Pacific Grove City Council
November 5, 2025

ϰ
ƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚĞĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐƚĂĨĨŝŶŐŶĞĞĚƐ͕ŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶĂůƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕ƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞĂůůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ĂŶĚ ƐĞƌǀŝĐĞĚĞůŝǀĞƌLJŵŽĚĞůƐ͘dŚĞƉƌŝŵĂƌLJŽďũĞĐƟǀĞƐŽĨƚŚĞĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞ͗ x
džĂŵŝŶĞĂŶĚĞdžƉůŽƌĞƚŚĞŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƟŽŶĂů͕ĨƵŶĐƟŽŶĂů͕ĂŶĚĐƵůƚƵƌĂůŝƐƐƵĞƐƚŽĂƐƐĞƐƐ ĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚĐƵůƚƵƌĞ͕ůĞǀĞůƐŽĨĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞĞŶŐĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ͕ƚĞĂŵĞīĞĐƟǀĞŶĞƐƐ͕ƌŽůĞͬŐŽĂů ĐůĂƌŝƚLJ͕ĂŶĚƐŬŝůůƐĞƚƐͬĐŽŵƉĞƚĞŶĐŝĞƐ͘
x ŽŶĚƵĐƚĂ&ƵŶĐƟŽŶĂůƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚ͕ĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚƚŽĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞƚŚĞĐĂƉĂďŝůŝƚLJͬĐŽŵƉĞƚĞŶĐĞŽĨ ƚŚĞĨƵŶĐƟŽŶ;ƐͿǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚĂŶĚƚŽĞŶƐƵƌĞĂůŝŐŶŵĞŶƚǁŝƚŚďĞƐƚƉƌĂĐƟĐĞƐ͘ x
ǀĂůƵĂƚĞŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƟŽŶĂůƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕ƐƚĂĸŶŐůĞǀĞůƐ͕ƉŽƐŝƟŽŶƐ͕ĨƵŶĐƟŽŶƐ͕ĂŶĚĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚĞĚ ƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐŝŶƌĞůĂƟŽŶƚŽƚŚĞǁŽƌŬůŽĂĚ͕ĂŶĚƉƌŽŐƌĂŵĞĸĐŝĞŶĐLJĂŶĚĞīĞĐƟǀĞŶĞƐƐ͘ x
ǀĂůƵĂƚĞƐĞƌǀŝĐĞĚĞůŝǀĞƌLJŵĞƚŚŽĚƐĂŶĚŽƵƚĐŽŵĞƐ͕ĂŶĚƚŚĞƉŽůŝĐŝĞƐ͕ůĞŐŝƐůĂƟǀĞ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ͕ĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŝŶŇƵĞŶĐĞƐƚŚĂƚŝŵƉĂĐƚĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚĂůŽƉĞƌĂƟŽŶƐ͘ tKZ<W>E
DZ'ŚĂƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚƚŚĞĨŽůůŽǁŝŶŐǁŽƌŬƉůĂŶĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚƚŽŵĞĞƚƚŚĞŝƚLJ͛ƐŶĞĞĚƐ͘dŚĞƐĐŽƉĞ ŽĨǁŽƌŬŝƐĚĞƉĞŶĚĞŶƚƵƉŽŶƚŚĞŶĞĞĚƐŽĨƚŚĞŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶĂŶĚŵĂLJďĞŵŽĚŝĨŝĞĚĂƐŶĞĞĚĞĚ ĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞŝŶŝƚŝĂůǀŝĚĞŽĐŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞ͗
W,^
ϭʹKƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶĂůŝĂŐŶŽƐƚŝĐ
ϭ͘ WƌŽũĞĐƚ/ŶŝƚŝĂƚŝŽŶͬ>ĂƵŶĐŚ͗
x /ŶŝƚŝĂůǀŝĚĞŽĐŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞǁŝƚŚŵĂũŽƌƐƚĂŬĞŚŽůĚĞƌƐŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐďƵƚŶŽƚůŝŵŝƚĞĚƚŽŝƚLJ DĂŶĂŐĞƌĂŶĚ,ƵŵĂŶZĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐŝƌĞĐƚŽƌ͘
x ZĞǀŝĞǁƉƌŽũĞĐƚŽƵƚĐŽŵĞƐ͕ƉƌŽĐĞƐƐƚŝŵŝŶŐ͕ĞdžƉĞĐƚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ĚĞĨŝŶĞŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁƐƵďũĞĐƚƐ͕ ĂŶĚƐĞƚŝŶŝƚŝĂůƚŝŵĞůŝŶĞ͘
x ZĞƋƵĞƐƚ͕ŽďƚĂŝŶĂŶĚƌĞǀŝĞǁŶƵŵĞƌŽƵƐĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐďƵƚŶŽƚůŝŵŝƚĞĚƚŽƚŚĞ ĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶĂůĐŚĂƌƚƐ͕ŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶĂůĂĐĐŽŵƉůŝƐŚŵĞŶƚƐ͕ŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂů ďƵĚŐĞƚĂƌLJĂŶĚƐƚĂĨĨŝŶŐůĞǀĞůĚĂƚĂ͕ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJƐƵƌǀĞLJƐ͕ĂŶĚĂŶLJŽƚŚĞƌƌĞůĞǀĂŶƚ ƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂŶĚĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ͘KďƚĂŝŶĂŶĞĐĚŽƚĂůƉĞƌƐƉĞĐƚŝǀĞƐŽŶŝƐƐƵĞƐĂŶĚĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐƚŚĂƚ ĚƌŝǀĞƚŚŝƐƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ͘
x ŽŶĚƵĐƚĂŬŝĐŬͲŽĨĨŵĞĞƚŝŶŐǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚŚĞĂĚƐŝŶƚƌŽĚƵĐŝŶŐƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚĂŶĚ ĚŝƐĐƵƐƐŝŶŐƚŚĞŝƌƌŽůĞ͘
Ϯ͘ ŽŶĚƵĐƚ^ƚĂĨĨ/ŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁƐĂŶĚZĞǀŝĞǁWƌŽĐĞƐƐ
x ĞǀĞůŽƉŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁĨŽƌŵĂƚĂŶĚƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐ͘
x ŽŶĚƵĐƚŽŶĞͲŚŽƵƌŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁƐǀŝĂŽŶͲƐŝƚĞĂŶĚͬŽƌǀŝĚĞŽĐŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐŝŶŐǁŝƚŚĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ ŚĞĂĚƐĂŶĚŽƚŚĞƌŬĞLJƐƚĂĨĨŵĞŵďĞƌƐŝŶƚŚĞŝƚLJ͘
x ŶƚŝĐŝƉĂƚĞĐŽŶĚƵĐƚŝŶŐĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϭϭŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁƐ͘
x ŽŵƉŝůĞĂŶĚĂŶĂůLJnjĞŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁĚĂƚĂĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ͘
ϯ͘ WƌĞƉĂƌĞ/ŶŝƚŝĂů&ŝŶĚŝŶŐƐͬZĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ
x ŽŵƉŝůĞĚĂƚĂ͕ƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĂůLJƐŝƐ͕ƉƌĞƉĂƌĞŬĞLJŝŶŝƚŝĂůĨŝŶĚŝŶŐƐƐƵŵŵĂƌŝĞƐ͕ĂŶĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉ ƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘








 






PGCC 11-5-2025

ϱ
ϰ͘ ŽŶĚƵĐƚDŝĚͲWƌŽũĞĐƚhƉĚĂƚĞDĞĞƚŝŶŐǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŝƚLJDĂŶĂŐĞƌĂŶĚ,ƵŵĂŶZĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐ ŝƌĞĐƚŽƌ͘
x ZĞǀŝĞǁŝŶŝƚŝĂůĨŝŶĚŝŶŐƐͬƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐͬďĞƐƚƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĞƐ͕ĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƌĞƐĞĂƌĐŚ ĂŶĚŽƵƚƌĞĂĐŚĂƐŶĞĞĚĞĚ͘
ϱ͘ WƌĞƉĂƌĞĨŝŶĂůZĞƉŽƌƚĨŽƌZĞǀŝĞǁ
x ŽŵƉŝůĞZĞƉŽƌƚ͕ƌĞǀŝĞǁǁŝƚŚŝƚLJDĂŶĂŐĞƌ͕ƌĞǀŝƐĞĂƐŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJ͕ƉƌĞƉĂƌĞĨŝŶĂůZĞƉŽƌƚ͕ ĂŶĚĚĞůŝǀĞƌƚŽŝƚLJ͘
x dŚĞZĞƉŽƌƚǁŝůůŝŶĐůƵĚĞŚŝŐŚͲůĞǀĞůŽďƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ƉƌĞůŝŵŝŶĂƌLJĨŝŶĚŝŶŐƐ͕ĂŶĚ ƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘
W,^
ϮʹKƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƟŽŶĂůĂŶĚ^ƚĂĸŶŐ>ĞǀĞůƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚĨŽƌƚŚĞWƵďůŝĐtŽƌŬƐĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ ϲ͘ WŚĂƐĞϮ>ĂƵŶĐŚ͗
x /ŶŝƚŝĂůǀŝĚĞŽĐŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞǁŝƚŚŵĂũŽƌƐƚĂŬĞŚŽůĚĞƌŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐďƵƚŶŽƚůŝŵŝƚĞĚƚŽŝƚLJ DĂŶĂŐĞƌĂŶĚWƵďůŝĐtŽƌŬƐŝƌĞĐƚŽƌ͘
x ZĞǀŝĞǁƉƌŽũĞĐƚŽƵƚĐŽŵĞƐ͕ƉƌŽĐĞƐƐƚŝŵŝŶŐ͕ĞdžƉĞĐƚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ĚĞĨŝŶĞŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁƐƵďũĞĐƚƐ͕ ĂŶĚƐĞƚŝŶŝƚŝĂůƚŝŵĞůŝŶĞ͘
x ZĞƋƵĞƐƚ͕ŽďƚĂŝŶĂŶĚƌĞǀŝĞǁŶƵŵĞƌŽƵƐĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐďƵƚŶŽƚůŝŵŝƚĞĚƚŽƚŚĞ ĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶĂůĐŚĂƌƚƐ͕ũŽďĐůĂƐƐŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ͕ĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚŐŽĂůƐĂŶĚ ŽďũĞĐƚŝǀĞƐ͕ŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶĂůĂĐĐŽŵƉůŝƐŚŵĞŶƚƐ͕ĚĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐĂŶĚƉƌŽŐƌĂŵƐ͕ ŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂůǁŽƌŬůŽĂĚĚĂƚĂ͕ŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂůďƵĚŐĞƚĂƌLJĂŶĚƐƚĂĨĨŝŶŐůĞǀĞůĚĂƚĂ͕ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJ ƐƵƌǀĞLJƐ͕ĂŶĚĂŶLJŽƚŚĞƌƌĞůĞǀĂŶƚƌĞƉŽƌƚƐĂŶĚĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ͘KďƚĂŝŶĂŶĞĐĚŽƚĂů ƉĞƌƐƉĞĐƚŝǀĞƐŽŶŝƐƐƵĞƐĂŶĚĐŽŶĐĞƌŶƐƚŚĂƚĚƌŝǀĞƚŚŝƐƌĞƋƵĞƐƚ͘ ϳ͘ ŽŶĚƵĐƚ^ƚĂĨĨ/ŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁƐĂŶĚZĞǀŝĞǁWƌŽĐĞƐƐ
x ĞǀĞůŽƉŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁĨŽƌŵĂƚĂŶĚƋƵĞƐƚŝŽŶƐ͘
x ŽŶĚƵĐƚŽŶĞͲŚŽƵƌŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁƐǀŝĂŽŶͲƐŝƚĞĂŶĚͬŽƌǀŝĚĞŽĐŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐŝŶŐǁŝƚŚWƵďůŝĐ tŽƌŬƐĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐƚĂĨĨ͘
x ŶƚŝĐŝƉĂƚĞĐŽŶĚƵĐƚŝŶŐĂƉƉƌŽdžŝŵĂƚĞůLJϭϮŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁƐ͘
x ŽŵƉŝůĞĂŶĚĂŶĂůLJnjĞŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁĚĂƚĂĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ͘
ϴ͘ ŽŶĚƵĐƚĞŶĐŚŵĂƌŬŝŶŐǁŝƚŚŽŵƉĂƌĂďůĞŝƚŝĞƐ
x ŽŶĚƵĐƚĂĐŽŵƉĂƌŝƐŽŶĂŶĂůLJƐŝƐŽĨƵƉƚŽĨŝǀĞ;ϱͿĐŝƚŝĞƐƚŚĂƚǁŝůůďĞŵƵƚƵĂůůLJĂŐƌĞĞĚ ƵƉŽŶďLJƚŚĞŝƚLJĂŶĚDZ'͘
ϵ͘ WƌĞƉĂƌĞ/ŶŝƚŝĂů&ŝŶĚŝŶŐƐͬZĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ
x ŽŵƉŝůĞĚĂƚĂ͕ƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĂŶĂůLJƐŝƐ͕ƉƌĞƉĂƌĞŬĞLJŝŶŝƚŝĂůĨŝŶĚŝŶŐƐƐƵŵŵĂƌŝĞƐ͕ĂŶĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉ ƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘
ϭϬ͘ ŽŶĚƵĐƚDŝĚͲWƌŽũĞĐƚhƉĚĂƚĞDĞĞƚŝŶŐǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŝƚLJDĂŶĂŐĞƌĂŶĚƐƐŝƐƚĂŶƚŝƚLJ DĂŶĂŐĞƌƐ͘








 






PGCC 11-5-2025

ϲ
x ZĞǀŝĞǁŝŶŝƚŝĂůĨŝŶĚŝŶŐƐͬƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐͬďĞƐƚƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĞƐ͕ĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƌĞƐĞĂƌĐŚ ĂŶĚŽƵƚƌĞĂĐŚĂƐŶĞĞĚĞĚ͘
ϭϭ͘ WƌĞƉĂƌĞĨŝŶĂůZĞƉŽƌƚĂŶĚ^ƵŵŵĂƌLJ>ĞǀĞůƌĂĨƚWŽǁĞƌWŽŝŶƚWƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶĨŽƌZĞǀŝĞǁ x ŽŵƉŝůĞZĞƉŽƌƚĂŶĚͬŽƌWŽǁĞƌWŽŝŶƚWƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƌĞǀŝĞǁǁŝƚŚŝƚLJDĂŶĂŐĞƌĂŶĚ ƐƐŝƐƚĂŶƚŝƚLJDĂŶĂŐĞƌƐ͕ƌĞǀŝƐĞĂƐŶĞĐĞƐƐĂƌLJ͕ƉƌĞƉĂƌĞĨŝŶĂůZĞƉŽƌƚĂŶĚͬŽƌ WŽǁĞƌWŽŝŶƚ͕ĂŶĚĚĞůŝǀĞƌƚŽŝƚLJ͘
x dŚĞZĞƉŽƌƚǁŝůůŝŶĐůƵĚĞŽďƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ƉƌĞůŝŵŝŶĂƌLJĨŝŶĚŝŶŐƐ͕ĂŶĚƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘ dŚĞƌĞƉŽƌƚǁŝůůĂůƐŽŝĚĞŶƚŝĨLJĂŶLJŝƐƐƵĞƐŽƵƚƐŝĚĞƚŚĞŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚƐĐŽƉĞŽĨǁŽƌŬƚŚĂƚŵĂLJ ŝŵƉĂĐƚƚŚĞŽĨĨŝĐĞĂŶĚƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĨƵƌƚŚĞƌĂŶĂůLJƐŝƐŽƌĂĐƚŝŽŶƐŽŶƚŚĞƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞŝƚLJ͘dŚĞ ĚƌĂĨƚƌĞƉŽƌƚ͕ǁŚŝĐŚǁŝůůŝŶĐůƵĚĞĂƐƵŵŵĂƌLJĂŶĚĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶŽĨƐƚƵĚLJŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJ͘ WZK:
d&

^
DZ'ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐĂŶĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚŶŽƚͲƚŽͲĞdžĐĞĞĚĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚĂŵŽƵŶƚŽĨΨϯϵ͕ϳϳϯ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐĞdžƉĞŶƐĞƐ͘ dŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚǁŝůůďĞŝŶǀŽŝĐĞďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞŵŝůĞƐƚŽŶĞƐůŝƐƚĞĚďĞůŽǁ͘ĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞĐůŝĞŶƚ͛ƐĚŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶ͕ ŵĂŶLJŽĨƚŚĞŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁƐĐĂŶďĞĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĞĚŽŶͲƐŝƚĞƵŶůĞƐƐƌĞŵŽƚĞŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁƐĂƌĞĨĞĂƐŝďůĞ͘ůů ŽƚŚĞƌǁŽƌŬŝƐŝŶƚĞŶĚĞĚƚŽďĞĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞĚƌĞŵŽƚĞůLJǀŝĂĞŵĂŝů͕ƚĞůĞĐŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞ͕ĂŶĚǀŝĚĞŽ ĐŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞ͘^ŚŽƵůĚƚŚĞĐůŝĞŶƚĂŶĚDZ'ŵƵƚƵĂůůLJĂŐƌĞĞƚŽĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĂŶLJŽƚŚĞƌŵĞĞƚŝŶŐƐŽƌǁŽƌŬ ĂĐƚŝǀŝƚŝĞƐŽŶͲƐŝƚĞ͕ƚƌĂǀĞůĞdžƉĞŶƐĞƐǁŝůůďĞďŝůůĞĚƚŽƚŚĞĐůŝĞŶƚĂƚĐŽƐƚ͘ D/>
^dKE
^ K^d
dĂƐŬϭͲ>ĂƵŶĐŚΘWƌŽũĞĐƚŽŽƌĚŝŶĂƚŝŽŶ ΨϮ͕ϵϬϱ
dĂƐŬϮͲKƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶĂůŝĂŐŶŽƐƚŝĐ Ψϳ͕ϴϬϬ
dĂƐŬϯͲWƵďůŝĐtŽƌŬƐ͗/ŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁƐ͕ZĞƐĞĂƌĐŚΘŽŵƉĂƌĂƚŝǀĞŶĂůLJƐŝƐ ΨϭϬ͕ϰϬϬ dĂƐŬϰͲWƵďůŝĐtŽƌŬƐ͗&ŝŶĚŝŶŐƐ͕ZĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ZĞƉŽƌƚΘWƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶƐ Ψϭϱ͕ϲϲϴ ^ƵďͲƚŽƚĂů Ψϯϲ͕ϳϳϯ
dƌĂǀĞů
džƉĞŶƐĞƐ;ĂƐƐƵŵĞƐϮƚƌŝƉƐʹŝŶƚĞƌǀŝĞǁƐĂŶĚŽƵŶĐŝůƉƌĞƐĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶͿ Ψϯ͕ϬϬϬ dKd> Ψϯϵ͕ϳϳϯ
/ĨĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐĂƌĞƌĞƋƵĞƐƚĞĚŽƌĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůƚŝŵĞŶĞĞĚĞĚ;ƐƵĐŚĂƐĨŽƌĂƐƐŝƐƚĂŶĐĞŝŶ ŝŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚĂƚŝŽŶŽƌƉƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚͿ͕ƚŚŽƐĞŚŽƵƌƐǁŝůůďĞďŝůůĞĚĂƚΨϮϲϬƉĞƌŚŽƵƌĂĨƚĞƌ ďĞŝŶŐĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚďLJƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨWĂĐŝĨŝĐ'ƌŽǀĞĂŶĚDZ'͘
DZ'WZK:
dd
D
DZ'ŚĂƐĐŚŽƐĞŶĂĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚƚĞĂŵǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĞdžƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞĂŶĚĂƉƉƌŽĂĐŚƚŽĐŽŶĚƵĐƚĂŶŽďũĞĐƚŝǀĞ ĂŶĚŝŶĚĞƉĞŶĚĞŶƚƐƚƵĚLJ͘
ĂƚŚLJĂƉƌŝŽůĂŝƐĂŶDZ'sŝĐĞWƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚĂŶĚŚĂƐĐŽͲůĞĂĚĞƌƐŚŝƉŽǀĞƌDZ'͛ƐŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶĂů ĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĞĂƌĞĂ͘
ZŝĐŬKƚƚŽŝƐĂ^ĞŶŝŽƌŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚǁŝƚŚĞdžƉĞƌƚŝƐĞŝŶŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶĂůĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚƐĂŶĚůĞĂĚĞƌƐŚŝƉ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘ZŝĐŬǁŝůůďĞƚŚĞůĞĂĚĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘ 







 






PGCC 11-5-2025

ϳ

K s/
WZ
^/
Ed ^
E/KZKE^h>dEd
DĂƌLJ
ŐĂŶ

K

ŐĂŶΛƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐͲŵƌŐ͘ĐŽŵ
;ϵϭϲͿϮϲϭͲϳϱϰϳ
ĂƚŚLJĂƉƌŝŽůĂ
sŝĐĞWƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚ
ĂƉƌŝŽůĂΛƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐͲŵƌŐ͘ĐŽŵ
;ϵϭϲͿϮϱϳͲϯϮϴϳ
ZŝĐŬKƚƚŽ
^ĞŶŝŽƌŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚ
ŽƚƚŽΛĐŝƚLJŵĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚΛŐŵĂŝů͘ĐŽŵ
;ϳϭϰͿϳϰϱͲϮϴϱϮ
Z/<KddK
ƐƚŚĞĨŽƌŵĞƌŝƚLJDĂŶĂŐĞƌĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨKƌĂŶŐĞ͕ZŝĐŬKƚƚŽƵŶĚĞƌƐƚĂŶĚƐƚŚĞŵĂŶLJ ĐŚĂůůĞŶŐĞƐƚŽĚĂLJ͛ƐůŽĐĂůŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚĞdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞƐĨĂĐĞŽŶĂĚĂŝůLJďĂƐŝƐ͘ZŝĐŬƐƵĐĐĞƐƐĨƵůůLJ ŶĂǀŝŐĂƚĞĚŚŝƐŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶƚŚƌŽƵŐŚƚŚĞƉĂŶĚĞŵŝĐ͕ƌĞĐĞƐƐŝŽŶƐ͕ƉĞƌŝŽĚƐŽĨƉŽůŝƚŝĐĂů ƚƌĂŶƐŝƚŝŽŶ͕ůŽĐĂůĞŵĞƌŐĞŶĐŝĞƐ͕ĂŶĚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJƚƌĂŐĞĚŝĞƐ͘,ŝƐĐŽŵƉĂƐƐŝŽŶĂƚĞ͕ ĐŽůůĂďŽƌĂƚŝǀĞ͕ĂŶĚƌĞƐƵůƚƐͲŽƌŝĞŶƚĂƚĞĚůĞĂĚĞƌƐŚŝƉƐƚLJůĞĂůůŽǁƐŚŝŵƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞĂŶĚĨŽƐƚĞƌ ĂƉŽƐŝƚŝǀĞǁŽƌŬĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚĨŽƌŐĞĞdžĐĞůůĞŶƚǁŽƌŬŝŶŐƌĞůĂƚŝŽŶƐŚŝƉƐǁŝƚŚƉŽůŝƚŝĐĂůůĞĂĚĞƌƐ͕ůĂďŽƌ ĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJŐƌŽƵƉƐ͕ĂŶĚĨĞůůŽǁĐŝƚLJŵĂŶĂŐĞƌƐ͘ ZŝĐŬŚĂƐŽǀĞƌϯϮLJĞĂƌƐŽĨůŽĐĂůŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚĞdžƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞǁŽƌŬŝŶŐĨŽƌƐŵĂůůĂŶĚŵĞĚŝƵŵͲƐŝnjĞĚĐŝƚŝĞƐŝŶ ^ŽƵƚŚĞƌŶĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ͘/ŶĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶƚŽƐĞƌǀŝŶŐĂƐƚŚĞŝƚLJDĂŶĂŐĞƌĨŽƌKƌĂŶŐĞ͕ĂĨƵůůͲƐĞƌǀŝĐĞĐŝƚLJǁŝƚŚĂŶ ĂŶŶƵĂůďƵĚŐĞƚŽĨΨϮϬϬŵŝůůŝŽŶĂŶĚϳϱϬĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞƐ͕ZŝĐŬĂůƐŽƐĞƌǀĞĚĂƐƚŚĞŝƌƐƐŝƐƚĂŶƚŝƚLJDĂŶĂŐĞƌ͕ ŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŝƌĞĐƚŽƌ͕ĂŶĚ
ĐŽŶŽŵŝĐĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚDĂŶĂŐĞƌ͘WƌŝŽƌƚŽŚŝƐƚĞŶƵƌĞŝŶKƌĂŶŐĞ͕ ZŝĐŬǁŽƌŬĞĚĨŽƌƚŚƌĞĞĐŽŶƚƌĂĐƚĐŝƚŝĞƐŝŶ>ŽƐŶŐĞůĞƐŽƵŶƚLJ͗ZĂŶĐŚŽWĂůŽƐsĞƌĚĞƐ͕>ĂDŝƌĂĚĂĂŶĚdĞŵƉůĞ ŝƚLJ͘dŚƌŽƵŐŚŽƵƚŚŝƐĐĂƌĞĞƌ͕ZŝĐŬŚĂƐďĞĞŶŝŶǀŽůǀĞĚŝŶŶĞĂƌůLJĞǀĞƌLJĂƐƉĞĐƚŽĨůŽĐĂůŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚ͕ŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐ ůĂŶĚƵƐĞƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐ͕ŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐƉƌĞƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶ͕ĐŝƚŝnjĞŶĞŶŐĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ͕ĂĨĨŽƌĚĂďůĞŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ͕ĞĐŽŶŽŵŝĐ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͕ĨŝŶĂŶĐĞĂŶĚďƵĚŐĞƚŝŶŐ͕ĐĂƉŝƚĂůƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐ͕ŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶƚĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJ͕ůĂďŽƌŶĞŐŽƚŝĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ƐƚĂĨĨ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͕ĂŶĚƉƵďůŝĐƐĂĨĞƚLJĐŽŽƌĚŝŶĂƚŝŽŶ͘ZŝĐŬďƌŝŶŐƐŚŝƐƵŶŝƋƵĞĂŶĚĚŝǀĞƌƐĞďĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚƚŽĐůŝĞŶƚƐ ďLJƐƉĞĐŝĂůŝnjŝŶŐŝŶKƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶĂůƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚƐ͕KƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĂůZĞǀŝĞǁƐ͕ džĞĐƵƚŝǀĞ
ǀĂůƵĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕^ƚĂĨĨ
ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚDĞŶƚŽƌŝŶŐ͕^ƚƌĂƚĞŐŝĐWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ͕&ŝƐĐĂůĂŶĚ ĐŽŶŽŵŝĐĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŶĂůLJƐŝƐ͕ĂŶĚ>ĂŶĚ
hƐĞ
ŶƚŝƚůĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘
/ŶĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶƚŽŚŝƐƉƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůĂĐŚŝĞǀĞŵĞŶƚƐ͕ZŝĐŬĞĂƌŶĞĚĂĂĐŚĞůŽƌŽĨƌƚƐŝŶWƵďůŝĐĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶĂŶĚ ĂDĂƐƚĞƌŽĨWƵďůŝĐWŽůŝĐLJĂŶĚĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶ͕ďŽƚŚĨƌŽŵĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ^ƚĂƚĞhŶŝǀĞƌƐŝƚLJ͕>ŽŶŐĞĂĐŚ͘ZŝĐŬŝƐĂ ĨƌĞƋƵĞŶƚŐƵĞƐƚƐƉĞĂŬĞƌĨŽƌƉƵďůŝĐƉŽůŝĐLJĂŶĚũŽƵƌŶĂůŝƐŵĐůĂƐƐĞƐĂƚĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ^ƚĂƚĞhŶŝǀĞƌƐŝƚLJ͕&ƵůůĞƌƚŽŶ͕ ĂŶĚŚĂƉŵĂŶhŶŝǀĞƌƐŝƚLJ͘,ĞĂůƐŽŚĂƐďĞĞŶĂƐƉĞĂŬĞƌĨŽƌƚŚĞŵĞƌŝĐĂŶWůĂŶŶŝŶŐƐƐŽĐŝĂƚŝŽŶ͘&ŝŶĂůůLJ͕ZŝĐŬ ŝƐƉƌŽƵĚƚŽŚĂǀĞďĞĞŶĂŝƐŶĞLJůĂŶĚĂƐƚDĞŵďĞƌĂŶĚƐƚŝůůƵƐĞƐƚŚĂƚĐƵƐƚŽŵĞƌͲĐĞŶƚƌŝĐĂƉƉƌŽĂĐŚǁŝƚŚŚŝƐ ĐůŝĞŶƚƐ͘
d,zWZ/K>
ĂƚŚLJĂƉƌŝŽůĂŝƐĂŶĞdžƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞĚůŽĐĂůŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚĞdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞǁŝƚŚϯϭLJĞĂƌƐŵĂŶĂŐŝŶŐ ĐŝƚŝĞƐŝŶĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂǁŝƚŚĚĞĞƉĞdžƉĞƌƚŝƐĞŝŶŐŽǀĞƌŶĂŶĐĞ͕ŚƵŵĂŶƌĞƐŽƵƌĐĞƐ͕ƉƵďůŝĐ ŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶ͕ĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJĞŶŐĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ͕ĨŝŶĂŶĐĞ͕ĂŶĚŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶƚĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJ͘ƐĂsŝĐĞ WƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚDZ'͕ĂƚŚLJůĞĂĚƐƚŚĞĨŝƌŵ͛ƐŽĂĐŚŝŶŐΘ>ĞĂĚĞƌƐŚŝƉĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ƉƌĂĐƚŝĐĞĂƌĞĂ͘ƐĂŵĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚĐŽŶƐƵůƚĂŶƚ͕ĂƚŚLJĚĞůŝǀĞƌƐŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƚŝŽŶĂů ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚĂƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚƐ͕ƐƚƌĂƚĞŐŝĐĂĚǀŝƐŝŶŐ͕ƉůƵƐůĞĂĚĞƌƐŚŝƉͬƚĞĂŵĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽĨŵĂŶĂŐĞƌƐĂŶĚ ĞdžĞĐƵƚŝǀĞƐŝŶůŽĐĂůŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚŶŽŶͲƉƌŽĨŝƚƐ͘ĂƚŚLJŚĂƐĞdžƚĞŶƐŝǀĞĞdžƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞĨĂĐŝůŝƚĂƚŝŶŐůĂƌŐĞĂŶĚ ŵƵůƚŝͲĚŝŵĞŶƐŝŽŶĂůǁŽƌŬƐŚŽƉƐĂŶĚŵĞĞƚŝŶŐƐ͘








 






PGCC 11-5-2025

ϴ
ĂƚŚLJƌĞƚŝƌĞĚĨƌŽŵǁŽƌŬŝŶŐŝŶƐŝĚĞůŽĐĂůŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚĂĨƚĞƌƐĞƌǀŝŶŐĂƐƚŚĞŝƚLJDĂŶĂŐĞƌĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨ ^ŽŶŽŵĂĨŽƌĨŽƵƌLJĞĂƌƐĂŶĚƐĞƌǀĞĚĂƐƚŚĞƐƐŝƐƚĂŶƚŝƚLJDĂŶĂŐĞƌǁŝƚŚŝƚLJŽĨEŽǀĂƚŽ͕ĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƚŝǀĞ ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐŝƌĞĐƚŽƌǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨŝƚƌƵƐ,ĞŝŐŚƚƐ͕ĂŶĚĞƉƵƚLJŝƚLJDĂŶĂŐĞƌǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨĂǀŝƐ͘ ĂƚŚLJ͛ƐĞĚƵĐĂƚŝŽŶĂů ďĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞƐ Ă ͘^͘ ŝŶ ŽŵŵƵŶŝĐĂƚŝŽŶͬDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ ĨƌŽŵhĂǀŝƐ ĂŶĚ Ă DĂƐƚĞƌ͛ƐŝŶWƵďůŝĐĂŶĚWƌŝǀĂƚĞDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚ;DWWDͿĨƌŽŵzĂůĞhŶŝǀĞƌƐŝƚLJ͘ 







 






PGCC 11-5-2025

Professional Services Agreement 07.19.2022

EXHIBIT C

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Without limiting CONSULTANT’s indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of Work, CONSULTANT shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City.

General liability insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted.

Automobile liability insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non-owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident.

Professional liability (errors & omissions) insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the effective date of this Agreement and CONSULTANT agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three (3) years after completion of the Services required by this Agreement.

Workers’ compensation insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at least $1,000,000).

CONSULTANT shall submit to CITY, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of CITY, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers.

Umbrella or excess liability insurance. CONSULTANT shall obtain and maintain an umbrella or excess liability insurance policy with limits that will provide bodily injury, personal injury and property damage liability coverage at least as broad as the primary coverages set forth above, including commercial general liability, automobile liability, and employer’s liability. Such policy or policies shall include the following terms and conditions:
x A drop down feature requiring the policy to respond if any primary insurance that would otherwise have applied proves to be uncollectible in whole or in part for any reason;
x Pay on behalf of wording as opposed to reimbursement; x Concurrency of effective dates with primary policies; x Policies shall “follow form” to the underlying primary policies; and 







 






PGCC 11-5-2025

Professional Services Agreement 07.19.2022
x Insureds under primary policies shall also be insureds under the umbrella or excess policies.

Other provisions or requirements
Proof of insurance. CONSULTANT shall provide certificates of insurance to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers’ compensation. Insurance certificates and endorsements must be approved by City’s Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City at all times during the term of this contract. City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.

Duration of coverage. CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Work hereunder by CONSULTANT, his agents, representatives, employees or subconsultants.

Primary/noncontributing. Coverage provided by CONSULTANT shall be primary and any insurance or self-insurance procured or maintained by City shall not be required to contribute with it. The limits of insurance required herein may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of City before the City’s own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.

City’s rights of enforcement. In the event any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, City has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by CONSULTANT or City will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from CONSULTANT payments. In the alternative, City may cancel this Agreement.

Acceptable insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance or is on the List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders’ Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VI (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best’s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City’s Risk Manager.

Waiver of subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against CITY, its elected or appointed officers, agents, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow CONSULTANT or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss.

CONSULTANT hereby waives its own right of recovery against City, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.

Enforcement of contract provisions (non estoppel). CONSULTANT acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of the City to inform CONSULTANT of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on the City nor does it waive any rights hereunder. 







 






PGCC 11-5-2025

Professional Services Agreement 07.19.2022
Requirements not limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.

Notice of cancellation. Consultant agrees to oblige its insurance agent or broker and insurers to provide to CITY with a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation (except for nonpayment for which a ten (10) day notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage.

Additional insured status. General liability policies shall provide or be endorsed to provide that City and its officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be additional insureds under such policies. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella liability policies.

Prohibition of undisclosed coverage limitations. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to City and approved of in writing.

Separation of insureds. A severability of interests provision must apply for all additional insureds ensuring that Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the insurer’s limits of liability. The policy(ies) shall not contain any cross-liability exclusions.

Pass through clause. CONSULTANT agrees to ensure that its subconsultants, subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by CONSULTANT, provide the same minimum insurance coverage and endorsements required of CONSULTANT.

CONSULTANT agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section.

CONSULTANT agrees that upon request, all agreements with consultants, subcontractors, and others engaged in the project will be submitted to City for review.

City’s right to revise specifications. The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the CONSULTANT ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the CONSULTANT, the City and CONSULTANT may renegotiate CONSULTANT’s compensation.

Self-insured retentions. Any self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. City reserves the right to require that self-insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self-insurance will not be considered to comply with these specifications unless approved by City.

Timely notice of claims. CONSULTANT shall give City prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from CONSULTANT’s performance under this Agreement, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies. 







 






PGCC 11-5-2025

Professional Services Agreement 07.19.2022
Additional insurance. CONSULTANT shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the work.








 






PGCC 11-5-2025

Professional Services Agreement 07.19.2022

FIRST AMENDMENT TO CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MUNICIPAL RESOURCE GROUP, LLC
This First Amendment to City of Pacific Grove Professional Services Agreement (“ Agreement”), is made and effective as of January 27, 2025, between the City of Pacific Grove (“ City”), a municipal corporation and Municipal Resource Group, LLC ( MRG) a limited liability company CONSULTANT”).

The City and Consultant hereby agree to the following terms:

1. On November 20, 2024, the City and Consultant entered into a City of Pacific Grove Agreement for Professional Services (“ Agreement”) to conduct a comprehensive City-wide organizational and staffing level assessment.

2. The Agreement provided Consultant agreed to the Scope of Work that was set Forth in Exhibit A to the agreement.

3. This First Amendment to the Agreement adds Task 5 to the Scope of Work and is described in Exhibit 1 to this First Amendment.

4. The Agreement provided Consultant agrees to the following in Section 5 a. of the agreement:

PAYMENT
a. The City agrees to pay CONSULTANT monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the Payment Schedule as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amount shall not exceed Thirty-Nine Thousand Seventy Hundred Seventy- Three dollars ($ 39,773.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement.

5. This First Amendment to the Agreement revises Section 5 a. to the not to exceed amount as follows:

PAYMENT

6. The City agrees to pay CONSULTANT monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the Payment Schedule as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amended amount shall not exceed Fifty-thousand- one-hundred- seventy- three dollars ($ 50,173) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. The not to exceed amount of $50,173 includes the $ 39,773 paid on the Agreement plus an additional $ 10,400 for the services described in Exhibit 1 to this Amendment for a total of $50,173.

7. Except as modified by this First Amendment, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

PGCC 11-5-2025

Professional Services Agreement 07.19.2022
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this First Amendment as of the day and year written below.

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE CONSULTANT
By: By:

Nick Smith, Mayor Mary Egan, CEO
Date: Date:

APPROVED AS TO FORM
By:

Brian Pierik, City Attorney
Attachments:

Exhibit 1 Consultant December 19, 2024 Proposal Containing Detailed Amended Scope of Work and Amended Payment Schedule
Mary Egan ( Jan 30, 2025 11:20 PST)
Mary Egan
01/30/2025
Brian Pierik ( Jan 30, 2025 11:29 PST)
Brian Pierik
Nick Smith (Jan 30, 2025 11:32 PST)
01/30/2025
PGCC 11-5-2025

EXHIBIT 1
Consultant December 19, 2024 Proposal Containing Detailed Amended Scope of Work and Amended Payment Schedule
PGCC 11-5-2025

8788 Elk Grove Blvd. Ste. L Elk Grove, CA 95624 866- 774-3222 www. Solutions- MRG. com December 19, 2024
Matthew Mogensen, City Manager
City of Pacific Grove
300 Forest Avenue
Pacific Grove, CA 93950
Dear Mr. Mogensen,
MRG is submitting an amendment estimate regarding the City’ s request to conduct the Community Development Department Assessment ( Task 5, below). Consultant Rick Otto will build upon interviews that have already been conducted and add interviews for departmental staff. A separate report will be provided to assist the department with recommendations for improvements.

The original agreement included an estimated not-to-exceed contract amount of $39,773, which included 141 hours of professional consulting services. The City has requested an expanded scope of work to include additional interviews and analysis. The updated estimated not-to-exceed amount is $50,173, covering an additional 40 hours at $260.

MILESTONES COST
Task 1 - Launch & Project Coordination $ 2,905
Task 2 - Organizational Diagnostic $ 7,800
Task 3 - Public Works: Interviews, Research & Comparative Analysis $ 10,400 Task 4 - Public Works: Findings, Recommendations, Report & Presentations $ 15,668 Task 5 - Community Development: Interviews, Comparative Analysis, Recommendations & Report
10,400
Travel Expenses ( assumes 2 trips – interviews and Council presentation) $ 3,000 TOTAL $ 50,173
We truly value your business and will continue to serve as the City’s trusted advisor.

Sincerely,
Mary Egan, CEO

MRG, LLC
916-261-7547
egan@solutions- mrg.com
PGCC 11-5-2025

First Amendment- Municipal Resources Group,
LLC
Final Audit Report 2025- 01-30
Created: 2025- 01-23
By: Staphany Arriola ( sarriola@cityofpacificgrove. org) Status: Signed
Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAUzY3QwI- Lw36TtPWL5wEGfIkAeVdkSB0 First Amendment- Municipal Resources Group, LLC" History Document created by Staphany Arriola ([email protected]) 2025- 01- 23 - 11:01:51 PM GMT
Document emailed to Mary Egan ([email protected]) for signature 2025- 01- 23 - 11:01:55 PM GMT
Email viewed by Mary Egan ( contracts@solutions- mrg.com) 2025- 01- 23 - 11:02:34 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Mary Egan ([email protected]) Signature Date: 2025- 01-30 - 7:20:46 PM GMT - Time Source: server Document emailed to Brian Pierik ([email protected]) for signature 2025- 01- 30 - 7:20:48 PM GMT
Email viewed by Brian Pierik ([email protected])
2025- 01- 30 - 7:28:27 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Brian Pierik ([email protected])
Signature Date: 2025- 01-30 - 7:29:12 PM GMT - Time Source: server Document emailed to Nick Smith ([email protected]) for signature 2025- 01- 30 - 7:29:13 PM GMT
Email viewed by Nick Smith ( nsmith@cityofpacificgrove. org) 2025- 01- 30 - 7:31:58 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Nick Smith ([email protected]) Signature Date: 2025- 01-30 - 7:32:22 PM GMT - Time Source: server PGCC 11-5-2025

Agreement completed.
2025- 01- 30 - 7:32:22 PM GMT
PGCC 11-5-2025

Professional Services Agreement 07.19.2022

SECOND AMENDMENT TO CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MUNICIPAL RESOURCE GROUP, LLC
This First Amendment to City of Pacific Grove Professional Services Agreement (“Agreement”), is made and effective as of November 6, 2025, between the City of Pacific Grove (“City”), a municipal corporation and Municipal Resource Group, LLC (MRG) a limited liability company (“CONSULTANT”).

The City and Consultant hereby agree to the following terms:

1. On November 20, 2024, the City and Consultant entered into a City of Pacific Grove Agreement for Professional Services (“Agreement”) in the amount of $39,773, to conduct a comprehensive City-wide organizational and staffing level assessment. This scope of work has been completed.

2. On January 30, 2025, the City and Consultant entered into a First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement in the amount of $10,440, to conduct an organizational and staffing level assessment of the Community Development Department, as described in Exhibit A to the First Amendment. This scope of work has been completed.

3. This Second Amendment to the Agreement adds the Scope of Work described in Exhibit A to this Second Amendment and will provide observations and recommendations regarding the program staffing needs, organizational structure, resource allocations, and service delivery models regarding the Information Technology Division.

4. This Second Amendment to the Agreement revises Section 5 a. to the not to exceed amount as follows:
“PAYMENT

5. The City agrees to pay CONSULTANT monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the Payment Schedule as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amended amount shall not exceed Sixty-Eight-Thousand-One-Hundred-SixtyThree dollars ($68,163.00) for the total term of the Agreement unless additional payment is approved as provided in this Agreement. The not to exceed amount of $68,163 includes the $39,773 paid on the Agreement plus $10,400 for work performed under Amendment No. 1 to the agreement, plus an additional $17,990 for Amendment No. 2 for the services described in Exhibit A to this Amendment No. 2.

6. Except as modified by this Second Amendment, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

PGCC 11-5-2025

Professional Services Agreement 07.19.2022
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Consultant have executed this Second Amendment as of the day and year written below.

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE CONSULTANT
By: By:

Nick Smith, Mayor Consultant
Date: Date:

APPROVED AS TO FORM
By:

Brian Pierik, City Attorney
Attachments:

Exhibit 1 Consultant October 13, 2025 Proposal Containing Detailed Amended Scope of Work and Amended Payment Schedule
PGCC 11-5-2025

Professional Services Agreement 07.19.2022

EXHIBIT A
Consultant October 13, 2025 Proposal Containing Detailed Amended Scope of Work and Amended Payment Schedule
PGCC 11-5-2025

1 | Page
October 13, 2025
Matthew Mogensen, City Manager
City of Pacific Grove
300 Forest Avenue
Pacific Grove, CA 93950
Dear Mr. Mogensen:

On behalf of Municipal Resource Group (MRG), we are pleased to submit the attached revised scope of work for an Organizational Diagnostic for the Information Technology program.

As you know, MRG has been honored to partner with the City of Pacific Grove in conducting the City-wide organizational and staffing diagnostic, as well as deeper assessments of the Public Works and Community Development Departments. Building upon this foundation, we look forward to providing the City with a diagnostic review of the information technology program within the Administrative Services Department.

This Diagnostic will focus on organizational structure, staffing levels, resource allocation, and service delivery methods for the Information Technology program. The work plan is designed to ensure a collaborative process with City leadership and staff, resulting in practical findings and recommendations to guide future decisions. To further strengthen the review of the IT function, MRG will be partnering with SDI Presence, bringing specialized expertise in government technology services.

We appreciate the opportunity to continue serving the City and supporting its commitment to organizational effectiveness and excellence in service delivery. Please do not hesitate to reach out with any questions or clarifications regarding the proposed approach.

Sincerely,
Mary Egan, CEO

MRG, LLC
916-261-7547
[email protected]
PGCC 11-5-2025

2 | Page
MRG – FIRM PROFILE
MRG was founded in 2009 by highly skilled and broadly experienced professionals. Municipal Resource Group, LLC is an experienced, full-service consulting firm dedicated to assisting public sector agencies in attaining their strategic goals. Our 60 consultants have extensive experience in all aspects of Executive Coaching, Governance, Organizational Assessment & Development, and Human Resources, including staffing and effectiveness analyses. Our team is experienced in working with elected officials, agency executives, managers, and staff. MRG’s consulting work focuses on the five practice areas listed below.

SCOPE OF WORK
Organizational and Staffing Assessment of the
Administrative Services Department
In late 2024, the City of Pacific Grove hired MRG to conduct a comprehensive City-wide organizational and staffing level diagnostic. The primary purpose of the City-wide organizational diagnostic was to identify gaps in service and operational challenges at the department level so that future organizational and staffing level assessments for each City department can be prioritized. The final diagnostic report included numerous findings and recommendations specific to each City department. At the request of the City, MRG subsequently conducted a deeper organizational assessment of the Public Works and Community Development Departments. These two efforts were completed in the Spring 2025.

The City is now requesting a proposal for a deeper organizational diagnostic of the Information Technology program within the Administrative Services Department. The IT program currently has three in-house staff positions (one vacant) and is responsible for providing all information technology services to City operations. The purpose of the organizational diagnostic is to provide the City with a snapshot of observations and recommendations regarding the program staffing needs, organizational structure, resource allocations, and service delivery models.

PGCC 11-5-2025

3 | Page
The primary objectives of the assessment include:
• Examine and explore the organizational and functional issues to assess program culture, levels of employee engagement, team effectiveness, role/goal clarity, and skillsets/competencies.
• Evaluate organizational structure, staffing levels, positions, functions, and contracted services in relation to the workload, and program efficiency and effectiveness. • Evaluate service delivery methods and outcomes, and the policies, legislative requirements, and other influences that impact program operations.

As part of this engagement, MRG will be partnering with SDI Presence to assist with the review of the Information Technology function. SDI Presence is an IT consultancy and managed service provider that has a strong presence in the government services sector. A biography of Rick Otto, Project Lead for MRG, and Terry Hackelman, Project Lead for SDI Presence, is attached.

WORK PLAN
MRG has developed the following work plan for the project to meet the City’s needs. The scope of work is dependent upon the needs of the organization and may be modified as needed during the initial video conference:

1. Project Initiation / Launch:
• Initial video conference with major stakeholders including but not limited to City Manager, Deputy City Manager and the Administrative Services Director. • Review project outcomes, process timing, expectations, define interview subjects, and set initial timeline.
• Request and obtain numerous documents including but not limited to the department organizational charts, organizational accomplishments, historical budgetary and staffing level data, community surveys, and any other relevant reports and documents. Obtain anecdotal perspectives on issues and concerns that drive this request.

2. Conduct Data Analysis and Staff Interviews:
• Review and analyze obtained data.
• Develop interview format and questions.
• Conduct one-hour interviews via on-site and/or video conferencing with members of the IT program as well as other stakeholders in the City. • Anticipate conducting approximately eight interviews. • Compile and analyze interview data and information.

3. Prepare Findings and Recommendations:
• Prepare key initial findings.

PGCC 11-5-2025

4 | Page
• Review initial findings with City Manager and designated staff. Refine findings based on feedback.
• Develop initial recommendations.
• Review initial recommendations with City Manager and designated staff. Refine recommendations based on feedback.

4. Prepare Final Report:
• Compile Report and/or PowerPoint Presentation, review with City Manager and designated staff, revise as necessary, prepare final Report and/or PowerPoint, and deliver to City.
• The Report will include observations, preliminary findings, and recommendations.

The report will also identify any issues outside the identified scope of work that may impact the office and require further analysis or actions on the part of the City.

PROJECT FEES AND TIMELINE
MRG proposes an estimated not-to-exceed contract amount of $17,990, including expenses.

The project will be invoiced upon completion of each milestone with associated travel expenses as described below. Based on the client’s direction, many of the interviews can be conducted on-site unless it is determined that virtual interviews are feasible. All other work is intended to be completed remotely via email, teleconference, and video conference. Should the client and MRG mutually agree to conduct any other meetings or work activities on-site, travel expenses will be billed to the client at cost.

If additional services are requested or additional time needed (such as for assistance in implementation or professional development), those hours will be billed at $260 per hour for Information Technology support and $290 per hour for the Lead Consultant.

Milestones Hours Costs
Milestone #1 - Project Initiation / Launch 11 $ 3,080.00 Milestone #2 - Data Analysis and Staff Interviews 20 $ 5,470.00 Milestone #3 - Prepare Findings & Recommendations 24 $ 6,640.00 Milestone #4 - Prepare Final Report 7 $ 1,950.00
Travel Expenses $ 850.00
TOTAL $ 17,990.00
PGCC 11-5-2025

5 | Page

MRG CONSULTANTS
Rick Otto, Lead Consultant
(714) 745-2852
[email protected]
As the former City Manager for the City of Orange, Rick Otto understands the many challenges today’s local government executives face on a daily basis. Rick successfully navigated his organization through the pandemic, recessions, periods of political transition, local emergencies, and community tragedies. His compassionate, collaborative, and results-orientated leadership style allows him to create and foster a positive work environment and forge excellent working relationships with political leaders, labor associations, community groups, and fellow city managers.

Rick has over 32 years of local government experience working for small and medium-sized cities in Southern California. In addition to serving as the City Manager for Orange, a full-service city with an annual budget of $200 million and 750 employees, Rick also served as their Assistant City Manager, Community Development Director, and Economic Development Manager. Prior to his tenure in Orange, Rick worked for three contract cities in Los Angeles County: Rancho Palos Verdes, La Mirada and Temple City. Throughout his career, Rick has been involved in nearly every aspect of local government, including land use planning, historic preservation, citizen engagement, affordable housing, economic development, finance and budgeting, capital projects, information technology, labor negotiations, staff development, and public safety coordination. Rick brings his unique and diverse background to clients by specializing in Organizational Assessments, Operational Reviews, Executive Evaluations, Staff Development and Mentoring, Strategic Planning, Fiscal and Economic Development Analysis, and Land Use Entitlements.

A facilitator of governmental regionalization, Rick has chaired numerous regional committees including the Metro Cities Fire Authority, the Orange County Animal Control Taskforce, the Orange County City Manager’s Solid Waste Committee, the North Orange County Cities Homelessness Coalition, and Orange County City Manager’s Homelessness Task Force.

In addition to his professional achievements, Rick earned a Bachelor of Arts in Public Administration and a Master of Public Policy and Administration, both from California State University, Long Beach. Rick is a frequent guest speaker for public policy and journalism classes at California State University, Fullerton, and Chapman University. He also has been a speaker for the American Planning Association. Finally, Rick is proud to have been a Disneyland Cast Member and still uses that customer-centric approach with his clients.

PGCC 11-5-2025

6 | Page
Cathy Capriola, Project Director
(916) 257-3287
[email protected]
Cathy is an experienced local government leader with over 30 years of experience in the areas of general management, emergency management, organizational development, human resources, finance, information technology, and risk management. Cathy’s key strengths are strategic planning, facilitation, team building, coaching, mentoring, and project management. As a developer of people and organizations, Cathy enjoys delivering best practices, new systems, and innovation.

With a strategic entrepreneurial lens, Cathy has the ability to see enhanced levels of service delivery and to drive initiatives to help organizations reach the next level. As a coach, Cathy is able to help executives focus on their strengths and provide strategic and tactical assistance to navigate issues and problems.

SDI PRESENCE
SDI provides management consulting and advisory services focused exclusively on assisting public sector agencies enhance their use of technology. Since 1999, SDI’s Advisory & Consulting practice has supported IT assessments, IT strategic plans, enterprise software procurements, and implementation projects for nearly 200 west coast clients. Our successful track record includes completing more than 100 IT Assessments and Strategic Plans for cities, counties, special districts, and State of California agencies.

SDI Presence LLC (SDI)
SDI is an IT consultancy and managed services provider
(MSP) that leverages its strong team presence to
advance our clients to a secure digital enterprise. With a 25+-year corporate resume, SDI delivers strategic
managed services, IT consulting, and hybrid
infrastructure solutions to optimize our clients’
technology environments. SDI is a certified Minority
Business Enterprise (MBE), with a portfolio of clients
that includes some of the nation’s largest airports,
utilities, commercial real estate portfolios, and
government agencies.

SDI delivers a deep technical presence through a local
delivery model to achieve customer confidence and
success. SDI is headquartered in Chicago, Illinois with regional offices in Anaheim, Sacramento, and Los Angeles, California; Atlanta, Georgia; and Dallas Fort-Worth, Texas.

SDI Snapshot:
• Headquartered in Chicago
• 25+ Years IT Consulting/Managed Services
Experience
• 360+ Business Professionals
• 92% Customer Satisfaction Rating
• Continuously awarded the “Best Places to
Work” Recognition since 2020
• Financial Stability:
- 2023 Revenue - $85M
- Backed by Private Equity Firm - Abry
Partners with $5B under management
• Corporate Plus® Member of the National
Minority Supplier Development Council
(NMSDC)
PGCC 11-5-2025

7 | Page
SDI’s core services include:

Terry Hackelman - Senior Vice President / Subject Matter Expert Mr. Hackelman is the SVP of State, Local, and Education West (SLED). He leads all of SDI’s SLED West business, including all municipalities and related utilities in the Western states. Sales, business development, strategy and delivery of services are included in his responsibilities to client agencies. He has over 34 years of complex technology procurement and implementation success at state and local government including cities, counties, utilities, and special districts. In Manhattan Beach, he served as the IT Director as a full-services municipality. His extensive experience spans more than 50 California municipalities and includes many of the technologies used by municipalities and districts to manage finance, payroll, human resources, utility billing, assets computerized maintenance, permitting/inspection, e-Government, mobile applications, geographic information systems, documents, and more.

PGCC 11-5-2025

Agenda No. 10 A

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Anna Bornstein, Associate Planner
MEETING DATE: November 05, 2025
SUBJECT: Architectural Review Board Meeting Minutes: September 9, 2025 CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Receive the minutes.

Attachments
ARB Minutes 09.09.2025
PGCC 11-5-2025

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD

MEETING MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, September 9, 2025, 3:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA AGENDA

1. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL
Secretary Huff called the meeting to order at 3:00 pm. Present in the chamber: Secretary Huff, Member Boyle and Member Sublett
ABSENT: Chair Brooks and Vice Chair Byrne

2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Upon a motion by Member Boyle and seconded by Member Sublett, the Board voted to approve the agenda.

Motion carried 3-0-2, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Secretary Huff, Member Boyle, Member Sublett
NOES: None
ABSENT: Chair Brooks and Vice Chair Byrne

3. BOARD AND STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS (City-Related Items Only) None.

4. COUNCIL LIAISON ANNOUNCEMENTS
None.

5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Lisa Ciani provided general public comments
Inge Lorentzen Daumer provided general public comments
A.

Written General Public Comment
None

CONSENT AGENDA

6. REPORTS FOR INFORMATION ONLY
None

7. REPORTS REQUIRING ACTION
PGCC 11-5-2025

A. Minutes of the August 12, 2025, Architectural Review Board Regular Meeting Reference: Anna Bornstein, Associate Planner
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the August 12, 2025, Regular Meeting of the Architectural Review Board.

CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
ACTION: Upon a motion by Member Sublett, seconded by Member Boyle, the Board voted to approve the Consent Agenda
Motion carried 3-0-2, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Secretary Huff, Member Boyle, Member Sublett
NOES: None
ABSENT: Chair Brooks and Vice Chair Byrne

REGULAR AGENDA

8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Sign Permit (SP) 25-0118 for 1199 Forest Avenue Units 1-3 (APN 006-726-008-000).

Zoning District/General Plan Designation: C-FH / Forest Hill Commercial Coastal Zone: No
Historic Resources Inventory: No
CEQA: Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class I, Existing Facilities Recommended Action: Consider Sign Permit 25-0118 subject to the recommended findings, conditions of approval, and Class 1 Categorical Exemption (CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Existing Facilities).

Reference: Anna Bornstein, Associate Planner
Anna Bornstein, Associate Planner, provided the staff presentation The applicant presentation was provided by Patricia Silva No public comment was received
ACTION: Upon a motion by Member Boyle, seconded by Member Sublett, the Board voted to approve Sign Permit 25-0118 subject to the recommended findings, conditions of approval, and Class 1 Categorical Exemption (CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Existing Facilities).

Motion carried 3-0-2, by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Secretary Huff, Member Boyle, Member Sublett
NOES: None
ABSENT: Chair Brooks and Vice Chair Byrne

9. CONTINUED AND ONGOING BUSINESS
None.

PGCC 11-5-2025

10. NEW BUSINESS
None.

11. PRESENTATIONS
A. BCC Recommendation Process Changes & Quarterly Reports Zoning District/General Plan Designation: n/a
Coastal Zone: N/A
Historic Resources Inventory: N/A
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
Recommended Action: Receive report.

Reference: Aaron Campbell, Senior Planner
Inge Lorentzen Daumer provided public comment

12. NEXT MEETING - October 14, 2025

13. ADJOURNMENT- 3:28 p.m.

PGCC 11-5-2025

Agenda No. 10 B

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: George Fuerst, Environmental Program Manager
MEETING DATE: November 05, 2025
SUBJECT: Beautification and Natural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes: March 18, April 15, May 20, July 15, August 19, September 16, 2025 CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Receive the minutes.

Attachments
BNRC Minutes
PGCC 11-5-2025

Minutes of the

BEAUTIFICATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
Tuesday, 18 March 2025, 4:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA

1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Walkingstick called the meeting to order at 4PM. Commissioners Gorman, Wooten, Brisson, Giraudo, Lloyd and Dunn present. Staff: EPM George Fuerst and Amy Colony from DPW; Councilmember Lori McDonell.

2. AGENDA: Approved.

3. COMMISSIONER, SUBCOMMITTEE, and STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chair Walkingstick announced an upcoming COAST meeting, 10 April, from 5-7. She spoke to Policy 000-5 about establishing a direct line to City Council from the BCCs, a protocol in progress.

Commissioner Brisson gave an update on the seals: top count is 105 with 50-60 pregnant.

Tourism is heavy. Seasonal fencing going up soon.

Vice Chair Gorman said that FWS has extended the comments period for listing the Monarchs as a threatened species to 19 May.

EPM Fuerst reported that Arbor Day is 27 April; there will be a tree planting/celebration similar to last year’s with location and details TBD. Blue Strike’s research contract in re climate change was approved by council and has ‘hit the ground running.’ As part of their outreach, they will host the first community workshop on 17 April.

4. COUNCIL LIAISON ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council liaison McDonell announced the district election map is nearly ready. Council is making progress with goals-setting. PG Cares is on the council’s 19 March agenda.

5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Lisa Ciani stated her hopes that the city will hire an urban forester by the summer and hold off on Title 12 decision until the forester is on board. She urged BNRC’s support for coastal wildlife protection and to increase CSO time for enforcement, open space and habitat protection.

Nina Beattie reported that the Monterey Bay Aquarium will be conducting high-decibel geophysical surveys in the bay from March 24th to 26th that will ‘maim and kill sea life.’ She requested that BNRC contact the Monterey Bay Aquarium and ask them to halt these surveys.

Anthony Ciani called in about Crespi Pond: the biological study was completed 24 February but nothing has been done since. He suggested BNRC might ask the DPW to nudge this along. He also mentioned the possibility of archeological information there…perhaps a study of that?

6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
With noted corrections, the February minutes were approved.

7. REGULAR AGENDA
A. A presentation on Sea Otters in Pacific Grove: A Fragile Treasure by Gena Bentall; Director, Senior Scientist at Sea Otter Savvy (SOS).

Ms. Bentali gave a brief history of her 501(c)(3) organization followed by a deep dive into otters’ habits, their habitats and the ongoing threats to their population by human disturbance (even though some of that disturbance is from otter admirers seeking up-close viewing of them). She asked if PG would ‘take the pledge’ to protect sea otters. SOS’s website is www.seaottersavvy.org and the pledge is at seaottersavvy.org/pledge Public Comment (Ms. Bentali’s responses are in parentheses) PGCC 11-5-2025

Anthony Ciani addressed concerns about fishing line entanglement (discarded line and hooks also a threat). Lisa Ciani asked if the wildlife symposium will return again this year. (Not this year—very labor intensive—but hope to do it every two years.) Commissioner Giraudo queried about issues related to kayakers. (Big concern, but SOS continues to work on educating kayakers, mainly through the local kayak rental agencies, signage and social media.) He asked if otters’ level of exposure varies by location, making habituation hard to study. (Yes. Need more volunteers to do physical measurements.) Commissioner Brisson noted the ‘Respect the Nap’ stickers—originated in 2015 and now updated—on rentals. (Vendors survey customers if they heeded the message. Hoping to be impactful.)
No apparent acute issues on otter population after Moss Landing fires; that area is being closely monitored. There is concern about accumulation of heavy metals in the otters’ prey.

Other discussion included query about ‘keeping-distance’ laws for otters, such as in place for humpback protection (No. Complicated and enforcement is rare.) Might videos in re otter protection be made and distributed for placement in hotel rooms? MSP, Brisson/Dunn: Recommend Mayor Smith take the Sea Otter Pledge.

B. Pacific Grove Harbor Seals Presentation – Kim Akeman Ms. Akeman gave a comprehensive talk on the harbor seal colony at Hopkins Marine Station.

These seals call this cove their permanent home, year-to-year.

Some general info:

The seals are not tagged but are recognized by their distinctive coats. Because they are nocturnal, they sleep ashore during the day. That vital sleep can be adversely affected by the hordes of ‘pup-arazzi’ wanting to view the creatures, thus creating threats to their essential rest.

They are extremely sensitive to noise—loud cars, construction, dog-barking, etc.—and will clear (called ‘flushing’) the beach when afraid. They give birth on the beach, with the gulls as unofficial midwives (thus creating a concern that avian flu could be transmitted to the seals).

Pupping season lasts about two months.

For seals in distress, contact Marine Mammal Center: 415.289. 7325.

Ms. Akeman offered thanks to the PG community and to her ‘seal team,’ then took questions. (Her answers are in parentheses.)
Public Comment
Several callers expressed their thanks to Ms. Akeman.

Anthony Ciani asked about haul-out sites. (There are 13 in these parts of the coast.) Commissioners’ Comments
How long do the seals vacate the beach when they flush? (Depends on the type of disturbance.) Additional signage might be good idea.

Does the city have any kind of noise restrictions? (No nearby road work is allowed during pupping season.)
How can BNRC engage with non-city businesses/services to promote seal security? Seals are good for PG businesses.

Perhaps a good idea for Ms. Akeman to give this presentation to the police department.

C. 2025 BNRC GOALS AND SUBCOMMITTEES
Chair Walkingstick reminded that subcommittees can consist of 1-3 members. She detailed the responsibilities of BNRC as an advisory committee to city council, that BNRC needs to follow the established structure in fulfilling our mission.

Public Comment
PGCC 11-5-2025

Lisa Ciani called in to ask for a coastal wildlife subcommittee. She also thanked the Chair for her overview.

Anthony Ciani opined that the city needs a coastal ranger for education and enforcement purposes.

Commissioners’ Comments
Commissioner Lloyd suggested a feasibility analysis about capturing and reusing rainwater runoff. He also emphasized the importance of preserving the artwork on the NOAA building.

Commissioner Giraudo spoke to ‘line of sight’ models vs ‘top-down’ models. How can citizens become more engaged with the city, such as PG Cares proposes to do? He added that it’s important to educate the public, especially around tree-cutting, road work, etc., to be mindful of when to schedule work so that it has minimal impact on wildlife.

Vice Chair Gorman liked the idea of making sea otter protection informational videos available through our local hotels. She also noted that, in re the tree canopy, PG has not yet met the 31% planted goal from last year, so another goal of hers is to establish more ‘tree neighborhoods’ and public space plantings.

Commissioner Wooten promoted the creation of a pest management plan.

Commissioner Dunn emphasized beautification, including Shop-Scape and litter control, as well as eliminating single-use plastics.

Commissioner Brisson agreed that wildlife and their habitats, open space, and pest management should be included, as well as bird boxes.

Chair Walkingstick addressed the Master Plan Revision of GWP, pest management, ShopScape (maybe reach out to the Chamber on this), creating an amphitheater, and involvement with COAST.

In summing up, the commissioners suggested these four BNRC goals for 2025:

Wildlife
Climate Action and Adaptation
Habitat
Educational Outreach and Awareness
The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 PM.

The next meeting will be on 15 April at 4 PM.

Respectfully submitted,
Marty Dunn, Recording Secretary
PGCC 11-5-2025

Minutes of the

BEAUTIFICATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
Tuesday, 15 April 2025. 4:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA

1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Walkingstick called the meeting to order at 4PM. Commissioners Gorman, Wooten, Brisson, Lloyd and Dunn present; Commissioner Giraudo absent. Staff:

EPM George Fuerst. Councilmember Lori McDonell.

2. AGENDA: Approved.

3. COMMISSIONER, SUBCOMMITTEE, and STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
Ms. Dunn spoke to the heavy flow into the bay of likely toxic debris from the Carl’s Jr. fire. Are there tools available to prevent this in future? Mr. Lloyd announced the Perkins Park clean-up and BBQ on Saturday, 26 April, 9-12 at Sea Palm Avenue. Ms. Brisson is glad to see the fawn signage around town, and also acknowledged the seal signage as being very helpful. There are about 50 pups now. She continues to be in touch with the Chamber in re a wildlife protection tab on their website. Chair Walkingstick noted the recent COAST meeting, and also announced that she and Ms. Dunn will be staffing a table at a 26 April event for children at the PG Museum of Natural History.

Mr. Fuerst said that the fire debris was considered a hazardous waste spill, and that Monterey Fire and the department of health are required to report it to the state. PG’s sewer system was able to capture most of the runoff in its system. The city is investing in a stormwater capture program, which includes testing outfalls. Arbor Day is 27 April, and the city will again host a tree-planting of larger cypress and pine at GW Park. Blue Strike will host its first workshop on the city’s Climate Action Plan on 17 April. Mr. Lloyd asked Mr. Fuerst if the stormwater and water recycling information could be included in the LWP; Mr. Fuerst was happy to do that.

4. COUNCIL LIAISON ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmember McConnell confirmed that PG Cares’ two initial projects have been approved by council. Deadline for input on parklet encroachment permits has been extended to 31 October.

Council approved increasing the downtown decibel level to 80; the city attorney will present an ordinance to this effect, and that will trigger a full public hearing.

5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Sally Moore spoke of landscape guides available from Monterey Water District. She also talked about the upcoming hiring of a city forester and updated tree ordinance. She noted that $3400 of tree fund money was spent on a sculpture at City Hall; she requested that money be returned to be used as originally intended.

Inge Lorentzen Daumer advised that council will receive an archeological resources report on 16 April. Anthony Ciani urged BNRC to become part of the coastal parks and management plans; consider agendizing this to make it so. Crespi Pond continues to be in poor condition.

Lisa Ciani wondered if the extension of the coastal trail at Esplanade Park might involve archeological resources.

6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
With noted corrections, the March minutes were approved.

7. REGULAR AGENDA
A. Great Horned Owl Platform/Nest for Eagle Scout Project Eagle Scout Malloch Lee made a comprehensive outline of his proposed GH Owl plan for GWP and “Rip” Van Winkle Park. The goal is to support/enhance the owl population, which will, as a PGCC 11-5-2025

positive sidebar, help control the rodent population. The project should be completed at the latest by the end of July.

Motion: Recommend installation of owl platforms at GWP and RVW with the evaluation and suggestions of possible other locations within the given parks, from a biologist.

Also, recommend PW be present and assist with installation of owl platforms and other activity associated with this project.

MSP: Wooten/Gorman; 5-0 approved.

B. "Dancing Monarchs" Art Donation Proposal
PG residents Jan and John Stewart propose donating this work of fused glass and metal by artist Peter Hazel to the city. Ms. Stewart gave information on this piece. It should be completed by fall of this year; the artist has indicated he would come for the installation.

Public Comment
Several callers expressed strong support for this gift, though questions about vulnerability to wind, vandalism and safety were shared. Tony Ciani suggested a committee work together to find potential locations.

Commissioners’ Comments
Chair Walkingstick urged BNRC to do due diligence as per the city’s Policy 900-3. Commissioners were enthusiastic about this proposal.

Motion #1: Recommend that city council accept this donation. MSP: Gorman/Walkingstick (5-0) Motion #2: Recommend that BNRC form a subcommittee of the donors and representative(s) from DPW, city council and BNRC to research locations for this piece.

MSP: Gorman/Wooten (5-0)
(BNRC reps will be Chair Walkingstick and Ms. Dunn.)
C. 2025 BNRC GOALS AND SUBCOMMITTEES (Continued)
Chair Walkingstick gave a recap of this process, calling it an ‘inspirational exercise.’ Public Comment
Lisa Ciani called in to give some history on the coastal wildlife subcommittee development and its recommendations from several years ago. She looks forward to BNRC’s discussion on this topic.

Commissioners’ Comments
Commissioner Lloyd withdrew his earlier suggestion about capturing and reusing rainwater runoff due to its cost. This could come back as a future agenda item, however. He voiced interest in wildlife protection and water concerns.

Commissioner Giraudo is on the habitat protection subcommittee.

Commissioner Wooten wants to work on an integrated pest management ordinance with ‘some teeth in it’ to present to council.

Commissioner Dunn is working (with the chair) on Shop-Scape. (Hoping to get the Chamber involved with this as well.) Plastics, especially the control of single-use plastics, is also on her list.

Commissioner Brisson chose wildlife and their habitats, deer fencing, integrated pest management, and continued association/outreach with COAST and the Chamber.

Vice Chair Gorman opted for establishing more ‘tree neighborhoods’ and public space plantings, education, and the GWP trail project.

Commissioner Lloyd suggested that our four main goals are rather like ‘umbrellas’ under which our various tasks fall.

Chair Walkingstick addressed pest management, Shop-Scape, monarch neighborhood meetings, and involvement with COAST.

In summing up, the commissioners suggested these four BNRC goals for 2025:
*Wildlife and Habitat Protection
PGCC 11-5-2025

*Shop-Scape
*Integrated Pest Management
*Educational Outreach and Awareness
D. Coastal Wildlife Protections
Public comments encouraged the mayor to take the Sea Otter Pledge, and also mentioned the huge positive difference the seal signage has made. Lisa Ciani asked about CSOs on bikes to help with enforcement of rules.

Commissioner Lloyd reminded that no bikes are allowed on the Perkins Park path.

Chair Walkingstick suggested that city should hire a wildlife point person who could help with enforcement and general public inquiries and reporting.

Motion #1: Recommend that commissioners and all city council members sign the Sea Otter Pledge. MSP: Brisson/Lloyd (5-0)
Motion #2: Recommend that city council visit harbor seal cove. MSP: Brisson/Walkingstick (5-0) Subsequent discussion pertained to wildlife protection issues and concerns that the CSOs were not doing this work as originally proposed when the city hired them. It was again mentioned that perhaps PGPD could receive some wildlife education that would help them with the enforcement of wildlife rules. A motion was proposed that spurred the question about data: what do we know about need for more wildlife protection as shown by city data? Motion: Recommend that the city consider hiring a wildlife conservation officer for animal-specific questions, issues and enforcement. MSP: Walkingstick/Brisson (4-2) The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 PM.

The next meeting will be on 20 May at 4 PM.

Respectfully submitted,
Marty Dunn, Recording Secretary
PGCC 11-5-2025

Minutes of the

BEAUTIFICATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
Tuesday, 20 May 2025. 4:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA

1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Walkingstick called the meeting to order at 4PM. Commissioners Gorman, Wooten, Brisson, Lloyd, Giraudo and Dunn present. Staff: EPM George Fuerst, Amy Colony. Councilmember Lori McDonnell.

2. AGENDA: Approved.

3. COMMISSIONER, SUBCOMMITTEE, and STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
Ms. Dunn asked for confirmation that gas leaf blowers are prohibited in town. Per Mr. Fuerst:
yes; notify code enforcement if you see one in use. Ms. Brisson noted that the federal government is considering changing the definition of “harm’ in the Endangered Species Act, and that could have negative consequences for wildlife. She is glad to see the fawn signage around town, and also acknowledged the seal signage as being very helpful. She reported there are about 73 pups now, up from 2024’s total. Chair Walkingstick highlighted the recent city volunteer luncheon and thanked Ms. Colony for her wonderful efforts in that. The chair and Ms.

Dunn participated in a science program at the PG Museum of Natural History. 50 cypress trees were planted in GWP on Arbor Day; KSBW did a spot on that event. The chair thanked Mr.

Fuerst for all his efforts surrounding that day’s happenings. There will be a GWP walk-through with Dan Gogh et al on 13 May; maintenance work is scheduled for mid-June.

Mr. Lloyd said about 60 volunteers showed up to weed and enjoy BBQ at the Perkins Park clean-up; he thanked Ms. Colony for her support of that. Mr. Giraudo spoke of the Historical Resources Commission meeting on 28 May @ 3PM. One of the agenda items is a discussion of the NOAA building at 1352 Lighthouse Avenue being designated as an historic building.

Staff news
Ms. Colony announced newly added hours for weeding at Perkins Park: Wednesdays from 10-2 and Saturdays from 11-1. Trashing will continue through the summer on the second Saturday morning of each month.The Monarch Sanctuary is looking for volunteers to help with landscaping work there; contact Ms. Colony for more information.

Mr. Fuerst reported that Good Old Days went very well. He especially thanked the outside agencies involved for their waste removal efforts. The owl perches’ locations are set for GWP and ‘Rip’ Van Winkle parks, as per Audubon and project innovator Malloch Lee. Folks from Audubon, the city and BLOY volunteers met at Berwick Point. The area is now signed and cordoned off and eggs are laid! There is a Plan B if this does not work out. Mowing at GWP now underway.

4. COUNCIL LIAISON ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmember McDonnell confirmed that council received a five-year recap of Capital Improvement Projects (CIPs), and the 2025 and 2026 CIPs were received and will be part of budget talks going forward. The Local Coastal Plan (LCP) amendment that the city submitted to the Coastal Commission last December has been approved by them; council must now finalize that approval.

5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Kim Akeman enthused about the 73 seal pups’ arrival and thanked the city for the signage and lighting that ‘really made a difference!’ Molting season is on tap so there will be a high number PGCC 11-5-2025

of the pinnipeds hauling out. Commissioner Giraudo inquired if any outreach can be done with car show organizers in re seal protection during events.

Lisa Ciani thanked the city, especially Mr. Fuerst, for help with the BLOYs; also kudos to Mr.

Giraudo for the info on the Historical Resources meeting.

6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
With noted correction of Councilmember McDonnell’s name, the April minutes were approved.

7. REGULAR AGENDA
A. Presentation from Liese Murphee, Director of Education and Outreach, on the Natural History Museum's plans to update their garden.

Ms. Murphee gave a comprehensive talk and slide show on the museum’s garden update, their outdoor education space and plans to continue to enhance the facility’s outreach. There is a jade exhibit on tap.

Public Comment
Lisa Ciani expressed her appreciation for these efforts.

Commissioner Comments
Mr .Giraudo asked about the time frame for the new projects. Ms. Murphee said that will happen once they connect with the contractors. Mr. Lloyd wondered about rainfall collection on site; Ms.

Murphee hopes to expand this option. Ms. Wooten gave kudos for all this and asked if there will be QR codes for plant IDs, etc. That is hoped for, according to Ms. Murphee, including plant names in the native Rumsen language. Mr. Giraudo asked about how to encourage and educate the community about the happenings at the museum; various PR tactics are always good.

B. Wildfire Safety Measure – Recommendation to Prohibit Open Flames on Public Property Natural Spaces Mr. Fuerst shared sections of the municipal code that apply to this subject then presented a slide show. California fire code automatically applies to PG as well. All fire codes apply to all property in PG.

Commissioner Gorman stated the BNRC ask is for the city to amend the city code to prohibit all open fires in 11 specific sites (of 28 total parks/open spaces in town). Smoking is already prohibited. Only one grill remains on city property but picnic areas are still available. The chair noted that human ignitions of fire have tripled the length of wildfire season. 337% of US homes are in a Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). Ms. Gorman and the chair submitted some action ideas, which include BNRC to:
1) request regular fire-ready community events
2) recommend fire safety ordinances
Commissioner Dunn asked if that includes municipal fireworks. Answer: ‘Could be.’ Public displays require council approval, so perhaps raise this idea at that time. Comm. Lloyd agreed with no-fire areas but wants to preserve spots already in use for BBQs and celebrations. What of the GWP BBQ? A permit is required to use it, but that doesn’t always happen. It’s problematic, especially with its proximity to the Monarch Sanctuary. Maybe remove it altogether? Mr. Giraudo wondered how to notify public of changes. Signage and notifying Little Leagues and social media all useful ideas.

MOTION: Gorman/Dunn Recommend the City Council consider amending the fire code to prohibit the use of fires of any kind, or any source of open flame, in any public park designated as a Natural Area or Open Space. MSP 6—0.

PGCC 11-5-2025

MOTION: Walkingstick/Brisson Recommend removal of BBQ at George Washington Part and adding signage in the area. MSP 6-0.

C. BNRC Goals 2025 - Adopt Goals
Chair Walkingstick gave a recap of this process, saying this is not the ‘end all and be all’ on this subject.

Public Comment
Lisa Ciani wanted to clarify that the 100’ perimeter trail was not the width of the trail. Answer:

That is correct.

Commissioner Comments
There followed further discussion on the goals, followed by:

MOTION: Adopt the goals with new modifications. MSP. (See below.) The meeting was adjourned at 5:45. The next meeting will be on 17 June 2025 at 4PM.

Respectfully submitted,
Marty Dunn, Secretary
Below is the full and amended list of BNRC Goals 2025.

BNRC Goals 2025
Mission Statement
The 2025 Beautification and Natural Resources Commission is dedicated to protecting and enhancing the city’s natural beauty and ecological health through climate-conscious stewardship, wildlife preservation, and habitat protection and restoration. We engage the community through inclusive outreach and education, fostering a shared commitment to sustainability, environmental awareness, and the protection of Pacific Grove’s unique natural resources for present and future generations.

1. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Management Plan and Ordinance (Brisson, Walkingstick, Wooten)
Recommend Council to adopt an ordinance implementing a comprehensive Integrated Pest Management Plan

1.1 Provide Council a comprehensive package justifying the adoption of a city ordinance to protect humans, wildlife, pets and the environment from the impact of pesticides. An ordinance would formalize
and expand on the current city policy and would require consistency, compliance and transparency in pesticide use.

1.1.1 Provide context in the form of documented research on the negative impact of pesticides, for example, the impact of exposure on predators, children and the bay.

1.1.2. Request documentation from the City of historical (2 years) pesticide application, purchase orders for herbicides, rodenticides, insecticides and other pesticides.

1.1.3. Provide information on IPM ordinances in other, similar, cities.

1.1.4. Provide information on alternative, effective pest control methods

1.1.5. Public outreach initiative

2. George Washington Park Perimeter Fire Break Rec Trail and Layered Map PGCC 11-5-2025

(Gorman, Walkingstick )

2.1 Recommend to Council to construct decomposed granite (DG) forest perimeter walking trail that functions as a fire safety break — enhancing recreational opportunities that are ADA compatible, aligning with CalFire and new state law requirements, preserving forest health and biodiversity.

2.1.1 Present to City Council

2.1.2 Incorporate into new GWP Master Plan

2.1.3 Keep up to date on evolving forest safety regulations and adjust where applicable (S.M.A.R.T. Goal break down)
Specific:

Recommend to Council to construct decomposed granite (DG) forest perimeter walking trail that functions as a fire safety break — enhancing recreational opportunities that are ADA compatible, aligning with CalFire and new state law requirements, preserving forest health and biodiversity.

This
would include reforesting efforts by planting 200 native trees and plants to protect and restore wildlife habitats and the forests’ overall biodiversity.Measurable:
• Establish a 100 ft wide defensible space to control non-native invasive grasses and weeds and to reduce fire risk.
• Complete the trail all at once, or in phases, within the next 2 years. • Preserve, prune (to provide 10 ft ground clearance to mitigate fire risk) and maintain all healthy trees in the trail corridor and plant 200 native trees throughout the park — with a 90% survival rate at the 1-year mark. Remove and replace any unsuccessful trees. • Create educational signage about biodiversity, fire prevention, and include recreational mile-markers for users (using strategic sign placement and design that doesn't compete with the natural setting of the park).

Achievable:

The perimeter trail and tree planting could be completed in phases to match resource availability, CEQA review, wildlife considerations, construction timetables, and funding.

Relevant:
• Addresses wildfire mitigation needs by permanently reducing tall invasive grasses in what is currently known as the "mow zone" (decomposed granite is natural in appearance, permeable, durable, and low maintenance).
• Increases outdoor recreation and accessibility.
• Increases beautification and curb appeal — blends seamlessly with the natural landscape. • Supports long-term ecological health by enhancing habitat and biodiversity in the urban forest by offering more dedicated trails to protect native ground covers from trampling aligning with the GWP Master Plan.

Time-bound:

The project would be completed over a 24-month timeline (, beginning July 2025 and concluding by
July 2027, with quarterly progress updates provided.

3. Shop-Scape Program and Initiative
(Dunn, Walkingstick)

3.1. Shop-Scape, a BNRC, City of Pacific Grove and Chamber of Commerce initiative and program to inspire business owners to lift business district aesthetic through soft-scape landscaping.

3.1.1 Grant program provided through City Façade Improvement Program

3.1.2 BNRC Guidance brochure

3.1.3 Chamber of Commerce outreach assistance
PGCC 11-5-2025

3.1.4 Utilize local and City volunteer resources

4. Monarch Sanctuary Neighborhood Meeting
(Brisson, Wooten, Walkingstick)

4.1. To provide the City and PG Natural History Museum support for the third annual, October 2025,
Monarch Sanctuary Neighborhood Meeting5. Deer Fencing Outreach, Education and Recommendations (Brisson, Gorman)

5.1 Research wildlife friendly fencing and provide potential recommendations and outreach awareness information for the community.

5.1.1 Research wildlife friendly fencing & outreach strategies

5.1.2 Review City literature, information, and ordinances regarding fencing regulations and make recommendations

6. Wildlife Habitat Protection and Outreach
(Giraudo, Lloyd, Brisson)
Background: Building on the recent presentations to BNRC addressing fence guidelines and Harbor Seals, we have an opportunity to increase awareness, voluntary compliance amongst service providers, residents, and visitors leading to a reduction in human caused disruption and impact on wildlife habitat. The presentation findings indicate some habitat disruptions are due to lack of awareness of existing guidelines (fencing as one example) and activity in sensitive areas that impacts critical wildlife cycles (see the George Washington Park Biological Assessment and Harbor Seal environment study as examples).

Goal Objective Statement: Increase awareness and voluntary compliance of Pacific Grove’s wildlife protection guidelines and regulations among residents, visitors, and service providers to protect area wildlife and wildlife habitat, with a primary focus on deer, harbor seals, and sea otters.

This goal encompasses several BNRC 2024 goals, including:

3.1 Initiate and engage in city and community partnerships that support our wildlife and their habitats

3.3 Recommend updates to wildlife and habitat protection as needed, especially along the coastal road and trail, and during sensitive breeding seasons

3.3 Promote public education of wildlife through city social media, signage, etc.

3.5 Review wildlife ordinances, code compliance and violations, and collaborate to with Police/CSOs to mitigate wildlife disturbances.

Measurements:

A reduction in observed human caused wildlife disruptions and severity in targeted populations by X amount in year 1 and a further reduction of X amount in year 2. To include:

No observed decline in harbor seal live birth rate attributed to human caused disturbances; An observed reduction in the number of seal “beach flushing” events due to human caused disturbances;An observed reduction in the number of disruptive human interactions with sea otters that could contribute to a reduction to the sea otter population.

The goal owners will provide quarterly updates to the BNRC on actions taken, outcomes, and learnings.

How: This may include communicating and highlighting when wildlife breeding seasons occur, wildlife sensitivity to noise disruptions, and other known/potential impacts to be avoided at different times of the year to increase voluntary compliance or adjustments to work schedules, traffic patterns, and public use of wildlife habitat. Primary targets would include various businesses and service agencies (fencing contractors, tree trimming companies, PGE, ATT, CalTrans, Monterey County, event organizers, See Monterey tourism, kayak rentals, etc.).

Communication may take the form of memorandum, social media, BNRC contacts, PGCC 11-5-2025

communicating requirements/guidelines during project planning, when issuing permits, at points of sale (fencing building materials as example), and establishing a City liaison to work with/advise service agencies when scheduling work in/near PGCC 11-5-2025

Minutes of the

BEAUTIFICATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
Tuesday, 15 July 2025, 4:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA

1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Walkingstick called the meeting to order at 4PM.

Commissioners Gorman, Wooten, Brisson, Lloyd, Giraudo and Dunn present. Staff:

EPM George Fuerst, Joyce Halabi, Amy Colony, and PG Police Chief Casey Day.

Also present was Councilmember and BNRC liaison Lori McDonnell.

2. AGENDA: Upon motion by Commissioner Gorman and seconded by Commissioner Brisson, the Commission voted 7-0 to approve the agenda.

3.COMMISSIONER, SUBCOMMITTEE, and STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
A. Commissioner Brisson and Chair Walkingstick made general announcements.

B. Mr. Fuerst announced that city forester John Kenney has been hired.

4. COUNCIL LIAISON ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmember McDonnell gave updates on the LCP, retail cannabis, map of city’s fire hazards, and language program in re DEI.

5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
General public comment received from PG Deer Awareness‘ Carmelita García, PG Cares Mike Gibbs, Vince Tuminello, and Inge Lorentzen Daumer.

6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Upon motion by Commissioner Brisson and seconded by Commissioner Gorman, the Commission approved the April and May minutes with noted corrections

7. REGULAR AGENDA
A. Comprehensive presentation by Natalie Johnston, interpretive programs manager at the
Natural History Museum.

Public Comment received from Lisa Ciani .

Commissioner Comments
Commissioners Giraudo, Brisson, Lloyd and Gorman added their thanks and questions/ideas.

B. Deputy City Manager Halabi outlined some of PG’s public outreach vehicles, including the city’s public information team. She then introduced Chief Day. The PGCC 11-5-2025

chief presented a summary of his employment history and emphasized the importance of public outreach and communication.

Public Comment received from Lisa Ciani and Inge Lorentzen Daumer.

Commissioner Comments
Chair Walkingstick and Commissioners Lloyd, Wooten, Giraudo, Brisson, and Gorman all
offered thanks and questions/ideas to the presenters.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:30. The next meeting will be on 19 August 2025 at 4PM.

Respectfully submitted,
Marty Dunn, Secretary
PGCC 11-5-2025

Minutes of the

BEAUTIFICATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
Tuesday, 19 August 2025. 4:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA

1. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Walkingstick called the meeting to order at 4PM. CommissionerGorman, Wooten, Brisson, Lloyd, Giraudo, and Dunn present. Staff: EPM George Fuerst, City Forester John Kenney. Councilmember Lori McDonnell.

2. AGENDA: Upon motion by Commissioner Wooten, seconded by Commissioner Brisson, commissioners voted 7-0 to approve the agenda.

3. COMMISSIONER, SUBCOMMITTEE, and STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
Commissioners Lloyd, Brisson, Gorman and Chair Walkingstick made general announcements, including a call for volunteers to help with the Save Our Shores beach cleanup on
20 September.

EPM Fuerst introduced the city’s new forester, John Kenney.

4. COUNCIL LIAISON ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmember McDonnell announced that there was a public forum in re the housing element and it will now go to the planning commission. She also shared updates on: the sale of cannabis in PG; DEI; upcoming recommendations to council from commissions, boards and committees; ARC/HCR; and council salaries.

5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
General comments received from Robin Aeschliman, Vicki Pearse, Lisa Ciani, and Anthony
Ciani.

6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Upon motion by Commissioner Lloyd, seconded by Commissioner Gorman, commissioners voted 7-0 to approve the minutes. Commissioner Brisson noted her displeasure with the new format of the minutes.

7. REGULAR AGENDA
A. Presentation from Natalie Johnston, Interpretive Programs Manager at the Natural History Museum. She gave a comprehensive report on the status of monarchs in general and of the Monarch Grove Sanctuary (MGS). Pesticides, including Roundup, and climate change have been shown to contribute to the steep decline in the monarchs’ population since monitoring began in 1997. The MGS suffered a mass mortality (about 10%) in January of 2024. USGS analysis showed lethal levels of three common pesticides; perhaps this could be turned into an educational opportunity going forward.

PGCC 11-5-2025

Public Comment
Lisa Ciani and Inge Lorentzen Daumer expressed appreciation for this presentation. .

Commissioner Comment
Each commissioner applauded Ms. Johnston’s talk. Comments mentioned the need for more public outreach, including to nurseries and realtors.

B. Monarch Sanctuary Annual Report
EPM Fuerst presented the annual Creekside Report on the MGS as prepared by scientist Stuart Weiss. He noted that monarch counts began in 1997 and that the city instituted management plans for the sanctuary beginning in 2011. There will be a public walkthrough of MGS on Friday, 5 September, at 1PM.

Commissioner Comment
Commissioners Wooten, Giraudo, Gorman, and Brisson inquired about watering (MGS volunteers help with that), encouraging growth of volunteer pines, ground cover, and tree inventory at both MGS and GWP.

Mr. Fuerst pointed out that monarchs need the structure found in PG, which includes the fog, even more than they need nectar in this area. He also noted that parasites are another threat to the butterflies.

ACTION ITEM: Commissioner Giraudo motioned, and Chair Walkingstick seconded, that the BNRC receive and accept the report as presented and to forward it to DPW with the recommendation that it be executed with regard to the detail and timeline within the report. Motion carried 7-0.

C. Pests, Pesticides, and Abatement in PG
EPM Fuerst gave a detailed report addressing these areas, including a definition of terms. PG has an Integrated Pest Management program (IPM) with regard to dealing with insects, rodents, and gulls. The first rule is to use pesticide alternatives first, and to abide by existing county and state regulations. (Note: anticoagulants are not used here, nor are they allowed anywhere in the state.)
Public Comment
Inge Lorentzen Daumer, Kris Lindstrom, and Lisa Ciani called in with comments.

Commissioner Comment
Commissioners Wooten, Lloyd, Brisson, Giraudo, Gorman, and Dunn all commented, including asking about controls used at the municipal golf course, adding signage about ground squirrels at Lovers Point, and the use of electronic rat traps by individuals. Chair Walkingstick suggested using CSOs to help educate visitors at Lovers Point. She also shared this website as a great resource: ipm.ucanr.edu
ACTION ITEM: Moved by Commissioner Dunn and seconded by Commissioner Lloyd that BNRC support prioritizing the legal abatement of ground squirrels in PGCC 11-5-2025

problem areas and adding temporary and permanent “Do not feed the animals” signage to promote public safety. Unanimously passed.

The meeting was adjourned at 7:08 PM.

The next meeting will be on 16 September 2025 at 4PM.

Respectfully submitted,
Marty Dunn, Secretary
PGCC 11-5-2025

Minutes of the

BEAUTIFICATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
Tuesday, 16 September 4:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA

1.CALL TO ORDER: Vice-chair Gorman called the meeting to order at 4PM.

Commissioners Wooten, Brisson, and Dunn present. Staff: EPM George Fuerst, Councilmember Lori McDonnell. Absent: Chair Walkingstick, Commissioners Lloyd and Giraudo.

2. AGENDA: Upon motion by Commissioner Brisson, seconded by Commissioner Wooten, commissioners voted 4-0 to approve the agenda.

3. COMMISSIONER, SUBCOMMITTEE, and STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
Commissioner Brisson reported on her meeting with COAST representative.

EPM Fuerst said Monarch Grove Sanctuary walk-through a success and that routine maintenance would begin there this week. MGS volunteers and PG Natural History Museum affiliates will introduce a door-knocking outreach campaign.

4. COUNCIL LIAISON ANNOUNCEMENTS
Councilmember McDonnell reported that the format for BCCs has been updated and that quarterly reports may be instituted from each group. The idea to combine the ARB and HRC was further discussed. Look for an improvement in traffic safety near the USPS. There will be a ballot measure in re councilmembers‘ pay raises.

5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Sally Moore spoke, about the owner of 306 Crocker’s latest DPW denial to remove cypress trees.

6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of the minutes was continued until the next meeting.

7. REGULAR AGENDA
A. Presentation from Shannon Connor Simpson, director of the Monterey Audubon Society. A highlight of their work involves the Pt. Pinos Seawatch in which migratory seabirds are counted. Dates for this year’s count are 1 November-15 December.

They have partnerships with the City of PG, the PG Natural History Museum, Bay Net and the BLOY Monitoring Project. Collected data is housed online in ebird. Pt. Pinos seabirds will be featured on a planned interpretive sign at that site.

B. Public Comment
Lisa Ciani expressed appreciation for this presentation. Anthony Ciani wondered if a permit is required for the new sign.

Commissioner Comment
PGCC 11-5-2025

Commissioner Wooten also asked about the need for a permit for the sign, but Mr.

Fuerst said it is a replacement sign so a permit may not be needed.

ACTION ITEM: Commissioner Wooten moved, and Commissioner Brisson seconded, that BNRC support and promote the permitting and installation of the interpretive sign. Passed 4-0.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:33 PM.

The next meeting will be on 21 October 2025 at 4PM.

Respectfully submitted,
Marty Dunn, Secretary
PGCC 11-5-2025

Agenda No. 10 C

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Sandra Kandell, City Clerk/DEI Coordinator
MEETING DATE: November 05, 2025
SUBJECT: Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Minutes: August 11, 2025 CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Receive the minutes.

Attachments
DEI Minutes
PGCC 11-5-2025

1 MEETING MINUTES

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE

TASK FORCE ON DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION

REGULAR MEETING
Monday, August 11, 2025, 6:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA JOIN THE ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE AT:
https://www.cityofpacificgrove.org/Zoom_DEI

1. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
Vice-Chair Fryberger called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. City Clerk/DEI Coordinator Kandell conducted roll call with the following Task Force members present in person:

Vice-Chair Fryberger, Secretary Pye, Members Doneux and Rubin. Absent: Chair Bui.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Action: Upon motion by Vice-Chair Fryberger and seconded by Member Doneux, the Task Force voted 4-0-1, Chair Bui absent, to approve the agenda.

3. PRESENTATIONS
(None.)

4. TASK FORCE AND STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS (City-Related Items Only) Member Doneux makes announcement of items on cultural calendar for August and September.

No staff announcements.

5. COUNCIL LIAISON ANNOUNCEMENTS
(None.)

6. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
No general public comment received.

7. CONSENT AGENDA
Action: Upon motion by Member Rubin and seconded by Member Doneux, the Task Force voted 4-0-1, Chair Bui absent, to approve the Consent Agenda.

A. Minutes of the May 12 and July 14, 2025 Task Force on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Meetings
Action: Approved the minutes.

CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
PGCC 11-5-2025

2 8. REGULAR AGENDA
A. Land Acknowledgment Subcommittee
Public comment received from Lisa Ciani, Kate Spencer, and Inge Lorentzen Daumer.

Action: Upon motion by Member Doneux and seconded by Member Rubin, the Task Force created a subcommittee comprising of Chair Bui and Secretary Pye to develop language for a Land and Ancestral Peoples Acknowledgment.

9. NEXT MEETING: September 8, 2025 at 6:00 p.m.

10. ADJOURNMENT
The regular meeting was adjourned at 6:21 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Kimberly Pye
Secretary
Approved by Chair:__________________________________________Date____________________ PGCC 11-5-2025

Agenda No. 10 D

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Garrett McCown, Associate Planner & RFP Coordinator MEETING DATE: November 05, 2025
SUBJECT: Historic Resources Committee Meeting Minutes: May 28, June 25, July 23, and August 27, 2025
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Receive the minutes.

Attachments
HRC Minutes 5.28.2025
HRC Minutes 6.25.2025
HRC Minutes 7.23.2025
HRC Minutes 8.27.2025
PGCC 11-5-2025

HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMITTEE

APPROVED MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Wednesday, May 28, 2025, 3:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA

PACIFIC GROVE MEETINGS ARE CONDUCTED IN PERSON AT CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER AND VIRTUALLY.

PLEASE NOTE THE MEETING WILL PROCEED AS NORMAL EVEN IF
THERE ARE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES ACCESSING ZOOM.

THE CITY WILL DO ITS BEST TO RESOLVE ANY TECHNICAL ISSUES AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

JOIN THE ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE AT:
https://www.cityofpacificgrove.org/Zoom_HRC
Please click here for directions to dial into the meeting audio.

AGENDA

1. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL
Chair Anton called the meeting to order at 3:00pm. Chair Anton conducted roll call with the following members present in the Chamber: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee members Collins.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
ACTION: Upon motion by Vice Chair Greening and seconded by member Collins, the committee voted to pull item 8A (1352 Lighthouse Ave.) from the agenda and “continue to a date uncertain”.

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee member Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None
PGCC 11-5-2025

3. COMMITTEE AND STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS (City-Related Items Only) NONE

4. COUNCIL LIAISON ANNOUNCEMENTS
NONE

5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
The following members of the public spoke:

Steve Hawk
Lora Lee Martin
Robert Fisher
Geva Arcanin
Mike Gibbs
Inge Lorentzen Daumer
Lisa Ciani
Louise Ramirez
Anthony Ciani
A. Written General Public Comment
The following members of the public submitted written comment:

Donna Foote
Charles H. Greene
Jane Haines
Lora Lee Martin
Nancy McDowell
Bill Peake
Mimi Sheridan
Stephanie Turcotte
Joseph Tardo
Geva Arcanin
Andree Brisson
Lisa Ciani
Inge Lorentzen Daumer
David A. Laws
Sam Farr
Vicki Pearse
Monika Romero
Jeff Rothal
Anthony Ciani

CONSENT AGENDA
PGCC 11-5-2025

6. REPORTS FOR INFORMATION ONLY
NONE

7. REPORTS REQUIRING ACTION
A. Minutes of the April 23, 2025, Historic Resources Committee Regular Meeting Reference: Garrett McCown, Associate Planner
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the April 23, 2025, Historic Resources Committee Regular Meeting.

CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
ACTION: Upon motion by member Collins and seconded by Vice Chair Greening, the committee voted to approve the consent agenda.

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee members Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None

REGULAR AGENDA

8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Historic Determination (HD) 22-0255 for 1352 Lighthouse Avenue (APN 007-011-005) Zoning District/General Plan Designation: O / Open Space Institutional Coastal Zone: Yes
Historic Resources Inventory: No
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
Recommended Action: Staff recommends the Historic Resources Committee (HRC) find the subject property ineligible for the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) based on the GSA Determination for Eligibility dated September 24, 2021, the Phase I Historic Resource Assessments provided by Historic Resource Associates dated September 22, 2022, and the Phase I Historic Resource Assessment provided by Chronicle Heritage dated April 17, 2025.

Reference: Jon Biggs, Community Development Director
This item was pulled from the agenda during the “Approval of the agenda (2.)” and continued to a date uncertain.

PGCC 11-5-2025

9. CONTINUED AND ONGOING BUSINESS
NONE

10. NEW BUSINESS
NONE

11. PRESENTATIONS
NONE

12. NEXT MEETING - June 25, 2025

13. ADJOURNMENT
3:24 pm
NOTICE OF ADA COMPLIANCE: Pursuant to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Codified At 42 United States Code Section 12101 and 28 Code of Federal Regulations Part 35), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the City of Pacific Grove does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, disability, age or sexual orientation in the provision of any services, programs, or activities. The City of Pacific Grove does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. City Hall is an accessible facility. A limited number of assisted listening devices will be available at this meeting. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting or provide the requested agenda format.

PGCC 11-5-2025

HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMITTEE

APPROVED MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Wednesday, June 25, 2025, 3:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA

PACIFIC GROVE MEETINGS ARE CONDUCTED IN PERSON AT CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER AND VIRTUALLY.

PLEASE NOTE THE MEETING WILL PROCEED AS NORMAL EVEN IF
THERE ARE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES ACCESSING ZOOM.

THE CITY WILL DO ITS BEST TO RESOLVE ANY TECHNICAL ISSUES AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

JOIN THE ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE AT:
https://www.cityofpacificgrove.org/Zoom_HRC
Please click here for directions to dial into the meeting audio.

AGENDA

1. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL
Chair Anton called the meeting to order at 3:00pm. Chair Anton conducted roll call with the following members present in the Chamber: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee member Collins.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
ACTION: Upon motion by Vice Chair Greening and seconded by member Collins, the committee voted to approve the agenda as is.

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee member Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None

3. COMMITTEE AND STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS (City-Related Items Only) NONE
PGCC 11-5-2025

4. COUNCIL LIAISON ANNOUNCEMENTS
NONE

5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
NONE
A. Written General Public Comment
The following members of the public submitted comments:

Bill and Patricia Eastman
Tony Ciani

CONSENT AGENDA

6. REPORTS FOR INFORMATION ONLY
NONE

7. REPORTS REQUIRING ACTION
A. Minutes of the May 28, 2025, Historic Resources Committee Regular Meeting Reference: Garrett McCown, Associate Planner
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the May 28, 2025, Historic Resources Committee Regular Meeting.

CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

ACTION: Upon motion Vice Chair Greening and seconded by Member Collins, the committee voted to approve the consent agenda.

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee member Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None

REGULAR AGENDA

8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Historic Determination (HD) 25-0101 for 304 Grove Acre Avenue (APN 006-402-004) PGCC 11-5-2025

Zoning District/General Plan Designation: R-1-B-3/Low Density Residential 4.4 DU/ac Coastal Zone: No
Historic Resources Inventory: No
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
Recommended Action: Staff recommends the Historic Resources Committee (HRC) add 304 Grove Acre Avenue to the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI), based on the conclusions of the Phase 1 Historic Assessments (Clovis 2025 and Seavey 2025) confirming HRI eligibility.

Reference: Garrett McCown, Associate Planner
Associate Planner, Garrett McCown, presented staff report.

Property owner, Michael McCloud presented report.

Public Comment:

Lisa Ciani
Nader Sharifi
Inge Lorentzen Daumer
ACTION: Upon motion by member Vice Chair Greening and seconded by Member Collins, the committee voted to add 304 Grove Acre Avenue to the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI).

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee members Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None

9. CONTINUED AND ONGOING BUSINESS
NONE

10. NEW BUSINESS
NONE

11. PRESENTATIONS
NONE

12. NEXT MEETING - July 23, 2025

13. ADJOURNMENT
PGCC 11-5-2025

3:17 pm
NOTICE OF ADA COMPLIANCE: Pursuant to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Codified At 42 United States Code Section 12101 and 28 Code of Federal Regulations Part 35), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the City of Pacific Grove does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, disability, age or sexual orientation in the provision of any services, programs, or activities. The City of Pacific Grove does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. City Hall is an accessible facility. A limited number of assisted listening devices will be available at this meeting. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting or provide the requested agenda format.

PGCC 11-5-2025

HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMITTEE

APPROVED MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Wednesday, July 23, 2025, 3:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA

PACIFIC GROVE MEETINGS ARE CONDUCTED IN PERSON AT CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER AND VIRTUALLY.

PLEASE NOTE THE MEETING WILL PROCEED AS NORMAL EVEN IF
THERE ARE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES ACCESSING ZOOM.

THE CITY WILL DO ITS BEST TO RESOLVE ANY TECHNICAL ISSUES AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

JOIN THE ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE AT:
https://www.cityofpacificgrove.org/Zoom_HRC
Please click here for directions to dial into the meeting audio.

AGENDA

1. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL
Chair Anton called the meeting to order at 3:00pm. Chair Anton conducted roll call with the following members present in the Chamber: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee member Collins.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
ACTION: Upon motion by member Collins and seconded by Vice Chair Greening, the committee voted to approve the agenda as is.

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee member Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None
PGCC 11-5-2025

3. COMMITTEE AND STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS (City-Related Items Only) Senior Planner, Aaron Campbell made announcements.

4. COUNCIL LIAISON ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council member Rau made announcements.

5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
NONE
A. Written General Public Comment
NONE

CONSENT AGENDA

6. REPORTS FOR INFORMATION ONLY
NONE

7. REPORTS REQUIRING ACTION
A. Initial Historic Screening (IHS) 25-0146 for 1134 Ripple Avenue (APN 006-051-018-000)
Zoning District/General Plan Designation: R-1-H/ Medium Density Residential (7.3 du/ac)
Coastal Zone: No
Historic Resources Inventory: No
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
Recommended Action: Staff requests that the Historic Resources Committee recommend an Initial Historic Screening Determination of ineligibility to the Community Development Director for the property located at 1134 Ripple Avenue. Based on the review of the City of Pacific Grove Historic Context Statement, property files, and the evaluation criteria listed in PGMC 23.76.025.

Reference: Garrett McCown, Associate Planner
Item pulled from consent agenda and put on regular agenda as item 8C.

B. Initial Historic Screening (IHS) 25-0131 for 1304 Funston Avenue (APN 007-564-044-000)
PGCC 11-5-2025

Zoning District/General Plan Designation: R-1/ Medium Density Residential (9.7 du/ac) Coastal Zone: No
Historic Resources Inventory: No
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
Recommended Action: Staff requests that the Historic Resources Committee recommend an Initial Historic Screening Determination of ineligibility to the Community Development Director for the property located at 1304 Funston Avenue. Based on the review of the City of Pacific Grove Historic Context Statement, property files, and the evaluation criteria listed in PGMC 23.76.025.

Reference: Garrett McCown, Associate Planner
C. Minutes of the June 25, 2025, Historic Resources Committee Regular Meeting Reference: Garrett McCown, Associate Planner
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the June 25, 2025, Historic Resources Committee Regular Meeting.

CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

Public Comment:

Inge Lorentzen Daumer
ACTION: Upon motion Vice Chair Greening and seconded by Member Collins, the committee voted to approve the consent agenda as amended. Item 7A, 1134 Ripple Ave., was pulled and added to the Regular Agenda as item 8C.

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee member Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None

REGULAR AGENDA

8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Historic Determination (HD) 25-0159 for 273 Lighthouse Avenue (006-254-001-000)
Zoning District/General Plan Designation: R-2 / High Density Residential PGCC
(21.8
11-5-2025
du/ac)

Coastal Zone: No
Historic Resources Inventory: No
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
Recommended Action: Staff recommends the Historic Resources Committee (HRC) add 273 Lighthouse Avenue to the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI), based on the conclusions of the Phase 1 Historic Assessment (Page & Turnbull, October 2023) confirming HRI eligibility.

Reference: Anna Bornstein, Associate Planner

Associate Planner, Anna Bornstein, presented staff report.

Public Comment:

Kent Seavey
Inge Lorentzen Daumer
Lisa Ciani
ACTION: Upon motion by member Vice Chair Greening and seconded by Member Collins, the committee voted to add 273 Lighthouse Avenue to the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI).

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee members Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None
B. Historic Determination (HD) 25-0127 for 139 7th Street (APN 006-205-009-000) Zoning District/General Plan Designation: R-3-PGR/High Density Residential 19.8 DU/ac
Coastal Zone: No
Historic Resources Inventory: Yes
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
Recommended Action: Staff recommends the Historic Resources Committee (HRC) remove 139 7th Street from the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI), based on the conclusions of the Phase 1 Historic Assessment (Clovis, February 7, 2025) and peer reviews (LHPS, May 1, 2025 and Brunzell, May 12, 2025) confirming HRI ineligibility.

Reference: Garrett McCown, Associate Planner
PGCC 11-5-2025

Associate Planner, Garrett McCown, presented staff report.

Project Applicant, Anthony Lombardo, presented report.

Public Comment:

Kent Seavey
Anthony Ciani
Amber Long
ACTION: Upon motion by member Vice Chair Greening and seconded by Member Collins, the committee voted to remove 139 7th Street from the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI).

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee members Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None
C. Initial Historic Screening (IHS) 25-0146 for 1134 Ripple Avenue (APN 006-051-018-000)
Zoning District/General Plan Designation: R-1-H/ Medium Density Residential (7.3 du/ac)
Coastal Zone: No
Historic Resources Inventory: No
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
Recommended Action: Staff requests that the Historic Resources Committee recommend an Initial Historic Screening Determination of ineligibility to the Community Development Director for the property located at 1134 Ripple Avenue. Based on the review of the City of Pacific Grove Historic Context Statement, property files, and the evaluation criteria listed in PGMC 23.76.025.

Reference: Garrett McCown, Associate Planner
Associate Planner, Garrett McCown, presented staff report.

Project applicant Eric Miller, presented report.

Public Comment:

Inge Lorentzen Daumer
PGCC 11-5-2025

Anthony Ciani
ACTION: Upon motion by member Vice Chair Greening and seconded by Member Collins, the committee voted and determined that 1134 Ripple Avenue is ineligible for the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI).

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee members Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None

9. CONTINUED AND ONGOING BUSINESS
NONE

10. NEW BUSINESS
NONE

11. PRESENTATIONS
NONE

12. NEXT MEETING - August 27, 2025

13. ADJOURNMENT
3:42 PM
NOTICE OF ADA COMPLIANCE: Pursuant to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Codified At 42 United States Code Section 12101 and 28 Code of Federal Regulations Part 35), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the City of Pacific Grove does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, disability, age or sexual orientation in the provision of any services, programs, or activities. The City of Pacific Grove does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. City Hall is an accessible facility. A limited number of assisted listening devices will be available at this meeting. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting or provide the requested agenda format.

PGCC 11-5-2025

HISTORIC RESOURCES COMMITTEE

APPROVED MINUTES

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Wednesday, August 27, 2025, 3:00 P.M.

Council Chamber – City Hall – 300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA

PACIFIC GROVE MEETINGS ARE CONDUCTED IN PERSON AT CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER AND VIRTUALLY.

PLEASE NOTE THE MEETING WILL PROCEED AS NORMAL EVEN IF
THERE ARE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES ACCESSING ZOOM.

THE CITY WILL DO ITS BEST TO RESOLVE ANY TECHNICAL ISSUES AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

JOIN THE ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE AT:
https://www.cityofpacificgrove.org/Zoom_HRC
Please click here for directions to dial into the meeting audio.

AGENDA

1. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL
Chair Anton called the meeting to order at 3:00pm. Chair Anton conducted roll call with the following members present in the Chamber: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee member Collins.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
ACTION: Upon motion by Vice Chair Greening and seconded by member Collins, the committee voted to approve the agenda as is.

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee member Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None

3. COMMITTEE AND STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS (City-Related Items Only) None

4. COUNCIL LIAISON ANNOUNCEMENTS
PGCC 11-5-2025

Council Member Rau made announcements

5. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
The following members of the public spoke:

Lisa Ciani
Inge Lorentzen Daumer
Anthony Ciani
A. Written General Public Comments
Reference: Garrett McCown, Associate Planner
Recommended Action: Receive Written Public Comments
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
The following members of the public submitted written comment:

Inge Lorentzen Daumer
Anthony Ciani

CONSENT AGENDA

6. REPORTS FOR INFORMATION ONLY
None

7. REPORTS REQUIRING ACTION
A. Minutes of the July 23 2025, Historic Resources Committee Regular Meeting Reference: Garrett McCown, Associate Planner
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the July 23, 2025, Historic Resources Committee Regular Meeting.

CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
B. Initiate Historic Determination for 955 Crest Ave (APN: 006-062-007) Zoning District/General Plan Designation: R-1/ Medium Density Residential (7.3 du/ac) Coastal Zone: No
Historic Resources Inventory: No
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
Recommended Action: Initiate the Historic Determination for 955 Crest Avenue (APN:
006-062-007) per Pacific Grove Municipal Code (PGMC) §23.76.030.

Reference: Anna Bornstein, Associate Planner
PGCC 11-5-2025

Public Comment:

Inge Lorentzen Daumer
ACTION: Upon motion member Collins and seconded by Vice Chair Greening, the committee voted to approve the consent agenda as is.

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee member Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None

REGULAR AGENDA

8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Architectural Permit (AP) 25-0068 for 403 Central Ave (APN 006-187-003-000) Zoning District/General Plan Designation: R-3-PGR
Coastal Zone: No
Historic Resources Inventory: Yes
CEQA: Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Class I, Existing Facilities Recommended Action: Staff recommends the Historic Resources Committee approve Architectural Permit (AP) 25-0068, subject to the findings, recommended conditions, and Class 1 and Class 31 CEQA categorical exemptions.

Reference: Aaron Campbell, Senior Planner
Senior Planner, Aaron Campbell, presented staff report.

Project applicant Hunter Eldridge, presented report.

Public Comment:

Inge Lorentzen Daumer
Anthony Ciani
Lisa Ciani
ACTION: Upon motion by member Collins and seconded by Vice Chair Greening, the committee voted to approve AP 25-0068 with the condition to differentiate the siding from the original historic property and the new additions.

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

PGCC 11-5-2025

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee members Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None
B. Historic Determination (HD) 25-0150 for 115 Forest Avenue (APN 006-157-020-000) Zoning District/General Plan Designation: R-3-PGR/High Density Residential 19.8 DU/ac Coastal Zone: Yes
Historic Resources Inventory: Yes
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378
Recommended Action: Staff recommends the Historic Resources Committee (HRC) remove 115 Forest Avenue from the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI), based on the Phase 1 Historic Assessment (PAST Consultants, LLC, 2025) findings, and its conclusion confirming HRI ineligibility.

Reference: Garrett McCown, Associate Planner
Associate Planner, Garrett McCown, presented staff report.

Project historian Seth Bergstein and owner Jill Kamler presented reports.

Public Comment:

Charles Machado
Anthony Ciani
Inge Lorentzen Daumer
ACTION: Upon motion by member Vice Chair Greening and seconded by member Collins, the committee voted to remove 115 Forest Avenue from the Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) and potentially include the property on the Neighborhood Character List.

Motion carried 3-0, by the following vote:

AYES: Chair Anton, Vice Chair Greening, and committee members Collins NOES: None
ABSENT: None

9. CONTINUED AND ONGOING BUSINESS
None

10. NEW BUSINESS
PGCC 11-5-2025

None

11. PRESENTATIONS
None

12. NEXT MEETING - September 24, 2025

13. ADJOURNMENT
4:08 pm
NOTICE OF ADA COMPLIANCE: Pursuant to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (Codified At 42 United States Code Section 12101 and 28 Code of Federal Regulations Part 35), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the City of Pacific Grove does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, disability, age or sexual orientation in the provision of any services, programs, or activities. The City of Pacific Grove does not discriminate against persons with disabilities. City Hall is an accessible facility. A limited number of assisted listening devices will be available at this meeting. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting or provide the requested agenda format.

PGCC 11-5-2025

Agenda No. 11 A

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Matthew Mogensen, City Manager
MEETING DATE: November 05, 2025
SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution Establishing Fees and Charges for Hearing Examiner Services, and Extending the Term of Water Entitlement Discounts through June 30, 2026
CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution Establishing Fees and Charges for Hearing Examiner Services, and Extending the Term of Water Entitlement Discounts through June 30, 2026.

1. 2. Take an alternative action.

DISCUSSION
On September 4, 2024, the City Council approved Resolution No. 24-038, which established fees for citywide services as documented in the FY 2024-25 Master Fee Schedule, which has been updated through Resolution No. 25-011, amending the FY 2025-26 Master Fee Schedule.

Establishing Hearing Officer Fees
On September 17, 2025, the City Council approved an Ordinance restructuring the City’s code enforcement framework and authorized the hiring of a professional hearing officer. The Pacific Grove Police Department has maintained a contract with the vendor Turbo Data since 2017 to facilitate the issuance, processing and collection of parking tickets. Turbo Data has also been the point on the intake of appeals. Turbo Data provides additional services that include professional hearing examiner services for all administrative citation appeals. These services include a professional hearing officer review of appeals and the decision on whether they should be upheld or not.

Turbo Data’s fee for processing appeals includes:

Hearing Examiner Services - Parking Citation Hearings - per hearing $40.00 Hearing Examiner Services - Administrative Citation Hearings - per hearing $50.00 Included in the attached Resolution Establishing Fees and Charges for Hearing Examiner Services, and Extending the Term of Water Entitlement Discounts through June 30, 2026, are fees in the amounts described above to achieve full cost recovery of the professional hearing officer services. Once adopted, these fees will be required for an appellate to pay in order to appeal a violation. If the appellant is successful in their appeal, the City will refund the appeal processing fee that was paid by the appellant.

PGCC 11-5-2025

Entitlement Water Discount
On October 15, 2025, the City Council discussed the status of the remaining “Entitlement Water” that has been available for sale since the completion of the Pacific Grove Local Water Project (PGLWP).

The PGLWP generated 47.88 acre-feet of water, of which approximately 19.2551 acre-feet of water remain available for sale.

The City is also expecting to receive a new allocation of 32-acre feet from Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD). This new allocation will be from the expansion of the Pure Water Monterey Ground Water Replenishment Project (PWM/GWR).

City Council direction on October 15, 2025, was to return with an updated Resolution that memorializes the assignment of potable water currently or nearly available for allocation, as provided for in Chapter 11.68 of the Pacific Grove Municipal Code, Water Distribution Regulations. In addition, the City Council indicated support to further lower the cost for residents that wish to purchase Entitlement Water. Within the current fee schedule, the cost per acre-foot of Water Entitlement Rights is $26,225 for every .10 of an acre-feet of new water needed for a project. The City Council has previously decided to include a 30% discount on this cost. This discount has been extended for a number of years. To further lower the costs, the City Council directed staff to return with a Fee Schedule revision that discounts the Water Entitlement Rights further to 60%.

Included in the attached Resolution Establishing Fees and Charges for Hearing Examiner Services, and Extending the Term of Water Entitlement Discounts through June 30, 2026, is the provision of a 60% discount on Water Entitlement Rights through June 30, 2026. This discount can be extended through the Master Fee Schedule annual update should that be desired.

OPTIONS
Do not adopt the resolution and provide staff with alternative direction. Note that if the Professional Hearing Examiner fees are not established, the costs of this service will be paid by the City and a budget amendment may be necessary.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There currently is no cost for appeals regarding parking violations and other administrative citations.

The dollar level of these citations are set at a rate that is far less than the costs to process appeals that are filed. A good majority of parking tickets especially are appealed because there is no cost to the appellant. As a result, it costs the City more to issue a citation generally than the penalty for the violation. Utilizing a Professional Hearing Examiner and establishing a pass-through fee for the services mitigates the costs to the City in issuing citations.

The Master Fee Schedule establishes Water Entitlement Rights at $26,225 for every .10 of an acre-feet of new water needed for a project. For the last several years, the Master Fee Schedule has also included a 30% discount (approximately $7,867.50) to incentivize the sale of the City’s Entitlement Water and to assist with the high costs of the water rights for residents and businesses. Despite this discount, the City still holds approximately 19.3-acre feet of water for sale. With new sources of water coming online, the value of the City’s Entitlement Water will be less. The further discount of the Water Entitlement Rights to 60% will result in a $15,735 savings per .10 acre-foot of annual water entitlement needs for residential project proponents.

FOCUSED PRIORITY AREA: Financial Sustainability
Attachments
PGCC 11-5-2025

Attachments
Resolution Adopted Master Fee Schedule Revisions
PGCC 11-5-2025

1 RESOLUTION NO. 25-XXX

ESTABLISHING FEES AND CHARGES FOR HEARING EXAMINER SERVICES,

AND EXTENDING THE TERM OF WATER ENTITLEMENT DISCOUNTS
THROUGH JUNE 30, 2026

FINDINGS

1. The City of Pacific Grove (City) is authorized to establish and update fees for services provided that the amount of each fee complies with one of the exceptions from the definition of “tax” set forth in Proposition 26 (California Constitution Article XIII C, Section 1(e)) (“Prop 26”), summarized below, and;

2. Consistent with the requirements of Prop 26, Pacific Grove Municipal Code (PGMC) Chapter 6.02 documents the parameters by which the City establishes the amounts of fees for service, and;

3. On September 4, 2024, the City Council approved Resolution No. 24-038, which established fees for citywide services as documented in the FY 2024-25 Master Fee Schedule, which has been updated through Resolution No. 25-011, amending the FY 2025-26 Master Fee Schedule, and;

4. The City determined that further amendments to the FY 2025-26 Master Fee Schedule are warranted, as set forth in this resolution, to establish fees for administrative hearing services based on the costs to the City in contracting for those services, and to extend the term for the water entitlement discounts, and;

5. The fees to be established and updated in accordance with this resolution are exempt from the definition of “tax” under Proposition 26 based on exemption numbers (1), (2), (3), and (6):
“(1)   A charge imposed for a specific benefit conferred or privilege granted directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of conferring the benefit or granting the privilege.
(2)   A charge imposed for a specific government service or product provided directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of providing the service or product.
(3)   A charge imposed for the reasonable regulatory costs to a local government for issuing licenses and permits, performing investigations, inspections, and audits, enforcing agricultural marketing orders, and the administrative enforcement and adjudication thereof.
***
(6)   A charge imposed as a condition of property development.” PGCC 11-5-2025

2 6. Based on a Notice of a Public Hearing published in accordance with PGMC Chapter 6.02 and relevant California Government Code sections, the City Council held a public hearing on November 5, 2025 regarding the changes to the Master Fee Schedule described in this resolution, and;

7. The City Council desires to adopt the fees described in this resolution and incorporate them into the City’s Master Fee Schedule for FY 2025-26, and;

8. The Action proposed by this Resolution does not constitute a “Project” as that term is defined under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), CEQA Guideline section 15378.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE:

1. The City Council determines that each of the Findings set forth above is true and correct, and by this reference incorporates those Findings as an integral part of this Resolution.

2. After receiving a report and holding a public hearing on the proposed fees and fee discount described in this resolution:
a. The City Council approves the establishment of Administrative Hearing Officer Fees, as follows:
 Hearing Examiner Services - Parking Citation Hearings - per hearing - $40.00
 Hearing Examiner Services - Administrative Citation Hearings - per hearing -$50.00
b. The City Council approves the amendment to the discount for Water Entitlement Rights, and sets the amount of the discounted fee as authorized by PGMC Section 11.68.040, as follows:
 60% Discount Expires June 30, 2026

3. Per Government Code 66017, fee changes that relate to community development services shall be effective 60 days following final action by the City Council on the resolution.  In the case of reductions, the reductions can be implemented on November 5, 2025, on a case-by-case basis, by decision of the City Manager consistent with the procedures and criteria set forth in PGMC Chapter 11.68.

4. Approved changes shall be effective upon adoption on November 5, 2025.

5. The fee amendments set forth in this resolution will be incorporated into the Master Fee Schedule and shall also be posted on the City’s website and available at the Library.

PGCC 11-5-2025

3 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE this _____ day of __________ 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
____________________________________
NICK SMITH, Mayor
ATTEST:

DATED:_______________________
_______________________________
SANDRA KANDELL, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
BRIAN A. PIERIK, City Attorney
PGCC 11-5-2025

Agenda No. 12 A

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Brian Pierik, City Attorney
MEETING DATE: November 05, 2025
SUBJECT: Historic Resources Inventory and Issue of Property Owner Consent CEQA: Does not constitute a Project per California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15378

RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file agenda report regarding Historic Resources Inventory and Issue of Property Owner Consent.

DISCUSSION
A. Background
On September 17, 2025, an Agenda Report was presented to the City Council from Councilmember Cynthia Garfield (Attachment 1) entitled: “Responsibilities and Authority of the Historic Resources Committee.”
The Discussion in the September 17, 2025 Agenda Report refers to two matters: (1) the composition of the Historic Resources Committee and (2) the inclusion in the Historic Resources Inventory and property consent.

The text of the Agenda Report on the matter of the Historic Resources Inventory and property consent reads as follows:

2. Inclusion in the Historic Resources Inventory may add or subtract value from a property and should be disclosed to a property’s buyer upon sale as being pertinent to the value of the property.

To include a property on the Inventory without the owner’s consent can add complications, cost and negatively impact the value of that property. Perhaps, in practice, property owners are consulted, or notified but this section says that the owner has no say. “Inclusion on the Inventory is based on the criteria listed in Municipal Code Section 23.76.025 and is not limited to a specific year of construction. The consent of the property owner is not required for inclusion on the Inventory. The Pacific Grove Historic Context Statement, Guidelines for Historic Assessment, and Historic Resources Inventory can be found on the City's Historic Resources webpage: Historic Resources” The City Attorneys Office was requested at the Council meeting on September 17, 2025 to review the PGCC 11-5-2025

issue of property owner consent in the context of inclusion of the property in the Historic Resources Inventory.

B. Pacific Grove Municipal Code Chapter 23.76 (Historic Preservation) Pacific Grove Municipal Code ("PGMC") Chapter 23.76 (Historic Preservation) is Attachment 2 to this Agenda Report.

PGMC Section 23.76.025 includes the Evaluation criteria to be utilized by the City to assess a historic property’s inclusion in the National and/or California Register and local resources inventory.

PGMC Section 23.76.030 (Historic resources inventory historic determination – Additions and deletions) provides as follows:
“Properties may be added to or deleted from the historic resources inventory either by initiation of the historic resources committee or by submittal of a historic determination application by the property owner. The historic resources committee shall determine, following hearing, whether or not the property should be added or deleted based on the criteria listed in PGMC 23.76.025 and documented in a department of parks and recreation (DPR) 523 form or equivalent document.

Deletions proposed for removal due to loss of integrity must demonstrate the loss of integrity was not the result of any illegal act or willful neglect by the owner or agent of the owner.” (Emphasis added)
As noted, properties may be added or deleted from the City’s historic resources inventory. However, there is no requirement for the City to include a property in the historic resources inventory based on satisfaction of the evaluation criteria.

C. Review of Issue of Property Owner Consent
The language quoted above from the September 17, 2025 Agenda Report appears to have come from the City website regarding the Historic Resources Committee. There is no provision if the City Municipal Code on whether property owner consent is, or is not, required for inclusion of their property in the Historic Resources Inventory. As explained below, we have concluded that the City may include a property in the Historic Resources Inventory without property owner consent.

California law requires owner consent for a property to be listed as State historical resource. (See, e.g., Public Resources Code section 5024.1(f)(4).) Federal law similarly requires owner consent for inclusion of a property on the National Register or designation as a National Historic Landmark. (See 54 USC section 302105(b).) However, no California or federal law imposes the consent requirement on cities, nor prohibits California cities from including properties on local inventories without property owner consent.

As noted above, the City’s Municipal Code contains no provision that either requires owner consent or states that consent is not required. Although the City’s website for the HRC states that owner consent is not required for inclusion of a property in the inventory, this statement is without textual support in the City’s Municipal Code. This statement on the website has no force of law.

No California or federal case of which we are aware has addressed the specific issue of whether a city may include a property within its inventory of historic properties without the consent of the property owner. However, several cases have concluded that cities have the general authority, pursuant to their constitutional police power, to enact ordinances that regulate the use of architectural styles as a means PGCC 11-5-2025

of historic preservation, irrespective of owner consent. (See generally California Land Use & Planning Law, supra, Chapter 9 Other Development Regulations, Historic Preservation, p. 210, citing Bohannan v. City of San Diego (1973) 30 Cal.App.3d 416, 423.)
Moreover, land use restrictions on historic properties are no different, from an analytic perspective, from any other zoning controls that limit property uses, size and design. Such zoning restrictions have been upheld in dozens of cases. (See generally California Land Use & Planning Law, supra, Chapter 1 Local Land Use Authority, Police Power, pp. 1-4.)
In rejecting a property owner’s “takings” challenge to a city’s imposition of development restrictions on one of the city’s most prominent historic structures, the Grand Central RR Station, the United States Supreme Court “made clear that local regulation of landmarks and historic districts falls within the scope of permissible government objectives”, and that the city’s law was constitutionally valid because “it provided the owners with a reasonable beneficial use of their property, while fostering an important governmental purpose.” (California Land Use & Planning Law, Chapter 9 Other Development Regulations, Historic Preservation, p. 210, citing Penn Central Transportation Company v. City of New York (1978) 438 U.S. 104, 131.)
D. City of Palo Alto
While there is no law that requires property owner consent for inclusion on a city’s historic resources inventory, we found in our research that the Palo Alto City Council recently exercised its discretion to not include property in its historic inventory without express property owner consent.

The City of Palo Alto addressed the issue of property owner consent at length in 2023 and 2024 and there was substantial opposition by many property owners who might be impacted by inclusion on the City’s historic inventory.

The City of Palo Alto decided not to designate property as historic if the property owner did not consent. Of the 160 properties studied there were 147 determined to be eligible. There were several hearings before the City’s Historic Resources Board. However, the City Council decided on April 22, 2024 to advance just 13 private properties due to the property owners opposition. See City Council Agenda Report for Item 12 (Attachment 2).

According to the Minutes for Item 12 considered at the April 22, 2024 City Council meeting:
“12. Addition of 16 properties to the City’s Historic Resources Inventory based on Owner interest. CEQA Status: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065, the Historic Designation of Properties is not a Project Subject to Environmental Review.

MOTION: Council Member Burt moved, seconded by Council Member Veenker to:

1. Adopt the attached record of land use action (Attachment A) to add 16 properties meeting specified criteria to the City’s Historic Resources Inventory, based on expressed owner interest; and,

2. Direct staff to continue outreach to eligible property owners among the properties discussed in this report and to place future additions to the Historic Resources Inventory with expressed owner interest on the Consent Calendar; and,

3. Direct staff to study the possibility of a process for removing the properties as shown as PGCC 11-5-2025

potentially eligible in the parcel reports and return to Council with evaluations on any alternatives.

MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1, Lauing absent”
E. Conclusion
As noted, property owner consent for inclusion in the City of Pacific Grove Historic Resources Inventory is not legally required. However, the City may exercise its discretion in determining whether to include a property in the Historic Resources Inventory based on the lack of property owner consent.

OPTIONS
None.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact.

FOCUSED PRIORITY AREA: Community Development
Attachments

1. Agenda Report for September 17, 2025

2. PGMC Chapter 23.76 (Historic Preservation)

3. Palo Alto City Council Meeting Agenda Report, Item 12, April 22, 2024 PGCC 11-5-2025







 


!"
#$%&'&%

#
$(&'
!&$))* + ,  -./01 -02.-3 45678517 9:8/ ;< ;=>+?@52.- ABCDCE FGHI
+ J3@ 38.8/8583956 -851 456,835 -8:J3 9-:37 22855 K+ L 3 5: 358595M- N:5@-7/84 -8OP8- 25/Q9/851:5R98/83?:58  E
AS 
;;=>= L8-:535445 .-8.:T5 : 9:8/: :@59/2 /565-3335U -3 4: :-83:933./ U >F
GFF= V:T- 9 3@-5 45683:9338 . 952-856,835 -8:J3 9-:37 22855-:685:59-/JP8UV -B85 83 5825 -P8U56-3@ 38.8/8583956 -8583 456,J7 WU 35 95387 9:8/ -P8U35 @@- @-8533 ?935: --:58 3-2-T3:- 33 953/5-58PU -883 8:/98- 

W6@ U-5 @@ 85:858X35 V -37 228338 3./ 35 5601 - 79--5/1B56 :6-5- 456,835 -8:J3 9-:37 2285563565956 -8515 : 229851 -8X58 B56 ,-85? :851 76856835 // U56,-85? :8515  285@ 558/22.-Y3Z4 -56 01 -[3@@ 852583: 38355U8565U  56-V77[3@-:58:3  
\]
^&

&%

"
%


__&

%!
&

''&
_
_`

$aa&!
b
$cc

b

_
' de
$

d]b
_!

$
&!

$!bf!d(
bc
']&

&%a

$&!$!b%"("
$(

"
%

g!
']
_
_`


]$((`
$(&%
!

b$
%]&
%d&]a

$&!
ha

&
!%
# ($!b
%$a&!c$
%]&
%#
!c&!

#
$
%]&
%"
$(]&

&$!#
`
$(&%
!

bc
!

$(%!
$%
d&]a

$&!
ha

&
!%
g#$!b!

]$((`
$

a

!$&
']
$%&'&%

^

&$c
F%&
ei^

&$c
F%&
e
]$(($aa&!&
_
_`

jgklmnmopqrsmtuvpmqwxrw
yuxpyrqmrxmxzmo{uouymu{qlm|mrq|uyqlm}uxxpqqmm~  C
€:/938 856,835 -8:J3 9-:3€P5 -121 -39.5-:5P/94- 2@- @-5136 9/ .83:/ 35 @- @-51[3.91-9@ 3/3.8@-5855 56P/9 456@- @-51 W 8:/9 @- @-51 56€P5 -1U856 9556 U-[3: 35:: 2@/8:58 3B: 3558P/182@:5 56P/9 4565@- @-51 M-6@3B8@-:58:B@- @-51 U-3-: 39/5B - 5848.9556833:58  31356556 U-63 31 
‚ƒ„
†‡ˆ‰ƒ‰ƒŠ‹Œ‚ƒŒƒŠ‰Žˆ‡‘‡Œ’‰ƒŠ‹Œ„ŽˆŠŒŽˆ‘
ˆ‡ŠŒ’ˆƒ“†ƒˆ„ˆ”‘
•‰’Œ –Œ„Šˆ‰ƒ—˜™š›™œ—‘ƒ’ˆ‡ƒ‰Š
ˆžˆŠŒ’Š‰‘‡”Œ„ˆŸˆ„Œ‘Ž‰Ÿ„‰ƒ‡ŠŽ†„Šˆ‰ƒ ¡‹Œ„‰ƒ‡ŒƒŠ ‰ŸŠ‹Œ”Ž‰”ŒŽŠ‰¢ƒŒŽˆ‡ƒ‰ŠŽŒ£†ˆŽŒ’Ÿ‰Žˆƒ„ †‡ˆ‰ƒ‰ƒŠ‹Œ‚ƒŒƒŠ‰Ž ¡‹Œ¤‘„ˆŸˆ„ ¥Ž‰Œ¦ˆ‡Š‰Žˆ„•‰ƒŠŒ§Š–Š‘ŠŒžŒƒŠ¨¥†ˆ’Œ ˆƒŒ‡Ÿ‰Ž¦ˆ‡Š‰Žˆ„©‡‡Œ‡‡žŒƒŠ¨‘ƒ’¦ˆ‡Š‰Žˆ„ ªŒ‡‰†Ž„Œ‡‚ƒŒƒŠ‰Ž„‘ƒŒŸ‰†ƒ’‰ƒŠ‹Œ•ˆŠ«‡¦ˆ‡Š‰Žˆ„ªŒ‡‰†Ž„Œ‡¢Œ”‘¬Œ­ ®¯°®±°±²³®®´µ®¶·¸¹º»¼¶½¾»¿ÀÁ¾Âù¼
ļ¼ÂÅ´°°¿¾Å¼º»ÆÄÃż¾¿ÇÈÃɰ¹º»¼ÊÀ½ÊɾÉÃÇÈËÉÌžÍβÏЮѹ¾ÒÊ»ÓÉίÑÉÿ¾ÎÔÕ¼¾¹»ÀÖѹ¾ÖÃÀ¿¾¿Î¼¹Ó¾Ñº¿Î×±±µÐ®°± ATTACHMENT 1 PGCC 11-5-2025









 

!"
#
$%&'(')*+%'%,)--'%,*+.,*%/ 0
1'&2/%3*'%*2&2**%/4'/25 6 !7!8 79 :
78; <+'2,)2,-%32(=%-*
>
7979 >!:?!;*@==32-%A3
7BBCDEFGHBI J'2**=KA32--((*
LMNLONOPQLLRSLTUVWXYZT[\Y]^_\`aWZ
bZZ`cRNN]\cZXYdbacZ\]efagN`WXYZh^[hg\gaefigjc\klPmnLoW\phYqglMoga]\lrsZ\WY^toW\ta^]\]lZWq\oX]luOOSnONO PGCC 11-5-2025



 

! "#$%&$'(')*+,-./$ "#$%&$'"'0/123242-3.$ "#$%&$'"(52.4-+26+/.-*+6/.6-77244//$ "#$%&$'"89:;<*;42-36+24/+2;$ =>?@A?B>BCDEFGHDIHJEGKHIJEDLMJLFGHNODEFGHDIPJFJHQDLRFDGLSTPPDFDGLERLPPJUJFDGLE? "#$%&$'V'W4;4/52.4-+26X*2<Y23Z[-Y/$ "#$%&$'8'\+Y23;+]7;234/3;36/;3Y+/,;2+$ "#$%&$'&'^36/342:/_9`6/,42-3.4-<;3Y*./+/Z*<;42-3._52.4-+26,+/./+:;42-3,/+724$ "#$%&$'%'a3.;1/-+Y;3Z/+-*.6-3Y242-3.$ "#$%&$'b'cYY242-3.;3Y;<4/+;42-3.$ "#$%&$'d'0/7-<242-3.$ "#$%&$(''e/<-6;42-3$ "#$%&$(('f2327*77;234/3;36/$ "#$%&$("'ghihjkhlm "#$%&$(#'931-+6/7/34;3Y,/3;<42/.$ nop

p
pq
rs

pt!upq vwxyz{vv|}~~{vv|rqx€wv

‚ƒ‚„
†
‡sˆp



|sr‰
|ˆpˆ
Šr

rqŠ 
‹
pŠ
Šp rq
Œs
ps

q 
‹s

p
rŽrq rps


ŠprŽ
Œ
‹
rŽ
r
q

s

s

trp
‹ŠŽ
ŠprŽrqr
s

‹




s
‰‰Š

tv
w~}w}‘|ww!‘z’“”srˆ
p}v•€–—‡u˜—”o˜™™˜š’‡—u{
s

ˆ !v
qˆŠŽ
s
Œv
‰”’or
‹
›p
œžs
‰Žor
‹
›p
œ}or
‹
›p
œ}•€vs
‰Ž
ww~ ATTACHMENT 2 PGCC 11-5-2025

 






 






 


 

 









 
 



   
 










  
 
!








" 

 
#



 
 








 
 

  
!

  











    

 
 



 
 



 


  


$ 
  







 

  #







$









 



 
  
 " 








 
 

 
%




 
 



 






"

 


 
&




 





  





  









 
 
$



    






 



 











 









  '
%





 

 
 

" 
 



()*+,-./0.
.-*+ )-*,.10*
.--* )2+,./0*
*22+3 456786949:;<=>=?=@>A6 



 




  



 BC
D" 
 E 
 

 


 




" 




 BC


D"
   





 

1-











"
 


 

 
'


 .F,

*-G.*G.1
**1HCI%
./+JKLM)NL%
N$M$NOCL)P


GG

 G%CG
  
GQRG

G
  
./G
  
./+J

.G*- ATTACHMENT 2 PGCC 11-5-2025

 















  


!
"

#
$

 #" %&" 
%&
!


 





#





 





'
 (



 $


)*  






 #!+,-./01203.4


#


' 

#5## !
 +


6#
#
#5#

#


# #5 



7


,



 
#


#

,

 

#5 #
8

#










8

#
# 
7

#



#




9('9'
99 :;,-<=> 6?@A86-!8?8B;@6AC
 ''

'-;'!
+
'DE''!
+
<'!
+
<=> <'9( ATTACHMENT 2 PGCC 11-5-2025

 









 







 




   










 






 

  




!
"


#



$
!
"

#

%

!
"
%%
& '()*+),'-
./0123/4
350263450
4277/1155) 89
:
  






 

 ;



;










<
=

  
; 







>  
?;
@






 

 

;


 

>  
?;







 

 

 
= 
; 

A 
"


 "


"

    
"



 





= 
; 

A 
"






 
 ;


 
 
@





 

;


 

>  
?;
 ;



 





A 



 

>  
?; 89
:

"
= 
;



 "






#
; "


   







:








=

:



















B



;







 










B







 89
:











 


 







"
 





 




C 89
@









 















   
 

;





;;

 89
:









D








 89
>=


 








=E 89
F

 


  



 




  


;
"

>?GH IJKLMKNJN#
89
@ 


  




 



  


;

 >?GH
OPQRSQSRS#
8 9

 




 



 


 

  89
@

 
 ;
;



T 








  





 D 



 







U


!
"

U#



!
"


#


!
 "

#



$
!
"

#

%

!
"
%%
&

VV$"
E$W
@GH

X
YZ[:ZH
>\[\]@:Z^
EVV=== 

VH@V>  ?;V_`V
V>  ?; V>  ?;
X
 UV
ATTACHMENT 2 PGCC 11-5-2025




 


!
"#"$%!

&'!"####"
#!
( ( !)*#

%#



!+"!

""
', -"


".

#! "
'"
!)
#!
 #% #

/
! )"# 0%
'

!
#"(! 1 2"34! !#! %!% "##


"
!" "! 5

! #! /"%"#(" !!'/(6
!5 
!"
 %!% "" "!
#!
#!
!)7"

8 /5!#!"!-"


"5 !9

!' :!"!#; 2$34! 
!
#!#
!"#


"
!
#!
/
!; 234 #! 

)
'
!

'
!"( #
5 "

"

&"!


5#


"
!) 
!
$%!'!!%!% 5
#! ) '/(6
!!
!)7"

8 /; 2'34! 
!
#"(" !
%" )
'<"6("(
' #!); 234! 
!
#
! 6"

<"6(#

!
!)7"

8 /(####

'
#!

%
#

" "!
#!
#"
" 
!!% "!)( #(
6
; 234! 
!
#"
!"$ ="
" 
!! 6"#! $%
' #

'
/
'%" ="##


"
!)

%
'!'/(6
!!
!)7"

8 /; 2
34! 
!6$'
#6
!#" 
!!% "'#

5'!"
56"!
"#  "!#6"
#
(!"! ( #
!"#


"
!" 
!!% "

/"!

; 234! 
!"##

%" ()#
"" "!
#!
#%

0%) ( #
!

"
#!"$
#'"
'"6

" /
#%""!% "


$ '566%

!)5 !
!)7"

8 /; 2
34! " #% 
!
#!
" %!% "#


"
 !"

#
#!


!

!)>?@ '>ABCDEFGE5 EDAB;@ '>DACEHGA5EDDA;@ '>IBCEFGA5AIIBJ> KLL L
MNLOP
QROOL
OO
L 7 ( !
#6")$"'''! '!' 6!
#!
 #% #

/
! )
! $)

!
"!

! 
#!
 #% #66
!! $)#%$6
!!""
#!
'! 6

"!

"((
"!

$)!( ( !) 
 >
#!
 #% #66
!!#"'! 6

5

"

5!  
!! ( ( !)#%'$"''' '!'$"#'
!
!
"
#!'

78S-TUVWXVYTZ"
''%6
!'

"'(" !6
!(" =#"
'  "!

2[7.3HEF 6 0%
/"
!'%6
!> [!

#( (#'  6/"'%!##

!

!)6%#!'6
#! "!!##

!

!)"#
! ! #%!"
)

""! 
%

!$)!
  "

!!
 >?@ '>ABCDEFGE5 EDAB;@ '>DACEHGA5EDDA;@ '>IBCEFGA5AIIBJ> AD,EA,EH5AA1H\]S-"(! EF>B^_`:@.`-7.a:a.b]`@+
!!(#1,,>'(%$
#

>6,-],7"

8 /,cd,!6,7"

8 /EF,7"

8 /EFB^>!6 H,AD ATTACHMENT 2 PGCC 11-5-2025






 


!"#$
%&
&
' (&"# )*+ , $-
",
.%'*
/0#"1 ,
(
&
#$
& 1
2+ , $-#
-+
& "$(!"#&
#

2  &
& "$30#
(
#1
& "$3#
(&"#
& "$"##
")
& "$"!(&#+)&+#
(,
( -$
&
,
()+&+#
#
("+#)
(45( #
6+ #
,27(&
&

83&
%'*
(
2
+(
,!"#2+ , $-("$&
 (&"# )#
("+#)
( $1
$&"#7 $&
) &79(2+ , $-0
#: &0#")
,+#
4;<#,4=>?@ABCA3A@=>D<#,4@=?AEC=3A@@=D<#,4F>?ABC=3=FF>G4 HI JK






L
 M"& $- $& ()
0&
#(
2
)"$(&#+
,&"0#
1 $&"#, $
#7:
$&
$
$)

$,#
0 #"!
2+ , $-"$ &
 (&"# )#
("+#)
( $1
$&"#74;<#,4=>?@ABCA3A@=>D<#,4@=?AEC=3A@@=D<#,4F>?ABC=3=FF>G4 N 
O
PQR
L






P

L

O

L
K
 S""8 $-$"& )
"!

# $-.=@,
7(90+2 (
,
$,0"(&
,/3&
 (&"# )#
("+#)
()":: &&

:
7 -#
$&
 (&"# )0#
(
#1
& "$0
#: &!"#
$
T)
0& "$&"U"$ $-, (&# )&#
-+
& "$(8
$(+)
T)
0& "$ ($
)
((
#7&"0
#: &&
0#
(
#1
& "$"##
(&"#
& "$"!3"# :0#"1
:
$&(&"3
2+ , $- (&
,"$&
 (&"# )#
("+#)
( $1
$&"#74%+)
T)
0& "$(:
7 $)+,
32+&$"&2
 : &
,&"30
#V $-37
#,(3
-&
$,)"1
#
-
#
-+
& "$(4%+)
T)
0& "$((
$"& $)+,

00#"1
"!+(
($"&"&
#8 (

"8
, 27&
U"$ $-, (&# )&#
-+
& "$(4W$)"$( ,
# $-
$
00 )
& "$!"#(+)
T)
0& "$3&
 (&"# ) #
("+#)
()":: &&

(
2
, #
)&
,
$,-+ ,
,27&
 (&"!0+#0"(
(!"+$, $XYZ
[\]^_]`a`
$,27XYZ
[\]`b]`a`4;<#,4=>?@ABCA3A@=>D<#,4@=?AEC=3A@@=D<#,4F>?ABC=3=FF>G4 c d



 M"$
"!&
0#"1 ( "$("!& ()
0&
#(
2
)"$(&#+
,&"0#
1 $&)"$(&#+)& "$3
&
#
& "$3,
:" & "$ "##
")
& "$$
)
((
#7&")"##
)&&
+$(
!
"#,
$-
#"+()"$, & "$(3
(,
! $
, $
00 )
2 2+ , $-)",
(3"!
$7(&#+)&+#
3!

&+#
3"#0
#&&
#
"!38
$(+))"$, & "$
(2

$,
)
#
, +$(
!
"#,
$-
#"+(27&
)
!2+ , $- $(0
)&"#38
#
(+)+$(
!
"#,
$-
#"+()"$, & "$)
$$"& 2
#
)& !
,&#"+-&
+(
"!&
%&
&
' (&"# )*+ , $-
",
3
$,8
#
&
0#"0"(
,:

(+#
( 
1 2

$,
)
#
,$
)
((
#727(+)"!! )
&")"##
)&&
(
,)"$, & "$4'"8
1 #3"$7(+)8"#V
( ($
)
((
#7&")"##
)&&
+$(
!
"#,
$-
#"+()"$, & "$:
72
0
#!"#:
,
$,"$7
!&
# "2&
$ $-
$7#
6+ #
,2+ , $-0
#: &4W$&

1 $&
$7(&#+)&+#
"#"&
#!

&+#
 (,
:
-
,27! #
"# "&
#)

: &73&
)
!2+ , $- $(0
)&"#:
7(0
) !730# "#&"
$7#
6+ #
,#
1 827&
 (&"# ) #
("+#)
()":: &&

3"#&

00#"0#
&
#
1 8
+&"# &70+#(+
$&&"

0&
#[\]^`XYZ
.
"::+$ &7e
1 "0:
$&X
#: &f
1 85+&"# &
(
$,X#")
,+#
(/3&

:"+$&"!#
0 #$
)
((
#7 &")"##
)&
$+$(
!
)"$, & "$4%+),
&
#: $
& "$(
2
:
,
 $)"$!"#:
$)
8 &&
0#"1 ( "$( "!X+2 )f
("+#)
(
",
%
)& "$g`[h4;<#,4=>?@ABCA3A@=>D<#,4==?@@=Ci3A@==D<#,4@=?AE C=3A@@=D<#,4F>?ABC=3=FF>G4 jk 






=@lA=lAE3==mEn5Z

0&
#AB4>i'W%<fW
Xfo%ofp5W<M
&&0(mll8884)",
0+2 ( $-4)":l
5lX
) ! )Y#"1
lqrl&:lX
) ! )Y#"1
ABlX
) ! )Y#"1
AB>i4&: il=@ ATTACHMENT 2 PGCC 11-5-2025







  




 



 


 
    










 


 



 
   
 





  

 

 




 

  
 







 
 

 
!"#$%&  
 '
 ( )  


*



 




 + 


 

 







+ 



 

 *,   
 




 









 
 

 
 

-



 







 

-





-








 


./
 





 



 


& !"#$%#%!% 
 
 

 
-

 




0 


*

1
 


 
 


  


 

 


 
 



  
 



 


& !"#$2#%!3




 
 4
1
 5
64


(

 
 

 

(

 


7
  8 

9
) 
(  




 
)
 1:,/

 8 


7
 (

1


 
  




*;<*=>. ?@AB@
@?=>-<*==.??=BC
@?==-<*?=.@DB=
@??=-<*E>.@AB=
=EE>F* GHIJKILMLNOPQRSTSQUVI 




  


 


 
  

)








 




  
 





 

 
 


   
  



* W 

4

.














 

 
 
   
 


 








 



 
+ 
* 
X

=?

5




 



 

 



 





 
 
*



 



 
  

  = 
 





 


 



 
 


  
-
=?0@=0@D
==DY)& 
@A*>C714<(1 (W4W(Z)1<


00*



*0 )0
  0[\00
  @A0
  @A>C* >0=? ATTACHMENT 2 PGCC 11-5-2025
















 







 





 














 








 







 






! 


"
  




  #$ 



 










 

























 %













 











 












&

'

 
 







 ($ 








 







)




 





 





 













 
 




 























*






 


 





 

 



 







 +%














 














 









 


 






























 

 ! (%





! ,











&

'










  


 -



 


















&'./012342506
 

























 &


 










 










  -







 







 









&'./012342575




 









 





!

$8 89
 9#./


(:;<=)->?=/&?*)*?@-=>A

88




8/8&

'

8BC8
8&

'

(8&

'

(:;
 #8 $ ATTACHMENT 2 PGCC 11-5-2025








  













   





























 !  








"
  


 

 


#$%&'()'*+*





 







 












,-
./0 1
23


1./-
1.0
43.

11.-
5/0
23..55/6
789:;9<==>?@ABCDEAF9 G





"









# 


"

 









#$%&'()'*H*















G






 


"

 



#$%&'(*'*I*
,-
./01
23


1./-
..011.3J

1..-
1.0
43.

11.-
5/0
23..55/6
789:;9<<=KEFELMLLCEFD?FCFB?9 $









 

"
 









  


















!

















N 

 




 "






 
















 




  "




 


  





 









  

 



,-
./01
23


1./-
1.0
43.

11.-
5/0
23..55/6
789:;9<7=OPP?C@QCFRBC@@SMPQ9 TUVUWXUYZ[\]Y^_`abcd^,- ..011.3J

1..-
1.0
43.

11.-
5/0e13..55/-
5/0
23..55/6

789:;9<8=fFgAhB?L?FDCFRP?FC@DE?Q9 i










 






 




 


j





 




 
i

"
 










 



 








 




 

.1k
.k
4.. 4l!$ 
2 /Jmin-Gi
GonoGp!i-q
  kk"""

 





k!k




#krsk
k




#
2k




#
2/J

5k.1 ATTACHMENT 2 PGCC 11-5-2025





 






 












 


 




 









  
 


 
  


 








 





 



 


 





 
 





















 



















  

 



 

 






 

 



 

 


 















 








 



















   
  



 









  
 




 



 

 








  




 





 









 
  

  



 















 



 




 











 

 




!





 

 








 



 


 




 



 




 



 

  
 




 
 




 





 
 


 







 








 

"#

$%&'() *(
('$%+#

'$&(,*$
(''$+#

-%&()*$
$--%.

 /0

 12
 






#
 (,&'$%


! 

$%
('(,
3

4
 2
2
5

 

 





 /0

 12

6



 



 2
2
5

 








 



 

 


2
7 

4899:;<==>>>?@A9BCD:E@ADA@FGCHI?CGF= 2

 
 4J)$KLJ&)$'' 2







 MINIGEOPCQI
$'R($R(,
$$4,J12

()
%KST!
#UT2/UV!VUW
T#X



4RR

 


R2R/0

 RYZR
R/0

 ()R/0

 ()%K

 $'R$' ATTACHMENT 2 PGCC 11-5-2025

CITY OF PALO ALTO

CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting
Monday, April 22, 2024
Council Chambers & Hybrid
5:30 PM
Agenda Item

12. Addition of 16 properties to the City’s Historic Resources Inventory based on Owner interest. CEQA Status: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065, the Historic Designation of Properties is not a Project Subject to Environmental Review. Public Comments, Presentation
ATTACHMENT 3
PGCC 11-5-2025

City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: ACTION ITEMS
Lead Department: Planning and Development Services
Meeting Date: April 22, 2024
Report #:2402-2684
TITLE
Addition of 16 properties to the City’s Historic Resources Inventory based on Owner interest.

CEQA Status: Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065, the Historic Designation of Properties is not a Project Subject to Environmental Review.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Adopt the attached record of land use action (Attachment A) to add 16 properties meeting specified criteria to the City’s Historic Resources Inventory, based on expressed owner interest.

2. Direct staff to continue outreach to eligible property owners among the properties discussed in this report and to place future additions to the Historic Resources Inventory with expressed owner interest on the Consent Calendar.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In early 2022, the Council directed staff to review 167 properties throughout the City that were previously identified as being eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR); 1471 of those properties were found to still exist and retain their historic significance and integrity2. Staff discovered one of the 147 properties had been placed on the Historical Resources Inventory (HRI) by Council action in 2014.
1 Link to consultant’s list and HRB hearing dates of 147 properties in the 2023 survey the HRB reviewed:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/2/planning-amp-development-services/historicpreservation/historic-inventory/property-groupings-for-hrb-hearings-hyperlinked-rev12052023.pdf 2 Link to 2023 Reconnaissance Survey Report: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/f6745b3d-6148-4678-99b3- 3c7dd712743b/2023-Reconn-Survey-Report_2023-09-28_RevisedDraft.pdf PGCC 11-5-2025

Through an extensive public engagement process with outreach and hearings before the City’s Historic Resources Board (HRB), 83 of the 146 property owners objected to their property being listed on the inventory. Based in part on this feedback, the HRB decided not to recommend nomination over a property owner’s objection. Accordingly, the HRB recommended the City Council list 63 properties on the City historic resources inventory.

However, the HRB and staff have not heard from all the 63 property owners despite sending multiple certified mailed notices to these owners. Three of the properties are City-owned and discussed later in this report. Another eleven property owners have affirmatively requested their property be listed on the City’s historic resources inventory. The remaining property owners (and some are in trusts) may be unaware of the HRB recommendation, still considering options, or ambivalent to being listed.

The attached record of land use action advances 16 properties for local listing on the City’s HRI.

Staff further recommends that Council authorize continued engagement to owners of the remaining 47 properties. Properties for which the owners affirmatively express an interest in being listed will be transmitted to the Council on the Consent Calendar.

BACKGROUND
The City of Palo Alto’s historic preservation program began in 1979 with a historic resources survey3 that looked at pre-1940 buildings located primarily north of Oregon Expressway. The survey identified the major styles of early Palo Alto and resulted in the local Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) with a list of hundreds of individual properties. The survey identified potential historic districts such as Professorville and Ramona Street Architectural District.

Between 1997 and 2001 another survey was prepared that built upon the 1979 survey and covered all properties within the city limits that were built prior to 1947. The survey addressed properties in relation to the national criteria for listing. Identified properties4 were placed in two categories: 1) those that appear National Register of Historic Places It is these 165 properties that are the subject of this report and associated with Council’s direction on March 21, 2022 to advance Comprehensive Plan Program L-7.1.1, which in summary, encourages the City to update and maintain its local HRI.
3 1979 survey report https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-developmentservices/historic-preservation/1979-inventory-and-report.pdf 4 Link to list of properties identified in the 1997-2001 historic survey:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/historicresources-board/2022/2001-survey-list-of-291-properties-evaluated-for-nrhp-resulting-in-165-nrhp-eligibleproperties.pdf PGCC 11-5-2025

DISCUSSION
Staff engaged a historic consultant and worked with the HRB to evaluate the 165 properties in accordance with state and federal criteria and local codes. Staff, with the HRB, supported an extensive outreach effort to notify all properties that continued to meet eligibility criteria.

Similar to an attempt at the turn of the century to list historic resources on the City’s inventory, this effort too was met with opposition from property owners opposed to listing. Over 55% of the eligible property owners expressed their objection citing concerns over impacts to property values, ability to make changes to their property or structures, and a lack of incentives, among other concerns.

While the Council has the authority to list all eligible properties on the local registry, staff and the HRB do not recommend advancing any properties over a property owner’s objection.

Moreover, staff is concerned that the City has not heard from most of the other property owners remaining on the list. This may be because property owners are unaware of the potential for nomination despite extensive outreach and certified mailing, or, less likely, because owners are ambivalent to nomination. Accordingly, staff has drafted a record of land use action that forwards properties for listing from owners that have affirmatively expressed interest in being listed on the inventory. This differs from the HRB’s recommendation, which supported listing all the remaining 63 properties that did not object to listing.

Staff seeks Council’s support to continue outreach to the remaining 47 properties in an effort to determine their affirmative interest in nomination. If more property owners elect to proceed, staff would return to the Council in the next few months with a new record of land use action and present that to the Council on the Consent Calendar.

Properties Proposed for Nomination
The following is a summary of the properties proposed for nomination, the address, the local criterion met for designation, and a brief description supporting the recommendation:

1. 731 Emerson Street5 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource, under local Criterion 2 (The structure or is particularly representative of an architectural style or way of life important to the city, state, or nation), and Criterion 5 (The architect or building was important). Built in 1896, it is significant as an early and notable example of the Queen Anne style that was built by important local builder H.L. Upham. 5 Link to nomination form and evaluation for 731 Emerson:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-development-services/historicpreservation/historic-inventory/emersonst_731.pdf PGCC 11-5-2025

2. 243-245 Webster Street6 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource, under local Criterion 2. Built in 1904, it is significant as a property that embodies the distinct characteristics of the Eastern Shingle style.

3. 330 Cowper Street7 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource, under local Criterion 1 (The structure or site is identified with the lives of historic people or with important events in the city, state or nation). Built in 1904, with a period of significance 1930- 1948, it is significant as a residence lived in by a notable Black family who were both active in the Black community of Palo Alto during a period of significant growth; and were rare Black residents in the city at a time when de jure and de facto segregation limited the ability of Blacks to reside within Palo Alto. 330 Cowper Street was constructed prior to the adoption of restrictive covenants (based on race and religion) and was located outside of the previously established small zone along Fife Avenue where Black families were allowed to rent property.

4. 541 E Crescent Drive8 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource, under local Criteria 2 and 5, and Criterion 6 (The structure or site contains elements demonstrating outstanding attention to architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship.) Built in 1928, it is a significant example of a Tudor Revival style building and a notable example of the work of significant local architect Charles K. Sumner. It is also an exemplar of craftsmanship by important local builder H.H. Dabinett. The building appears to retain a high level of integrity.

5. 421 California Avenue9 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource, under local Criteria 2 and 5. Built in 1929, it is significant as a notable example of a commercial building in the Spanish Colonial Revival style, and a rare example of the style in brick designed by prolific Palo Alto architect Birge Clark. Despite alterations to the facade including removal of 6 Link to nomination form and evaluation for 243-245 Webster:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-development-services/historicpreservation/historic-inventory/websterstreet_243.pdf 7 Link to nomination form and evaluation for 330 Cowper:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-development-services/historicpreservation/historic-inventory/cowperstreet_330.pdf 8 Link to nomination form and evaluation for 541 E Crescent:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-development-services/historicpreservation/historic-inventory/ecrescentdr_541.pdf 9 Link to nomination form and evaluation for 421 California:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-development-services/historicpreservation/historic-inventory/californiaave_421.pdf PGCC 11-5-2025

original wrought iron features, the building retains significance as a unique work by important local architect Birge Clark.

6. 1401 Edgewood Drive10 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource, under local Criteria 1, 2, and 5. Built in 1938 with a period of significance 1938-1960, it is significant for both its association with local Palo Alto resident Merritt C. Speidel and for its Colonial Revival design by David Clark and Walter Stromquist. The building was constructed for Speidel, who owned and operated a Palo Alto-based chain of eight newspapers that were published across the nation. Speidel lived with his family at the subject building until his death in 1960. Speidel’s personal residence is associated with his professional accomplishments as no other known location reflects that history. The building is a rare Colonial Revival design to come out of the office of prolific local architect Birge Clark, and was designed by his successors, David Clark and Walter Stromquist.

7. 1474 Edgewood Drive11 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource, under local Criteria 2 and 5. Built in 1935, 1474 Edgewood Drive is significant for its Spanish Colonial Revival style as designed by Birge Clark, who was one of Palo Alto’s most significant and prolific local architects.

8. 2340 Tasso Street12 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource, under local Criteria 2 and 5. Built in 1933, it is significant as a property that embodies the distinct characteristics of the French Norman and Storybook subtypes of the Period Revival style and is one of the earliest known Palo Alto residences designed by the prominent local buildercontractor William F. Klay.

9. 311 El Carmelo Avenue13 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource, under local Criteria 2. Built in 1894, it is significant as a good and rare example of an 10 Link to nomination form and evaluation for 1401 Edgewood:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-development-services/historicpreservation/historic-inventory/edgewooddrive_1401.pdf 11 Link to nomination form and evaluation for 1474 Edgewood:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-development-services/historicpreservation/historic-inventory/edgewooddrive_1474.pdf 12 Link to nomination form and evaluation for 2430 Tasso:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-development-services/historicpreservation/historic-inventory/tassostreet_2340.pdf 13 Link to nomination form and evaluation for 311 El Carmelo Ave:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-development-services/historicpreservation/historic-inventory/elcarmeloavenue_311.pdf PGCC 11-5-2025

early house type that was likely adapted from pattern book designs to incorporate two separate entrances, and that demonstrates characteristics of the Queen Anne style.

10. 541 Bryant Street14 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource, under local Criteria 2, 5, and 6. Built in 1946, it is significant as an early example of a professional office building in downtown Palo Alto at a time when such buildings were rare, and as an early and successful example of the courtyard office building in Palo Alto that demonstrates Midcentury Modern design. In addition, the building is a good example in the career of Leslie I. Nichols, demonstrating his transition to Modern styles in the post-World War II period.

11. 437 Kipling Street15 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource, under local Criteria 1, 2 and 4 (The structure or site is connected with a business or use which was once common but is now rare). Built in 1902 with a period of significance 1902-1947, it is significant for its use as a boarding house with a converted dress shop on the first floor. It is also a unique building type that combines stylistic elements of Queen Anne, Foursquare, and Colonial Revival.

12. 1275 Dana Avenue16 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 1 resource, under local Criteria 5 and 6. Built in 1935 with a period of significance 1935-1936, it is significant for its unique architectural design, high integrity and retention of character, and as the work of important local architects and builders W.F. Klay and H.H. Dabinett. It is also significant as the residence of San Francisco architect Charles H. Sawyer, who designed an addition in 1936 and occupied the residence through 1950.

13. 832 Kipling Street17 is recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource under local Criterion 2. Built in 1893, it is significant as a distinctive and stately example of the Queen Anne style.
14 Link to nomination form and evaluation: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-ampdevelopment-services/historic-preservation/historic-inventory/bryantstreet_541.pdf 15 Link to nomination form and evaluation https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-ampdevelopment-services/historic-preservation/historic-inventory/kiplingst_437.pdf 16 Link to nomination memo and evaluation for 1275 Dana:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-development-services/historicpreservation/historic-inventory/danaave_1275.pdf 17 Link to nomination memo and evaluation for 832 Kipling:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-development-services/historicpreservation/historic-inventory/kiplingst_832.pdf PGCC 11-5-2025

The following City properties were reviewed by staff from Administrative Services, Community Services, and Utilities prior to the HRB nominations hearings; staff did not identify any impediments to City operations or uses:

1. NW of Palo Alto Avenue & Hale Street (Cistern and Pump House): recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 2 resource18 under local Criteria 1 and 2. Built in 1924, it is an important part of the Palo Alto municipal water system that was developed from wells beginning in 1887. The subject building is significant as one of only two remaining early Palo Alto decorated utility structures and as an important part of the Palo Alto municipal water system that was developed from well sources beginning in 1887. The Cistern and Pump House also represents an important Northern California building typology that emerged from the City Beautiful Movement. It was designed to express pride in civic and public infrastructure.

2. 201 Alma Street (the water tower property): recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 1 resource19 under local Criterion 1, Criterion 4 (The structure or site is connected with a business or use which was once common but is now rare) and Criterion 5. Built in 1910 with a period of significance 1910-1962, it is significant as a distinctive example of a decorated municipal building that embodies the design principles of the City Beautiful movement. It is an early example of reinforced concrete construction and is significant for its design by important local builder Maurice Couchot. It also is associated with early municipal water retention planning in Palo Alto.

When Council recently reviewed a park dedication ordinance for this site, Council recommended staff endeavor to place the site on the National Register of Historic Places; staff estimates the cost for consultant assistance on the task would be approximately $16,000. Additionally, staff is targeting the May 9 HRB meeting to enable a discussion with CSD staff about naming the park after an important person associated with Palo Alto Utilities, Fred Eyerly.

3. 2601 East Bayshore Road (The Federal Telegraph Company – Marsh Station): recommended for placement on the HRI as a Category 1 resource20, under local Criteria 1, 4, and 5. Built in 1921 and with a period of significance 1921 - 1977, the former Federal Telegraph Company – Marsh Station is significant for its remarkable contributions to the field of radio communications that impacted the field nationally and were significant to the American war 18 Link to HRE for pump and cistern https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-ampdevelopment-services/historic-preservation/historic-inventory/cistern-and-pump-house.pdf 19 Link to HRE for Water Tower site https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-ampdevelopment-services/historic-preservation/historic-inventory/almast_201.pdf 20 Link to HRE for ITT site: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/planning-amp-developmentservices/historic-preservation/historic-inventory/EastBayshoreRoad_2601.pdf PGCC 11-5-2025

effort in World War II. The company, which was originally founded in 1909 in Palo Alto as the Poulsen Wireless Telephone & Telegraph Company, was a pioneer in continuous wave transmission and long-distance transmission. Marsh Station was the hub of all West Coast wired communication (telegraph and telephone, and later ship-to-shore radio transmission) when it was completed in 1921, and led the world in how many channels of communication could be used simultaneously. While alterations have been made to the property with the removal of several structures, the site’s significant association with national communication history remain legible through the presence of its main surviving building within the vast open marshland and the various concrete anchorage blocks that remain scattered throughout the site and once supported a 626-foot-tall radio tower (present from 1921-1960).

The HRB discussed this nomination on January 25, 2024. The question is whether listing on the local inventory helps create opportunities for its reuse, so that if it is demolished in the future there is some plan to do interpretive work preserving and highlighting the history conveyed on the site so that the public could understand the significance of the site.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Nominating properties for listing on a historic inventory can be controversial for any jurisdiction. While historic resources do benefit from certain zoning and building code incentives, it may not be as meaningful for homeowners who have already improved or simply plan to maintain their homes.21
Communities that have an incentive program that reduces property taxes in exchange for the preservation and maintenance of designated historic resources, such as a Mills Act program, are likely to see more voluntary requests for listing. Reduced property taxes, however, in places like Palo Alto with high property values, may also impact revenue to the Palo Alto Unified School District. The HRB has long championed a Mills Act program for Palo Alto. The City has only one Mills Act contract but has not expanded this program. Expansion would require direction from the Council and would need to be balanced to other Council and department priority objectives.

Communities that preserve historic resources create a sense of place and identity and can foster community pride as it celebrates its connection to the past. Robust preservation efforts can support economic development and support environmental sustainability through rehabilitation and reduced waste from construction.
21 Preservation incentives webpage: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning-DevelopmentServices/Historic-Preservation/Preservation-Incentives PGCC 11-5-2025

FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
There is no significant fiscal or resource impact associated with the recommendation in this report; all expenses have been previously accounted for in the department budget.

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
The City maintained a project website; provided certified mailing to property owners with eligible historic resources; held a community meeting in April and again in October 2023 followed by several evening public hearings before the HRB. Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Post on April 12, 2024, at least ten days in advance of the meeting.

NEXT STEPS
Based on the recommendation in this report, staff would continue to engage property owners whose properties are eligible for listing but who have not affirmatively expressed an interest in listing for the next two months. Afterwards, if there are any additional properties identified for listing, staff would advance that to the Council on the consent calendar.

For properties that are listed as part of the Council’s action, they would have six months to reconsider and request their property not be listed on the inventory. After that time period, properties would be included in the inventory.

As an alternative to the recommendation in this report, the Council could decide to direct staff to return with a record of land use action to nominate all 63 properties recommended by the HRB.

If so directed, staff recommends rescheduling the item for a future public hearing.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Historic designation of properties is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines per Section 21065. Court cases have established that historic resources do not need to be on a register to be protected under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) when a discretionary permit or approval is required. CEQA may, therefore, require reviewing a project for potential historic status even if it is not on the local historic inventory. This means that the City’s Historic Ordinance, local inventory, and procedures alone will not make clear the requirements that a property may be subject to, especially pursuant to CEQA.

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Record of Land Use Action with Exhibit for April 22 2024 Inventory Update Attachment B: List of 147 Properties Eligible for HRI in the 2023 Survey Report (one property is already listed on the local HRI)
Attachment C: List of 14 Properties Removed from Eligibility in Survey Report APPROVED BY: Jonathan Lait, Planning and Development Services Director PGCC 11-5-2025

Agenda No. 12 B

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Jon Biggs, Community Development Director
MEETING DATE: November 05, 2025
SUBJECT: Combining the Architectural Review Board and Historic Resources Committee.

CEQA: Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)

RECOMMENDATION
Review and provide direction to City Manager on whether to return with appropriate ordinance amendments combining the Architectural Review Board and Historic Resources Commission and start the public review process leading to a recommendation by the Planning Commission and consideration by the City Council.

DISCUSSION
At its meeting of August 20, 2025, the City Council indicated its support for consolidating the Architectural Review Board (ARB) and the Historic Resources Committee (HRC) into one Commission, referred to in the agenda report as the Architectural and Historic Resource Commission (AHRC). However, before moving forward with drafting the ordinances and starting the hearing process that would affect this, the City Council asked staff to return at a future meeting so the membership of the new commission and its duties could be confirmed.

The intent of this agenda item is to obtain City Council confirmation that staff has correctly captured the membership criteria for the AHRC and inform the City Council of the type of projects and applications this commission will be considering.

COMMISSION MEMBERSHIP
As noted at August 20, 2025 City Council meeting, staff’s concept for the make-up of the Commission included membership with a blend of backgrounds in the construction and design of buildings along with historic preservation experience.

Following is staff’s recommendation of the membership criteria for the AHRC.

The Commission shall be made up of seven voting members who are residents of Pacific Grove, appointed by the Mayor, and confirmed by the City Council.

Not less than two shall have experience in the construction trades such as a contractor, carpenter, or construction estimator. (2)
Not less than two shall have experience in the building design trades such as an architect, landscape architect, designer, or structural engineer. (2) One member shall be nominated by the Pacific Grove Heritage Society from its membership, who shall be appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council. In instances where the PGCC 11-5-2025

Pacific Grove Heritage Society is unable to appoint one of its members, the Mayor shall have the discretion to appoint a person with demonstrated historic preservation experience or if such a person is not available, another resident of the city who has demonstrated an interest for serving on the Commission. (1)
Two residents of Pacific Grove that have demonstrated an interest in serving on the Commission. (2)

DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION
The Architectural and Historic Resource Commission (AHRC) would be responsible for doing the work currently performed by the ARB and HRC, which covers architectural design and the aesthetics of new structures and additions or alterations to existing structures along with the preservation of historic structures and the evaluation of projects involving a historic structure for compliance with historic preservation guidelines, policies, and regulations.

The range of applications and projects the AHRC will consider include:

Architectural permits for new construction and major alterations to all structures, including those listed on the historic resource inventory (HRI).

Historic determinations (additions to and deletions from HRI).

Historic preservation permits (exceptions to site development standards for properties on the HRI).

Historic demolition permits.

Historic relocation permits.

Initial historic screenings.

Sign permits not subject to staff approval.

OPTIONS

1. Review and provide feedback and direction to staff.

Decline to move forward with the ordinance amendment process that will combine the ARB and HRC.

2. FINANCIAL IMPACT:

It is not anticipated that the review of the AHRC membership and duties will result in a significant financial impact.

FOCUSED PRIORITY AREA: Community Development
PGCC 11-5-2025