The Mills Act
Program Discussion
The Mills Act
PROGRAM DISCUSSION
Agenda
Welcome
Background
Discussion
Direction and Next Steps
4/21/2026 3
Background
Mills Act and
Historical Property Contracts
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 5
• Established by California
legislation in 1972
• Enables local governments to
enter 10-year, automatic
annual renewal contracts for a
restoration, rehabilitation, and
maintenance plan
The Mills Act and Historical Property Contracts 6
The Mills Act
Government Code, Article 12, Sections 50280-50290
● Enacted 1972
● Purpose is to encourage the maintenance and/or restoration of the historic character of properties
● Restoration and rehabilitation must conform to the US Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for rehabilitation
● Allows for 10-year, automatic annual renewal contract with owners of qualified historic properties
● Enabled in combination with Taxation Code Sections 439-439.4 with Property tax assessments reduced 40-60% (conservatively)
● Contract cancellations have a penalty of 12.5% of the property’s fair market value
Mills Act Applicability to
Orinda
The Mills Act and Historical Property Contracts 8
The Mills Act
Local Ordinance Established the Mills Act Applicability ● Earliest designation 1988 (Orinda Filter Plant)
● Identifies the importance of preserving historic structures as a positive benefit to the citizens of the City of Orinda
● Encourages the owners of qualifying historic properties to participate in preserving historic landmarks
● Sets eligibility for a Mills Act Contract with the City only after receiving a designation of an historic landmark
● Orinda does not have a Mills Act Contract application process OMC Title 17.25.22
Applicability of the Mills Act
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 9
The City Council, through implementation of the historic landmarks ordinance, has identified the importance of preserving historic structures as a positive benefit to the citizens of the City of Orinda and in support of economic development of the city. To further this end, the City Council is encouraging the owners of qualifying historic properties to participate in preserving historic landmarks by making available the use of the property tax relief incentives program known as the Mills Act. A qualifying property is one which is designated an historic landmark pursuant to this chapter.
OMC Title 17.25.23
Implementation of the Mills Act
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 10
Property owners may enter into a Mills Act contract with the City of Orinda only after receiving a designation of historic landmark pursuant to this chapter. Mills Act contracts must be reviewed and approved by the City Council. The contract is to be entered into between the City Manager and the property owner, with an indication that the contract complies with the requirements of Government Code Sections 50280— 50290. The contract shall be subject to final approval by the City Attorney as to form and legal substance. No later than twenty (20) days after the parties execute and enter into agreement on a Mills Act contract, the city shall cause the agreement to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of the county of Contra Costa.
Mills Act Contract
Requests
The Mills Act and Historical Property Contracts 12
Historic Landmark Designation Map
The Mills Act and Historical Property Contracts 13
Historic Landmarks
Orinda Historic Resources
● 20 historic landmark desigations
● Nine designated, privately-owned properties, potential eligibility due to size and scale for a Mills Act Contract
● Two total Mills Act Contract requests since enacted (6 Great Oaks in 2015, 511 Miner Rd in 2025)
● One current Mills Act Contract request (511 Miner Rd, Nelson House by Richard Neutra)
● One new application for an historic landmark designation (569 Miner Rd) ● Two inquiries (Old Yellow House, no address)
● Landmarking process is described by OMC 17.25.5 which establishes 8 criteria and specifies that no fee shall be imposed by the city
The Mills Act and Historical Property Contracts 14
Historic Landmarks Brochure
6 Great Oaks Circle (The Buehler House)
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 15
• On April 21, 2015, the owner of 6
Great Oaks Circle made a
request to the City of Orinda to
enter into a Mills Act contract
• The City Council directed staff to
take no further action with
respect to the Mills Act contract
• Insufficient public benefit to
balance tax reductions,
concerns about funding
maintenance over rehabilitation The Buehler House Landmark, the Frank Lloyd Wright Home and Associated Properties
511 Miner Road (The Nelson House)
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 16
• On May 7, 2019, The property
was designated as an Historic
Landmark by Ordinance 19-01
• On September 26, 2025, the
owner of 511 Miner Road
made a request to the City of
Orinda to enter into a Mills Act
contract
The Nelson House Landmark by Richard Neutra
Discussion
Cities Reviewing and Pausing Programs
1. Berkeley has paused its program
indefinitely and not renewing contracts
2. Los Angeles is paused while it reviews its
program
3. Redwood City voted in 2026 to
immediately suspended new contracts
4. Other cities, including San Jose, Saratoga,
and more are reviewing various aspects of
the Mills Act Program
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 18
Administrative Challenges
1. Requires an ongoing investment of
staff time
2. The nature of the 10-year rolling
contracts requires jurisdiction to
indefinitely track maintenance on
properties
3. Creates an ongoing cost burden for the
City
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 19
Casa Azul by the Chester Williams Family 511 Miner Road by Richard Neutra Potential Tax Revenue Loss
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 20
Estimated Tax Revenue Loss
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 21
No
.
Name 2025 Property Tax Estimated Mills Act Tax Reduction (40-60%)
1 Bien Venida (12) $27,435 $10,974-$16,461
2 Ben Venida (16) $12,923 $5,169-$7,753
3 Casa Azul $41,543 $16,617-$24,925
4 The Buehler House $42,409 $16,963-$25,445
5 511 Miner Ave $25,050 $10,020 - $15,030
Total estimated impact
(sample size)
$149,360 $59,743-$89,614
Demonstrated Public Benefit?
1. Tax savings often do not provide a
clear benefit to the broader public
2. Benefits appear concentrated in highresource neighborhoods where property owners are more likely to
have the means and resources to
maintain properties
3. Evidence of contractual misuse, where
tax incentives are applied to nonpreservation upgrades 4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 22
Option 1 for Consideration:
Repeal OMC 17.25.22 and 17.25.23
1. City Council repeals the above listed Orinda
Municipal Code sections due to the administrative
burdens, the impact on municipal budgets, and the
potential for limited public benefit
2. Orinda residents may continue to apply for
designation of property and/or structures as historic
landmarks that currently does not have an
application fee
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 23
Option 2 for Consideration:
Proceed with no program (ad-hoc)
1. City Council retains the ordinance but that Orinda
proceeds without a formal program, processing
applications on a case-by-case basis
2. Relies on ongoing, individualized efforts from both
staff and the Council to evaluate each request
3. Increases uncertainty for residents and staff alike
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 24
Option 3 for Consideration:
Proceed with a formal program
1. City Council proceeds with the development of a
formal program
2. Evaluating and implementing a program could help
ensure consistency and increase applicant certainty
3. A program could clarify potential benefits, as well as establish City objectives, participation parameters
(e.g. maintenance, inspections, revocation), and
participation caps at a level deemed appropriate for
Orinda
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 25
Direction and
Next Steps
The Mills Act and Historical Property Contracts 27
Request for Council Direction
1. Should staff draft an ordinance to repeal OMC code sections 17.25.22 and
17.25.23 pertaining to the Mills Act, effectively opting out of the program? Staff recommendation.
2. How should staff process the current Mills Act request for the 511 Miner Road (Nelson House) in light of the Council's direction on the ordinance? If the City Council selects to repeal OMC code sections and opt out of the Mills Act program, then the application for 511 Miner Road is denied. Staff direction.
3. If the Council chooses to retain the ordinances, should staff begin the formal evaluation and drafting of a Mills Act Property Tax Abatement Program, or continue to process applications on a case-by-case basis? • If a formal program is desired: Should there be specific criteria (for example, financial need, public visibility, maximum property value caps, or limits on total fiscal year benefits) to qualify?
Next Steps
Return to Council based on direction
received
4/21/2026 28
The Mills Act
Program Discussion
Fiscal Impact vs. Public Benefit
1. Revenue loss is weighed against
preserving Orinda’s unique character
and architectural heritage
2. Use discretionary standards and set
eligibility requirements
3. Can predetermine public benefit by
identifying Mills Act incentives to guide
development that does not result in
the loss of historic resources
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 30
Investment vs. Maintenance
1. Require a specific percentage of tax
savings to be reinvested into a restoration
plan
2. Prioritize specific structural or historical
restoration needs over routine
maintenance
3. Designate a percentage of those savings
to be used for routine maintenance
supports the long-term upkeep
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 31
Program Duration
1. 10-year process for non-renewal and
requirements for non-renewal upon the
sale of a property
2. Can require a year nine reassessment and
plan update for participating properties
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 32
Administrative Oversight
1. Programs would require Staff or consultant
resources for annual inspections and
reporting, and clear standards for qualifying
work
2. A restoration plan would require oversight to
confirm completion or enforce contract
cancelation
3. Clear and realistic enforcement strategies
would need to be determined
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 33
Program Participation Eligibility
1. Eligibility factors may include household
income at the onset of a contract or
accessibility of a property
2. Demonstrate tangible public benefit of
restoration, whether the property is used
for-profit, and other factors
3. Review of potential cap by a maximum
property value, or the total tax benefits
allowed for new applications in a given
fiscal year to strictly control revenue
impacts
4/21/2026 THE MILLS ACT 34