10% Mobile Home Parks Rent Stabilization
 Chapter

15.105, Article
II
19 Contra Costa
(County)
Contra
Costa
1995-
07 9 UC 0 0 75% CPI, 6% Cap No Mobilehome Space Rent  Title 5, Division 540
20 Cotati Sonoma 1979-
11 3 110 100% CPI, 6%
Cap
Yes Mobilehome Park Space
Rent Stabilization
 Chapter

19.14 21 Daly City San Mateo 1980-
06 1 501 Board No Mobile Home Rent
Review Commission
 Title 2,
Chapter 2.52
22 East Palo Alto San Mateo 1983-
11 2 146 Board Yes Rent Stabilization
Program
 RSP
23 El Monte Los
Angeles
2015-
08 33 1,427 100% CPI Yes, 100% CPI Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization
 Title 8,
Chapter 8.70,
2860
24 Escondido San Diego 1988-
06 30 3,185 Board Yes Mobilehome Rent Control
Ordinance
 Proposition
K
25 Fairfield Solano 1984-
11 4 123 4% Automatic No Mobile Home Parks  Chapter 29 26 Fontana San
Bernardino
1987-
02 19 1,423 100% CPI No Mobile Home Park Space
Rent Stabilization
 Chapter 14,
Article III
27 Fremont Alameda 1987-
02 3 732 3%, $10, 60%
CPI, 6% Cap
Yes Mobile Home Space Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter

9.55 28 Fresno Fresno 1988-
01 36 3,918 75% CPI
Automatic
Yes, 10% Mobilehome Park Rent
Review and Stabilization
Ordinance
 Article 20
29 Gardena Los
Angeles
1987-
04 28 1,339 Rent Mediation,
Arbitration
No Residential Rent
Mediation and Hearings
 Chapter

14.04 30 Gilroy Santa Clara 1987-
05 4 349 80% CPI, 5% Cap No Mobile Home Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter 14A
31 Goleta Santa
Barbara
2002-
01 5 650 75% CPI Yes, 10%, 1-5 Years Mobilehome Rent Control  Chapter

8.14 32 Grover Beach San Luis
Obispo
1987-
12 4 170 Graduated CPI Yes, 5% Mobile Home Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter 13
33 Hayward Alameda 1980-
03 16 2,397 Lesser of 3% or
60% CPI, 6% Cap
Yes Mobile Home Rent
Stabilization Ordinance
 08-12, 89-
057 C.S.
34 Hemet Riverside 1979-
05 43 6,924 Board No Mobile Home Rent
Review Commission
 Article IV,
Division 3
Totals: 1,531 158,334
4/21/26, 11:31 PM California Mobile Home Park Space Rent Stabilization Ordinances (RSO, SRSO) https://mhphoa.com/ca/rso/ 2/8
161
# City County Date Notes Parks Spaces Increase Vacancy Control Ordinance Name Reference 35 Humboldt
(County)
Humboldt 2017-
01 39 UC 42 1,095 100% CPI Yes, 5% Mobile Home Rent
Stabilization
 2569
36 Imperial
Beach
San Diego 2022-
10 3 287 5% Cap Urgency Ordinance  2023-1227
37 La Verne Los
Angeles
1994-
10 8 1,754 100% CPI, 7%
Cap
Yes, $34 or 7% Mobile Home Rent
Review
 Chapter

9.16 38 Lancaster Los
Angeles
1985-
03 34 4,177 60% CPI Yes Mobilehome Park Rent
Stabilization
 Title 11,
Chapter 11.08
39 Lompoc Santa
Barbara
1983-
12 7 887 75% CPI, 10%
Cap
Yes, 15% Mobilehome Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter

5.60 40 Los Angeles
(City)
Los
Angeles
1979-
04 8 187 100% CPI Yes, 10% Rent Stabilization
Ordinance
 Chapter XV
41 Los Angeles
(County)
Los
Angeles
1988-
03 74 UC 57 6,696 75% CPI, 8% Cap Yes, 10% Mobilehome Rent Stabilization
 Title 8,
Division 3,
Chapter 8.57
42 Los Gatos Santa Clara 1980-
10 2 138 100% CPI, 3%
Min, 5% Cap
Yes, $25 or Average Mobile Home Hearing
Process
 Article VII.V,
Division 2
43 Malibu Los
Angeles
1991-
12 1 262 100% CPI, 5%
Cap
Yes, 15% Mobilehome Park Rent
Control Regulations
 Chapter

5.16 44 Marina Monterey 2011-
11 5 399 100% CPI Yes, 5%, 2 Years Mobile Home Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter

5.72 45 Milpitas Santa Clara 1992-
08 3 521 50% CPI, 5% Cap Yes, Average Rent Mobile Home Park Rent Increases
 Title III,
Chapter 30
46 Modesto Stanislaus 2007-
10 9 1,400 100% CPI Yes, 10%, 5 Years Mobile Home Rent
Stabilization Program
 Chapter 19
47 Montclair San
Bernardino
1985-
11 8 728 100% CPI, 6%
Cap
No Mobile Home Rent
Regulation
 Title 4,
Chapter 4.60
48 Moreno
Valley
Riverside 1987-
07 7 872 Lessor of 65%
CPI or 5-8%
Current Rent
Yes, Limits Mobilehome Park Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter

13.01 49 Morgan Hill Santa Clara 1983-
08 6 531 75% CPI, 8% Cap Yes Mobile Home Park Rents  Chapter

5.36 50 Morro Bay San Luis
Obispo
1986-
08 10 443 75% CPI Yes, 125% CPI NonPermanent Resident, 10-15% Cap
Mobilehome and
Recreational Vehicle Park
Rent Stabilization
 Title 5,
Chapter 5.32
51 Mountain
View
Santa Clara 2021-
03 6 1,130 100% CPI, 5%
Cap, 2% Floor
Yes, 100% CPI Mobile Home Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter 46
52 National City San Diego 2023-
01 4 362 5% Cap No Mobilehome Park Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter

9.64 53 Novato Marin 1997-
01 4 722 100% CPI, 4%
Cap
Yes Rent Control -
Mobilehomes
 Chapter XX
54 Oceanside San Diego 1982-
06 20 2,401 75% CPI, 8.0%
Cap
Yes Mobile Home Rent
Control
 Chapter
16B, 82-87
55 Oxnard Ventura 1983-
03 24 2,684 100% CPI, 4%
Cap
Yes, 15%, $80, Average
Space Rent
Mobile Home Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter 24,
Article I
56 Pacifica San Mateo 1991-
09 1 93 75% CPI No Rent Stabilization
Regulations
 Title 9,
Chapter 1,
Article 2
57 Palm Desert Riverside 1986-
00 4 910 75% CPI Yes Mobile Home Rent
Control Program
 456
Totals: 1,531 158,334
4/21/26, 11:31 PM California Mobile Home Park Space Rent Stabilization Ordinances (RSO, SRSO) https://mhphoa.com/ca/rso/ 3/8
162
# City County Date Notes Parks Spaces Increase Vacancy Control Ordinance Name Reference 58 Palm Springs Riverside 1980-
04 10 1,974 75% CPI Yes Rent Control  Title 4,
Chapter 4.02
59 Palmdale Los
Angeles
1985-
10 16 2,098 75% CPI, 5% Cap No Mobile Home Space Rent
Control
 Title 5,
Chapter 5.44
60 Petaluma Sonoma 1994-
02 9 874 100% CPI, 6%
Cap
No Mobilehome Park Space
Rent Stabilization
Program
 Title 6,
Chapter 6.50
61 Pico Rivera Los
Angeles
2022-
02 6 405 75% CPI, 3% Cap Yes, 3% Mobilehome Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter

9.48 62 Pismo Beach San Luis
Obispo
1982-
11 1 181 75% CPI, 6% Cap Yes, 10% Mobilehome Park Rent
Control Regulations
 Title 5,
Chapter 5.20
63 Pleasanton Alameda 1993-
02 3 371 100% CPI, 5%
Cap
Yes, 25%, 5 Years Mobilehome Space Rents  Title 6,
Chapter 6.60
64 Pomona Los
Angeles
1992-
05 18 1,706 100% CPI, 5%
Cap
Yes Mobile Home Rent
Controls
 Article VIII,
Division 3
65 Rancho
Mirage
Riverside 1982-
05 4 676 75% CPI Yes, Average Rent Mobilehome Rent Control  Title 9, Chapter 9.58
66 Redlands San
Bernardino
1982-
12 6 694 75% CPI, 6-9%
Cap
Yes Rent Stabilization for
Mobilehome Parks
 Title 5,
Chapter 5.48
67 Rialto San
Bernardino
1992-
03 16 1,885 Rent Review
Commission
Yes Mobile Home Rent
Review Commission
 Title 4,
Chapter 4.01
68 Riverside
(City)
Riverside 1996-
07 38 4,177 80% CPI Yes, Average Rent Mobile Home Parks Rent Stabilization Procedures
 Chapter

5.75 69 Riverside
(County)
Riverside 1983-
08 31 UC 124 12,376 100% CPI No Mobile Home Park Rent
Stabilization Ordinance
 760
70 Rocklin Placer 1982-
05 5 454 100% CPI
Automatic
No Mobile Home Rent
Ordinance
 Title 2,
Chapter 2.46
71 Rohnert Park Sonoma 1987-
12 5 1,316 75% CPI, 4% Cap Yes Mobile Home Ordinance  Article VI, Chapter 9.70
72 Salinas Monterey 1990-
10 11 1,437 75% CPI, 8% Cap No Mobilehomes  Chapter

17.1 73 San
Bernardino
San
Bernardino
1984-
09 16 1,487 80% CPI, 4% Cap No Mobile Home Park Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter

8.90 74 San Jose Santa Clara 1985-
07 58 10,667 75% CPI, 3-7%
Cap
Yes Mobilehome Rent
Ordinance
 Title 17,
Chapter 17.22
75 San Juan
Capistrano
Orange 1979-
03 5 984 100% CPI Yes Mobile Home Rent
Control
 Article 9
76 San Leandro Alameda 2019-
07 15 1,077 4% Cap No Mobilehome Space Rent
Stabilization
 Title 4,
Chapter 4-39
77 San Luis
Obispo (City)
San Luis
Obispo
1988-
06 16 1,580 100% CPI, 5%
Cap
Yes, 10%, 3 Years Mobile Home Park Rent
Stabilization
 Title 5,
Chapter 5.44
78 San Luis
Obispo
(County)
San Luis
Obispo
1984-
06 16 UC 39 2,408 60% CPI Yes, 10% Mobilehome Rent
Stabilization
 Title 25
79 San Marcos San Diego 1980-
11 12 2,312 CPI, NOI Yes, Limits Mobilehome Rent Review Commission
 Title 16,
Chapter 16.16
80 San Rafael Marin 1990-
04 1 397 75% CPI Yes Mobilehome Rent
Stabilization
 Title 20
Totals: 1,531 158,334
4/21/26, 11:31 PM California Mobile Home Park Space Rent Stabilization Ordinances (RSO, SRSO) https://mhphoa.com/ca/rso/ 4/8
163
# City County Date Notes Parks Spaces Increase Vacancy Control Ordinance Name Reference 81 Santa Ana Orange 2021-
11 29 3,913 80% CPI, 3% Cap No Rent Stabilization
Ordinance
 NS-3009
82 Santa
Barbara (City)
Santa
Barbara
1984-
08 5 232 75% CPI Yes, 10%, 1-5 Years Mobilehome and
Recreational Vehicle
Parks - Residents' Rights
 Title 26,
Chapter 26.04
83 Santa
Barbara
(County)
Santa
Barbara
1994-
09 12 UC 19 2,161 75% CPI Yes, 10%, 1-5 Years Mobilehome Rent Control  Chapter 11A 84 Santa Clarita Los
Angeles
1990-
12 15 2,276 100% CPI, 5%
Cap
Yes, 10% Manufactured Home Park
Rent Adjustment
Procedures
 Chapter

6.02 85 Santa Cruz
(City)
Santa Cruz 1991-
01 2 250 75% CPI, 8% Cap Yes Mobilehome Rent/Sale
Stabilization
 Chapter

22.01 86 Santa Cruz
(County)
Santa Cruz 1979-
01 6 UC 45 2,013 50% CPI, Pass
Through
Yes Rental Adjustment
Procedures for Mobile
Home Parks
 Chapter

13.32 87 Santa Paula Ventura 1984-
06 9 775 75% CPI, 7% Cap Yes, 12% Rent Stabilization  Chapter 152 88 Santa Rosa Sonoma 2004-
00 16 2,154 70% CPI, 4% Cap Yes, 10% Mobilehome Rent Control Program
 Chapter 6-
66 89 Santee San Diego 1989-
12 11 2,004 Mobile Home Park Rent
Control Ordinance
 Chapter

2.44 90 Scotts Valley Santa Cruz 1980-
11 3 261 100% CPI Yes Mobile Home Park Rent
Stabilization
 Title 9,
Chapter 9.16
91 Sebastopol Sonoma 1988-
00 7 177 75% CPI, 3% Cap Yes, 10% Mobilehome Park Space Rent Stabilization
 Chapter 2,
Article XIX
92 Simi Valley Ventura 1983-
03 7 808 Rent Mediation No Mobile Home Rent
Mediation Board
Resolution 93-
52 93 Sonoma
(County)
Sonoma 1987-
06 28 UC 51 3,736 70% CPI, 4% Cap Yes, 5% Mobilehome Park Space Rent Stabilization
 Article XIX
94 Thousand
Oaks
Ventura 1980-
07 4 344 100% CPI Yes, 10-15% Mobile Home Rent
Stabilization
 Title 5,
Chapter 25
95 Tuolumne
(County)
Tuolumne 1995-
11 15 UC 36 1,900 2.5% COLA Yes, 10% Mobilehome Rent Control Ordinance
 Chapter

5.28 96 Ukiah Mendocino 2011-
02 23 1,014 100% CPI, 5%
Cap
Yes, 10% Mobilehome Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter 8
97 Union City Alameda 1980-
05 2 896 90% CPI, 7% Cap Yes Mobilehome Rent Review  Chapter

16.40 98 Upland San
Bernardino
1985-
12 6 865 80% CPI, 7% Cap Yes, $34 or 7% Mobilehome Rent Review  Title 5, Chapter 5.68
99 Vacaville Solano 1977-
12 11 1,089 Graduated CPI No Mobile Home Rent
Arbitration
 Title 2,
Chapter 2.36
100 Vallejo Solano 1982-
02 13 1,244 100% CPI/COLA
Average
No Mobile Home Parks Rent
Control
 Title 5,
Chapter 5.64
101 Ventura (City) Ventura 1981-
06 20 2,244 75% CPI, 7% Cap Yes, 15% Mobile Home Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter

6.600
102 Ventura
(County)
Ventura 1983-
02 29 UC 24 1,421 2%-8% COLA Yes, 15% Mobile Home Park Rent Control
 Division 8,
Chapter 10
103 Watsonville Santa Cruz 1989-
03 9 1,066 70% CPI, 5% Cap No Mobile Home Park Rent
Stabilization
 Chapter 3
Totals: 1,531 158,334
4/21/26, 11:31 PM California Mobile Home Park Space Rent Stabilization Ordinances (RSO, SRSO) https://mhphoa.com/ca/rso/ 5/8
164
# City County Date Notes Parks Spaces Increase Vacancy Control Ordinance Name Reference 104 West Covina Los
Angeles
1984-
09 2 265 100% CPI, 5-9%
Cap
No Mobile Home Park Space
Rents
 Chapter 15,
Article VIII
105 Windsor Sonoma 1992-
08 3 436 100% CPI, 6%
Cap
No Rent Stabilization  Title VIII,
Chapter 1
106 Yucaipa San
Bernardino
1990-
12 45 4,559 100% CPI, 4%
Cap
Yes, 10% Mobilehome Park Rent
Stabilization Program
 Chapter

15.20 Totals: 1,531 158,334
Nolo: California Rent Control and Rent Stabilization Laws Tuesday, February 20, 2024 – City-by-city rent control rules in California, with information on eviction protection. “In California, rent control (also known as rent stabilization) traditionally referred to city or county ordinances that limited the rent landlords could charge. (Popular perceptions of rent control include restrictions on evictions, as explained below.) Rent control laws typically specify a maximum percentage by which landlords can increase rent (for example, 5%) along with corresponding limits on the frequency of increases (typically once annually). Often the percentage of increase is tied to the area's annual Consumer Price Index (CPI), which is the price for items like gasoline, food and utilities.”
“This chart indicates which California cities and counties have rent control laws, along with a summary of the local law. Information about limits on evictions and other protections for renters is below the chart. Keep in mind the chart provides only rent-cap summaries, and the actual law might contain important additional details and tenant protections that apply to your situation. For more information on the many local ordinances that affect rent and evictions, including relocation assistance and owner move-ins, see our detailed Rent Control Chart for California.” Nolo: Tenant Protections Chart for California

1. Alameda

2. Alameda (County)

3. Albany

4. Baldwin Park

5. Berkeley

6. Beverly Hills

7. Burbank

8. Camarillo

9. Campbell

10. Commerce (City)

11. Concord

12. Culver City

13. East Palo Alto

14. El Cerrito

15. Emeryville

16. Fairfax

17. Fremont

18. Fresno

19. Gardena

20. Glendale

21. Half Moon Bay

22. Hayward

23. Healdsburg

24. Inglewood

25. Long Beach

26. Los Angeles

27. Los Angeles (County)

28. Los Gatos

29. Marin County

30. Maywood

31. Menlo Park

32. Milpitas

33. Monterey

34. Mountain View

35. Oakland

36. Oxnard

37. Palm Springs

38. Palo Alto (City)

39. Pasadena
4/21/26, 11:31 PM California Mobile Home Park Space Rent Stabilization Ordinances (RSO, SRSO) https://mhphoa.com/ca/rso/ 6/8
165

40. Redwood City

41. Richmond

42. Sacramento

43. San Diego

44. San Francisco

45. San Jose

46. San Leandro

47. San Rafael

48. Santa Ana

49. Santa Barbara

50. Santa Cruz

51. Santa Monica

52. Thousand Oaks

53. Union City

54. West Hollywood

55. Westlake Village
Consumer Price Index (CPI) U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics All Urban Consumers, Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, California Jan 2017 through Sep 2025 
Jan 2007 through Dec 2016 
Jan 1997 through Dec 2006 
The last column uses an example (not included in the Bureau of Labor Statistics data) of mobile home space rent starting at $450 per month in the year 1997 and currently (Sep 2025) at $982 per month. The difference in space rent is a 100% increase based on the yearly average CPI which is normally the maximum allowable increase under most California Mobile Home Park Rent Stabilization Ordinances (RSOs).

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg Rent 2017 2.1 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.5 2.2 2.5 2.8 3.1 3.1 3.6 3.6 2.8 $731 2018 3.5 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.1 4.0 3.9 3.9 3.9 4.1 3.6 3.2 3.8 $759 2019 3.2 2.5 2.7 3.3 3.1 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.0 3.1 $783 2020 3.1 3.4 1.9 0.7 0.9 1.4 1.9 2.0 1.2 0.7 1.0 1.5 1.6 $795 2021 0.9 1.0 2.2 3.6 3.9 4.0 3.9 4.0 4.6 5.4 6.0 6.6 3.8 $826 2022 7.5 7.4 8.5 7.9 8.0 8.6 7.7 7.6 7.8 7.5 6.0 4.9 7.4 $888 2023 5.8 5.1 3.7 3.8 3.2 2.5 2.7 3.3 3.2 2.4 2.8 3.5 3.5 $920 2024 2.5 3.4 4.0 3.9 3.9 3.2 3.4 2.9 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.3 $951 2025 3.3 3.1 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.2 $982
8 Year Average 2017-2024: 3.7
 Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index, Los Angeles Area Western Information Office, 90 7th Street, Suite 14-100, San Francisco, California 94103 CPI Line Chart 1997-2024
4/21/26, 11:31 PM California Mobile Home Park Space Rent Stabilization Ordinances (RSO, SRSO) https://mhphoa.com/ca/rso/ 7/8
166
Los Angeles, San Francisco, West Urban, City Average
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022  WEBSITE FOR RESIDENTS: The MHPHOA is NOT affiliated with any mobile home park owners and/or mobile home park management entities. We are both outspoken and anonymous mobile home residents, past and present, just like you, experiencing similar injustices, who want to help. ©2015-2026 MHPHOA ().com. All rights reserved. All trademarks and servicemarks are the properties of their respective owners. The MHPHOA.com is a Living Dynamic Domain.

2024
Los Angeles: 3
San Francisco:

West Urban:

City Average: 2
4/21/26, 11:31 PM California Mobile Home Park Space Rent Stabilization Ordinances (RSO, SRSO) https://mhphoa.com/ca/rso/ 8/8
167
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM #10
MEETING DATE: April 27, 2026
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Todd Juhasz, City Manager
SUBJECT: Legislative Update: Reallocation of E-Commerce Sales and Use Tax Revenues and a Summary of Revenue and Taxation Committee Positions on Upcoming Bills
Recommendation:

Staff to provide an overview of the discussions at both the January 22nd and March 2026 Revenue and Taxation Policy Committee meetings.

Background:

The first meeting of the Revenue and Taxation Policy Committee of 2026 was held on January 22nd and 23rd and the second was held on March 26th and 27th The focus of the Committee meetings was on the development of a set of recommendations that addressed the Bradley Burns Sales Tax which states that taxes are collected “at the point of negotiation.” The State considers the point of negotiation for e-commerce or online orders to be the community in which the orders are fulfilled. These orders are dispatched from fulfillment centers for online retailers like Amazon, Target, Walmart, and Best Buy. In other words, the community in which the fulfillment center is located keeps that sales tax revenue no matter where that order was originally placed by the consumer.

This interpretation has led to a steady erosion of the sales tax base in smaller cities with few storefronts from which staple items and essential goods are purchased (e.g. tools, socks, underwear). An inventory of cities by zip code was presented at the January meeting that showed that the City of Mt Shasta is losing approximately 54% of sales tax revenue to online sales. If, as proposed, 50% of sales tax revenue was returned to the City, there would be a 27% increase in sales tax revenue collected.

Committee Discussion:

Long and contentious discussions ensued among city managers on the committee regarding how e-commerce sales tax revenue should be distributed among California cities with X Regular Session
Special Session
Emergency
Session
Closed Session
168
fulfillment as compared to those cities without fulfillment centers. One city advocated for 100% of Bradley-Burns e-commerce-based sales tax revenue to be directed to the destination city, where goods are ultimately delivered and consumed.

In contrast, other committee members maintained that this portion of revenue should remain with the city where the fulfillment center is situated. Cities that supported this approach emphasized that fulfillment center cities bear significantly higher costs in maintaining the infrastructure necessary to support these large-scale operations, including roads, public safety services, and other municipal needs.

What’s At Stake:

The debate created significant tension among cities, driven by the potential for significant financial losses if certain allocation methods were adopted. For some municipalities, the proposed changes threatened to reduce their general fund revenues by more than 25%, a prospect that underscored the critical nature of the committee's deliberations.

The urgency behind the discussion stemmed from the broader implications of failing to reach a consensus. If cities could not agree on an equitable approach to distributing e-commerce sales tax revenues, there were concerns that the State of California might make that decision for all cities. In such a scenario, the state could decide unilaterally how to allocate these funds, potentially redirecting e-commerce revenues to address state budgetary needs. This possibility heightened the importance of the committee's work, as municipal leaders sought to preserve local control and ensure fair treatment for all cities involved.

The Committee’s Recommendations:

During the January 22 meeting, the Revenue & Taxation Committee voted with strong support to advance an item developing a series of recommendations for the League’s Board and the Legislature to consider. The committee’s proposals included:
• Implement a 50/50 split of Bradley-Burns sales tax revenues generated from ecommerce transactions, ensuring both fulfillment center cities and destination cities share in the revenue.
• Establish a plus or minus 5 percent fluidity band, allowing for limited flexibility in the revenue allocation to accommodate fluctuations in e-commerce sales tax receipts. • Apply the recommendations prospectively, excluding revenues from existing sales tax sharing agreements from any split to avoid disrupting current arrangements. • Introduce a five-year phase-in period following implementation by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), allowing cities time to adjust to the new revenue allocation method.
169
• Create a plus or minus 20 percent volatility band so that any city gaining revenues in excess of 20 percent would contribute those excess funds to mitigate losses greater than 20 percent for cities adversely affected by the reallocation of Bradley-Burns revenues.
• Reallocate county pool use tax dollars from out-of-state e-commerce transactions, moving these funds from the county pools to destination cities to better reflect where goods are delivered and consumed.

Following the Revenue & Taxation Committee's advancement of its recommendations, the League of California Cities Board addressed the issue during its meeting in Berkeley on February 19–20, 2026. After thorough consideration, the Board voted by a wide margin of 55–2 to reject all but one of the committee’s recommendations. The Board expressed concerns that adopting the recommendations would require a constitutional amendment and that with an estimated budget deficit of $18m forecast for FY26/27, the money needed to place the amendment(s) on the ballot was cost prohibitive. The costs cited include the required marketing to countervail media and print based arguments funded by online retailers and the communities where their fulfillment centers are located. It was also clear that Cal Cities and Legislators viewed the proposals as too divisive and noted that a substantial number of cities relied heavily on this revenue source for their general fund operations.

What was not stated by the Board, but implied was:
1) The potential loss of lobbying funds for incumbents or potential funds spent to unseat incumbents supportive of the change
2) The League of California Cities relies on membership funds and to take a controversial position could place those funds in jeopardy Recommendations Rejected:

Ultimately, the Board decided to direct League staff to pursue statutory changes focused specifically on reallocating county pool use tax dollars from out-of-state e-commerce transactions, which came about from AB 147 in 2019 and was implemented based on the South Dakota vs. Wayfair case requiring out-of-state-retailers with over $500,000 in annual CA sales to collect and remit sales and use tax. This change would shift these funds from the broader county pools directly to destination cities, thereby more accurately reflecting the locations where goods are delivered and consumed. The Board viewed this targeted action as a more balanced and less disruptive alternative than implementing a 50/50 split of Bradley-Burns sales tax revenues from e-commerce sales. In the grand scheme, this reallocation of sales tax revenue to cities, if approved, would be small.

Next Steps & The Committee’s Positions on Upcoming Bills:
170
Staff members from the League of California Cities are set to collaborate closely with the California Department of Tax & Fee Administration (CDTFA). Their joint effort will focus on designing and developing an effective mechanism for reallocating county pool use tax dollars generated from out-of-state e-commerce transactions. This process involves shifting these funds from county pools directly to destination cities, ensuring that tax revenues more accurately reflect the locations where goods are delivered and consumed.

Sponsored or Supported Bills:
• SB 922 (Road Repair):

Committee Position: Sponsor.

This bill seeks to reaffirm the authority of local agencies to recover costs for street maintenance and repairs linked to public services.

Under the bill, “linked to public services” refers to:
- Refuse and Waste Management: This is the primary focus of the bill, covering garbage, recycling, and green waste collection.
- Utility Operations: Broadly includes water, power, and heat services. - Infrastructure & Communications: Includes transportation and means of communication.
- Essential Public Health Operations: Services that rely on the regular use of local streets by heavy service vehicles to provide critical health and environmental benefits.
• SB 1005 (Payment Rounding):

Committee Position: Co-Sponsor.

This measure addresses the practicalities of public agency payments following the end of federal penny production. The primary intent of SB 1005 (Caballero) is to provide administrative clarity and legal protection for local public agencies as they navigate the phasing out of the penny by the federal government. The core objectives include:
- Addressing Currency Changes: The measure is a proactive response to the end of penny production by the U.S. Mint, ensuring that public agencies have a standardized method for handling cash transactions.
- Operational Clarity: It provides a specific legal framework for how agencies should round payment amounts (up or down) to the nearest nickel or other available denomination.
- Fiscal Transparency: By establishing these rules, the bill aims to prevent disputes 171
over minor discrepancies in payments for utilities, fees, or other municipal services. • SB 1349 (Tax Expenditure Review Board):

Committee Position: Support.

The Committee supports the establishment of an independent advisory body to assess major tax expenditures and provide recommendations to the Legislature. The main purpose of SB 1349 (Gonzalez) is to increase transparency and oversight of California’s tax system by establishing the California Tax Expenditure Review Board with the intent of providing:
• Independent Oversight: The bill creates the board as an independent advisory body to the State Legislature.
• Assessment of Expenditures: The board would be tasked with assessing major tax expenditures, which typically include tax credits, deductions, and exemptions that reduce the amount of revenue the state collects.
• Policy Recommendations: Based on its evaluations, the board would make formal recommendations to the Legislature regarding whether these tax expenditures are achieving their intended goals or should be modified.

Bills with Pending Positions
For the remaining items, no stance as of yet:

SB 1172 Sales Tax: Limits consultant compensation for negotiating tax-sharing agreements between agencies and retailers.

AB 2192 Sales Tax: Exempts farm equipment from local sales taxes; includes $200 million to offset local fiscal impacts.

SB 1415 Property Tax: Proposes a new welfare exemption for developers building market-rate housing.

AB 2214 Financial Reporting: Requires a 5-10% allocation from the Local Agency Investment Fund for a community reinvestment account.

AB 1953 Short-term Rentals: Seeks to raise caps on short-term rentals during natural disasters or major events like the Olympics.
172
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM #11
MEETING DATE: April 27, 2026
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Malisa Dodd, Finance Director
SUBJECT: Closeout of Fund 70 – Beautification Projects Fund RECOMMENDATION:

Staff respectfully requests the City Council approve close out of Fund 70 – Beautification Projects Fund as this fund is not required and budget can be managed as a department within the General Fund.

BACKGROUND & SUMMARY:

Fund 70 – Beautification Projects Fund has traditionally been used to fund projects throughout town based on input from the City Beautification Committee. In FY 24-25 there was $958.88 spent in the fund and in FY 25-26 there has been no spending to date. After discussion with the Finance Committee, we would like to close this fund and setup a department in the general fund to support the Beautification Committees approved projects.

ATTACHMENTS:

Fund 70 – Beautification Projects Fund - Balance Sheet
X Regular Session
Special Session
Emergency
Session
Closed Session
173
General Ledger
Balance Sheet
Printed:

User: [email protected]
04/22/2026 - 3:06PM
Fund:

Period:

Fiscal Year:
70 15
2025
Fund
Amount
ALFRE
Account Type
70 - Beautification Projects Fund
Assets
Cash and Investments current
70-000-1010 - Cash in Bank 4,608.13
70-000-1030 - Cash Savings Account-LAIF 13.51
Total Cash and Investments current: 4,621.64
Accounts Receivables
70-000-1200 - Accounts Receivable 0.00
Total Accounts Receivables: 0.00
Total Assets: 4,621.64
Liabilities
Accounts Payable
70-000-2010 - Accounts Payable 0.00
Total Accounts Payable: 0.00
Total Liabilities: 0.00
Fund Balance
Fund Balance/Net Position
70-000-3900 - Fund Balance 5,367.01
70-000-3950 - Prior Period Adjustments 0.00
Total Fund Balance/Net Position: 5,367.01
Retained Earnings
70-000-3980 - Change In Fund Balance 0.00
Total Retained Earnings: 0.00
Total Fund Balance:

Total Liabilities and Fund Balance:
5,367.01
5,367.01
Total Retained Earnings:

Total Fund Balance and Retained Earnings:

Total Liabilities, Fund Balance, and Retained Earnings:
4,621.64
(745.37)
4,621.64
Totals for Fund 70 - Beautification Projects Fund: 0.00 GL - Balance Sheet (4/22/2026 - 3:06 PM) Page 1
174

Mount Shasta City CouncilApril 27, 2026

Mount Shasta City Council
April 27, 2026