Agenda packet — Pacific Grove City Council, May 20, 2026 (part 3 of 3)

Application Information
Ownership Listed in Initial Application
Submission
QUESTION 2
As of the date of this affidavit, the
following persons are or will be
participating in the direction,
control, or management of
Applicant if granted a storefront
retail cannabis license from the City
of Pacific Grove:

QUESTION 3
For ANY person listed in the "Owner Information" section of the Application, please confirm whether they currently have, or in the past have had, any family, personal, or business relationship with ANY person listed in the "Owner Information" section of any pending storefront retail cannabis license application(s) with the City of Pacific Grove (other than Applicant's own Application):

QUESTION 4
For ANY person listed in the "Owner Information" section of the Application, please confirm whether they currently share, or in the past have shared, a place of business with ANY person listed in the "Owner Information" section of any pending storefront retail cannabis license application(s) with the City of Pacific Grove (other than Applicant's own Application):

QUESTION 5
As of the date of this Affidavit, the following persons participated in the drafting of, provided input on the content of, or otherwise assisted in the submission of this Applicant's retail cannabis license application, or this Affidavit:

QUESTION 6
The agent for service of
process for the
Applicant/entity is:

QUESTION 7
Please list all employment positions (e.g., manager, employee) that will be filled, and the names of those who will fill those positions. If unknown who will fill those positions at this time, please indicate as much.

QUESTION 8
Is there any other information you would like to
share with the City regarding the ownership
structure of the Applicant?
Affidavit Information
Applicant
Cannabis Ownership & Control Analysis
Robbinhood, LLC Robbin Yousif (100% ownership) Robbin Yousif Dillon Marogy: Rawy Yousif; Norman Yousif; Darline
Yousif: Sean Maddocks; Adam Mernit. In
accordance with the definition of Owner outlined in
PGMC §11.100.030 (“Definitions") and BPC
§26001(av), none of the listed individuals has
Ownership of Applicant and is not currently or in the
future contemplated to participate in the direction,
control, or management of Applicant if Applicant is
granted a storefront retail cannabis license from the
City of Pacific Grove.

Dillon Marogy; Rawy Yousif; Norman Yousif;
Darline Yousif. In accordance with the
definition of Owner outlined in PGMC
§11.100.030 (“Definitions") and BPC §26001(av),
none of the listed individuals has Ownership of
Applicant and is not currently or in the future
contemplated to participate in the direction,
control, or management of Applicant if
Applicant is granted a storefront retail
cannabis license from the City of Pacific
Grove.

Sean Maddocks; Adam Mernit; Jessica Morley.

In accordance with the definition of Owner outlined in PGMC §11.100.030 and BPC §26001(av), none of the individuals who participated in the drafting of Applicant's retail cannabis business license application has Ownership of Applicant and is not currently or in the future contemplated to participate in the direction, control, or management of Applicant if Applicant is granted a storefront retail cannabis license from the City of Pacific Grove.

Attorney Sean
Maddocks
Applicant does not currently know what individuals will fill employment positions for Applicant.

Applicant has no further information
that it would like to share with the City
regarding Applicant's Ownership
structure.

MJRE, LLC Matthew Jones (100% ownership) Matthew Jones
Adam Mernit, Norman Yousif, Darline Yousif, Sean
Maddocks. No one listed in this response is now or is
contemplated to be participating in the direction,
control, or management of Applicant if Applicant is
granted a storefront retail cannabis license from the
City of Pacific Grove and no one listed qualifies as
an owner of Applicant pursuant to PGMC
§11.100.300 ("Definitions") and BPC §26001(av).

No person listed in the Owner Information
section of the Application currently shares, or
has shared in the past, a place of business with
ANY person listed in the “Owner Information"
section of any pending storefront retail
cannabis license application(s) with the City of
Pacific Grove.

Adam Mernit, Jessica Morley, Sean Maddocks. Adam Mernit, Sean Maddocks and Jessica Morley served solely as drafters for this retail cannabis business license application. Per PGMC §11.100.030 and BPC §26001(av), these individuals are not owners of, and hold no ownership interest in, the Applicant. Furthermore, there are no plans for them to participate in the direction, management or control of the business should the City of Pacific Grove grant the license.

Attorney Sean
Maddocks It is not currently known who will fill employment positions for Applicant.

There is no further information Applicant
would like to share with the City
regarding the ownership structure of the
Applicant.

ADM Biz Dev, LLC Adam Mernit (100% ownership) Adam Mernit Sean Maddocks, Norman Yousif, Darline Yousif, Rawy
Yousif, Dillon Marogy: Robin Yousif, Matthew Jones.

No one listed in this response is now or is
contemplated to be participating in the direction,
control, or management of Applicant if Applicant is
granted a storefront retail cannabis license from the
City of Pacific Grove and no one listed qualifies as
an owner of Applicant pursuant to PGMC
§11.100.300 ("Definitions") and BPC §26001(av).

Sean Maddocks; Jessica Morley; Adam Mernit; Sean Maddocks and Jessica Morley served solely as drafters for this retail cannabis business license application. Per PGMC §11.100.030 and BPC §26001(av), these individuals are not owners of, and hold no ownership interest in, the Applicant. Furthermore, there are no plans for them to participate in the direction,
management or control of the business should the City of Pacific Grove grant the license.

Attorney Sean
Maddocks It is not currently know who will fill employment positions.

There is no further information Applicant
would like to share with the City
regarding the ownership structure of the
Applicant.

Marogy RE Dillon Marogy (100% ownership) Dillon Marogy
Rawry Yousif; Robin Yousif; Darline Yousif. Norman
Yousif; Sean Maddocks; Adam Mernit. No individuals
mentioned in this response currently hold, or are
intended to hold, any positions of management,
direction, or control over the Applicant. Furthermore,
none of the listed parties meet the criteria for 'owner' as defined by PGMC §11.100.030 and BPC
§26001(av) in the event a storefront retail cannabis
license is granted by the City of Pacific Grove.

Rawy Yousif; Robbin Yousif; Darline Yousif;
Norman Yousif. No individuals mentioned in
this response currently hold. or are intended to
hold, any positions of management, direction,
or control over the Applicant. Furthermore,
none of the listed parties meet the criteria for
'owner' as defined by PGMC §11.100.030 and
BPC §26001(av) in the event a storefront retail
cannabis license is granted by the City of
Pacific Grove
Sean Maddocks; Adam Mernit; Jessica Morley. The drafting of the Applicant's license does not grant the drafter any authority to direct, manage, or control the Applicant or its potential Storefront Retail Cannabis Business. Furthermore providing drafting services does not constitute an ownership interest under PGMC
§11.100.030 or BPC §26001(av).

Attorney Sean
Maddocks
Applicant has not identified any individuals to fill employment positions at this time.

Applicant has no other information to
share with the City regarding its
Ownership structure.
*Nug Pacific Grove LLC's affidavit was submitted after the deadline.

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 333 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 334 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 335 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 336 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 337 ends

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE

AFFIDAVIT OF APPLICANT FOR STOREFRONT RETAIL CANNABIS LICENSE [Please attach sheets as necessary.]
I, _________________________________, verify the following facts are true and correct:

1. I am the authorized representative of ___________________________ (“Applicant”). Applicant has submitted a storefront retail cannabis license application (“Application”) to the City of Pacific Grove.

2. As of the date of this Affidavit, the following persons are or will be participating in the direction, control, or management of Applicant if granted a storefront retail cannabis license from the City of Pacific Grove:
____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

3. For ANY person listed in the “Owner Information” section of the Application, please confirm whether they currently have, or in the past have had, any family, personal, or business relationship with ANY person listed in the “Owner Information” section of any pending storefront retail cannabis license application(s) with the City of Pacific Grove (other than Applicant’s own Application):
____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

4. For ANY person listed in the “Owner Information” section of the Application, please confirm whether they currently share, or in the past have shared, a place of business with ANY person listed in the “Owner Information” section of any pending storefront retail cannabis license application(s) with the City of Pacific Grove (other than Applicant’s own Application):
____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

Page 338 ends

4930-8408-4129, v. 5
2 6. The agent for service of process for the Applicant/entity is:
______________________________________________________________________________

7. Please list all employment positions (e.g., manager, employee) that will be filled, and the names of those who will fill those positions. If unknown who will fill those positions at this time, please indicate as much.
____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

8. Is there any other information you would like to share with the City regarding the ownership structure of the Applicant?
____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ I hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, on behalf of myself and all owners, managers, and supervisors of Applicant that the statements and information furnished in this Affidavit are true and accurate.

I understand that a misrepresentation of fact may be cause for rejection of my underlying application.

In addition, I understand that the filing of this Affidavit grants the City of Pacific Grove permission to reproduce submitted materials for distribution to staff, Commissions, Boards and City Council Members, and other Agencies to process it.

Under penalty of perjury, I hereby declare that the information contained herein and submitted with this Affidavit is true, complete, and accurate. I understand that a misrepresentation on the facts is cause for rejection of my underlying application.

Executed on this ____ day of ___________, 2026, at_______________________________.

By: ________________________________
Name: ____________________________
Title/Capacity: ____________________
On behalf of: _______________________
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 339 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 340 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 341 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 342 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 343 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 344 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 345 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 346 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 347 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 348 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 349 ends

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE

AFFIDAVIT OF APPLICANT FOR STOREFRONT RETAIL CANNABIS LICENSE [Please attach sheets as necessary.]
I, _________________________________, verify the following facts are true and correct:

5. As of the date of this Affidavit, the following persons participated in the drafting of, provided input on the content of, or otherwise assisted in the submission of this Applicant’s retail cannabis license application, or this Affidavit:
____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Lauren Carpenter
Lauren Carpenter, Dustin Moore
Pacific Grove Responsible
and Compliant Retail LLC
Lauren Carpenter - Owner/CEO, Dustin Moore - Owner/CCO, Katie Whinnery - VP of Licensing and Business Administration, Jamie Schniedwind - Director of Finance, Matthew Carroll - Security Consultant, Kirk Miller - Architect, Devon Wardlow, VP of Public Affairs Applicant does not currently share, and has not previously shared, a place of business with any of the persons listed in the "Owner Information" sections of the other pending applications. relationships with any of the persons listed in the "Owner Information" sections of the other pending applications.

Dustin Moore knows Sean Maddocks, John Oram, and Norman Yousif in their capacity as competing business as competing business owners in the cannabis industry. Applicant has no other personal, family, or business owners in the cannabis industry. Lauren Carpenter knows Sean Maddocks and Norman Yousif in their capacity , Eric Lightman - Legal Counsel
Doc ID: 9a64e4fe519e9deeeb4f15ccb8e344a2e6a79d24
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 350 ends

4930-8408-4129, v. 5
2 6. The agent for service of process for the Applicant/entity is:
______________________________________________________________________________

I understand that a misrepresentation of fact may be cause for rejection of my underlying application.

Executed on this ____ day of ___________, 2026, at_______________________________.

By: ________________________________
Name: ____________________________
Title/Capacity: ____________________
On behalf of: _______________________
Registered Agents Inc.

Lauren Carpenter - Officer/Owner, Dustin Moore - Officer/Owner, General Manager - unknown, Assistant General Manager - unknown, Sales Manager - unknown, Inventory Manager - unknown, 3 Lead Guides - unknown, 7 Guides - unknown
No.

Lauren Carpenter
Owner
Pacific Grove Responsible
and Compliant Retail LLC
29th April Sacramento
Doc ID: 9a64e4fe519e9deeeb4f15ccb8e344a2e6a79d24
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 351 ends

Revised Pacific Grove Affidavit
Applicant_Affidav...nse_-_revised.pdf
9a64e4fe519e9deeeb4f15ccb8e344a2e6a79d24

MM / DD / YYYY
Signed
04 / 29 / 2026
23:58:28 UTC
Sent for signature to Lauren Carpenter ([email protected]) from [email protected]
IP: 64.98.217.106
04 / 30 / 2026
00:29:48 UTC
A new document has been created based off of an existing document with ID 9a64e4fe519e9deeeb4f15ccb8e344a2e6a79d24 IP: 64.98.217.106
04 / 30 / 2026
00:29:48 UTC
Edited by Team Embarc ([email protected])
IP: 64.98.217.106
04 / 30 / 2026
00:29:48 UTC
Signature request resent by Team Embarc ([email protected]) IP: 64.98.217.106
04 / 30 / 2026
00:33:15 UTC
Viewed by Lauren Carpenter ([email protected])
IP: 64.57.98.125
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 352 ends

04 / 30 / 2026
00:45:36 UTC
A new document has been created based off of an existing document with ID 9a64e4fe519e9deeeb4f15ccb8e344a2e6a79d24 IP: 64.98.217.106
04 / 30 / 2026
00:45:36 UTC
Edited by Team Embarc ([email protected])
IP: 64.98.217.106
04 / 30 / 2026
00:45:36 UTC
Signature request resent by Team Embarc ([email protected]) IP: 64.98.217.106
05 / 04 / 2026
16:39:09 UTC
Signed by Lauren Carpenter ([email protected])
IP: 64.57.98.125
05 / 04 / 2026 The document has been completed.
16:39:09 UTC
Revised Pacific Grove Affidavit
Applicant_Affidav...nse_-_revised.pdf
9a64e4fe519e9deeeb4f15ccb8e344a2e6a79d24

MM / DD / YYYY
Signed
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 353 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 354 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 355 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 356 ends

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 357 ends

Agenda No. 12 C

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Joyce Halabi, Deputy City Manager
MEETING DATE: May 20, 2026
SUBJECT: Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy
CEQA: {CEQA}

RECOMMENDATION

1. Adopt a Resolution approving the Artificial Intelligence Policy, Council Policy 200-7

2. Alternatively, take other action related to this item.

DISCUSSION
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a rapidly changing landscape. Adopting an AI policy is essential in ensuring the City’s use of AI systems benefits the community, while safeguarding against potential harm.

Government agencies across the country are facing similar challenges, balancing limited resources with the demand for City services. AI has the potential to improve services and expand capacity in a resource constrained environment. Countless government agencies have adopted AI tools to enhance an array of services for their residents, while safeguarding against potential harm.

Adoption of this policy will establish the governance framework for the City of Pacific Grove to begin exploring AI tools for enhanced service delivery.

WHAT IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE?
Artificial Intelligence is not new; AI is used in common, everyday tools/applications, including google/apple maps, digital assistants like Siri/Alexa, or streaming services (like Netflix, Spotify).

Although in existence for some time, recent AI advancements have made AI tools more accessible.

AI serves as an umbrella term and encompasses an array of applications, including generative AI, predictive AI, and more; the common thread is that these applications learn from data.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is formally defined by the United States Code 15 U.S.C. 9401(3) as a machine-based system that can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, make predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing real or virtual environments. AI systems use machine- and human-based inputs to perceive real and virtual environments; abstract such perceptions into models through analysis in an automated manner; and use model inference to formulate options for information or action.

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 358 ends

or action.

Government agencies have begun harnessing AI tools for public benefit, while mitigating potential risk, in a myriad of ways. Examples include, but are not limited to, live meeting transcription, translation services, assistance with permit review, website chatbot assistants that summarize publicly available City data and answer constituent questions, traffic congestion analysis, and infrastructure analysis to efficiently prioritize repair and maintenance.

AI POLICY
This proposed policy establishes a flexible governance framework for Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems used by, or on behalf of, the City. The policy enables the City to use AI systems for the benefit of the community while safeguarding against potential harm. Key elements include establishing guiding principles, defining roles and responsibilities, and defining prohibited uses.

The Guiding Principles for responsible AI use, establish values with regards to how AI systems are purchased, configured, operated or maintained. The Guiding Principles are as follows:

Human-Centered Design: AI Systems are developed and deployed with a human centered approach that evaluates AI powered services for their impact on the public and the community.

1. Security & Safety: AI systems maintain confidentiality, integrity, and availability through safeguards that prevent unauthorized access and use. Implementation of AI systems is reliable and safe, and minimizes risks to individuals, society, and the environment.

2. Privacy: Privacy is preserved in all AI systems by safeguarding personally identifiable information (PII) sensitive data from unauthorized access, disclosure, and manipulation.

3. Transparency: The purpose and use of AI systems is proactively communicated and disclosed to the public on the City’s website. An AI system, its data sources, operational model, and its use are understandable and documented. Disclosure is required when City data is used in external AI tools.

4. Equity: AI systems support equitable outcomes for everyone. Bias in AI systems is effectively managed with the intention of reducing harm for anyone impacted by its use.

5. Accountability & Compliance: Roles and responsibilities govern the deployment and maintenance of AI systems, and human oversight ensures adherence to relevant laws and regulations.

6. Effectiveness: AI systems are reliable, meet their objectives, and deliver precise and dependable outcomes for the utility and contexts in which they are deployed.

7. Workforce Empowerment: Staff are empowered to use AI in their roles through education, training, and collaborations that promote participation and opportunity.

8. These guiding principles help safeguard against potential risks of AI tools by establishing core principles by which all AI usage will adhere to.

Additionally, proposed use of AI tools will undergo review to assess any potential risk, to obtain necessary technical documentation about the AI system, and to ensure compliance with data standards and best practices as established in the Policy.

This policy establishes the general governance framework for AI use. Additional internal AI guidelines, procedures, and training materials will be created by the IT team to supplement this policy, providing staff more detailed guidance, use cases, and detailed best practices, and will be updated as needed to reflect technological advancements, operational needs, and evolving industry standards. All additional materials will be aligned with this policy.

Policy Development
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 359 ends

The template used as the basis for the policy was developed by the GovAI Coalition and recommended for use by the City’s insurer, California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA). The GovAI Coalition is composed of government members from local, state, and federal agencies united to promote responsible and purposeful AI in the public sector. The coalition is led by the City of San Jose’s Information Technology Department.

The policy brought forward has been reviewed by the City Attorney’s Office.

OPTIONS

1. Adopt the Policy

2. Do not adopt the Policy
FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact associated with adopting this policy.

FOCUSED PRIORITY AREA: Not Applicable.

Attachments
Resolution Authorizing a City Council Policy Regarding Artificial Intelligence Artificial Intelligence Policy
AI Fact Sheet Example
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 360 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 26-xxx

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE CITY COUNCIL

ESTABLISHING AN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) POLICY

FINDINGS

1. AI has the potential to improve City services and expand capacity in a resource constrained environment.

2. Countless government agencies have adopted AI tools to enhance an array of services for their residents, while safeguarding against potential harm; and,

3. An AI Policy establishes a governance framework for the City to harness AI tools for enhanced service delivery.

4. Adopting an AI Policy is essential in ensuring the City’s use of AI systems benefits the community, while safeguarding against potential harm.

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

1. The 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. The Council authorizes adoption of a Resolution establishing Council Policy 200-7, Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy.

3. The AI Policy is hereby approved as attached to this Resolution.

4. This Resolution shall become effective immediately following passage and adoption thereof.

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

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 361 ends

_______________________________
NICK SMITH, Mayor
ATTEST:

DATED:_______________________
_______________________________
SANDRA KANDELL, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
ALEX LORCA, City Attorney
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 362 ends

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE, CALIFORNIA

COUNCIL POLICY
SUBJECT POLICY NO. EFFECTIVE DATE PAGE
Artificial Intelligence (AI)
Policy
200-7 XXX 1 of 7
I. PURPOSE
This policy establishes a clear and flexible governance framework for Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems used by, or on behalf of, the City of Pacific Grove (City). It also outlines practical guidelines for the responsible use of AI tools. This policy enables the City to use AI systems for the benefit of the community while safeguarding against potential harm.

The key objectives of the AI Policy are to:
 Provide guidance that is clear, easy to follow, and supports decision-making for City staff or those operating on its behalf;
 Ensure that use of AI systems adheres to the Guiding Principles that represent values with regards to how AI systems are purchased, configured, operated, or maintained;
 Define roles and responsibilities related to the City’s usage of AI systems;  Define prohibited uses of AI systems;
 Establish “sunset” procedures to safely retire systems that no longer meet the needs of the City; and
This policy establishes the general framework and operating principles for the use of evolving AI technologies. Additional internal AI guidelines, procedures, and training materials will be created and will supplement this policy by providing more detailed guidance, use cases, and best practices, and may be updated regularly to reflect technological advancements, operational needs, and evolving industry standards. All additional materials will be aligned with this policy.

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 363 ends

4910-9796-4971, v. 1
All uses of AI must comply with applicable laws, regulations, and internal policies related to data protection, security, privacy, and acceptable use. The City will review and update this policy and related supporting documents as needed to maintain alignment with legal, ethical, and technological developments.

The City defines “artificial intelligence” or “AI” to be a machine-based system that can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, make predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing real or virtual environments.1 AI systems use machine- and human-based inputs to perceive real and virtual environments; abstract such perceptions into models through analysis in an automated manner; and use model inference to formulate options for information or action.

The City defines an “AI system” to be any data system, software, hardware, application, tool, or utility that operates in whole or in part using AI.

II. SCOPE
This policy applies to:

1. All City-deployed AI systems, and any use of City data within AI tools by individuals with access to City data or systems; and

2. Staff (full-time, part-time), interns, consultants, contractors, partners, and volunteers who may be purchasing, configuring, developing, operating, or maintaining the City’s AI systems or who may be leveraging AI systems to provide services to the City.

III. GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR RESPONSIBLE AI SYSTEMS
Usage of AI Systems shall adhere to the following principles:

1. Human-Centered Design: AI Systems are developed and deployed with a human centered approach that evaluates AI powered services for their impact on the public and the community.

2. Security & Safety: AI systems maintain confidentiality, integrity, and availability through safeguards that prevent unauthorized access and use. Implementation of AI systems is reliable and safe, and minimizes risks to individuals, society, and the environment.
1 1 Definition from 15 U.S.C. 9401(3).

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 364 ends

4910-9796-4971, v. 1

3. Privacy: Privacy is preserved in all AI systems by safeguarding personally identifiable information (PII) sensitive data from unauthorized access, disclosure, and manipulation.

4. Transparency: The purpose and use of AI systems is proactively communicated and disclosed to the public on the City’s website. An AI system, its data sources, operational model, and its use are understandable and documented. Disclosure is required when City data is used in external AI tools.

5. Equity: AI systems support equitable outcomes for everyone. Bias in AI systems is effectively managed with the intention of reducing harm for anyone impacted by its use.

6. Accountability & Compliance: Roles and responsibilities govern the deployment and maintenance of AI systems, and human oversight ensures adherence to relevant laws and regulations.

7. Effectiveness: AI systems are reliable, meet their objectives, and deliver precise and dependable outcomes for the utility and contexts in which they are deployed.

8. Workforce Empowerment: Staff are empowered to use AI in their roles through education, training, and collaborations that promote participation and opportunity.

III. ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES
 The Information Technology (IT) Manager is responsible for:
o Overseeing the implementation, compliance, and enforcement of this policy and ensuring the City’s AI systems comply with the City’s internal IT policies/guidelines, security protocols, and industry standards and best practices.
o Overseeing the enterprise security infrastructure, cybersecurity operations, updating security policies, procedures, standards, guidelines, and monitoring policy compliance with the City’s internal IT policies/guidelines, security protocols, and industry standards and best practices. o Overseeing information/data privacy including enterprise digital privacy practices, data processing practices, and responsible usage of technology in compliance with the City’s internal IT policies/guidelines, security protocols, and industry standards and best practices.
o Notifying staff when an updates to this policy, or internal guidelines, is released.

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 365 ends

4910-9796-4971, v. 1
o Hosting regular training to ensure compliance and workforce empowerment of responsible AI tools.
o Maintaining a centralized, enterprise-wide AI Inventory of all approved and deployed AI systems, ensuring this registry is updated as new systems pass the AI Review Framework.
 Department Heads / Directors are responsible for:
o Ensuring that their staff strictly adhere to this policy and Internal IT Policies and AI Guidelines.
o Coordinating with the IT Manager for the procurement of AI technology, to ensure compliance with City’s internal IT policies/guidelines, security protocols, and industry standards and best practices.
 The City Attorney is responsible for advising of any legal issues or risks associated with AI systems usage by or on behalf of the City.
 The City Manager may, at its discretion, inspect the usage of AI systems and require a department to alter or cease its usage of AI systems or a partner’s usage of AI systems on behalf of the City.
 The Public Information Officer (PIO) is responsible for coordinating with the IT Manager and Department Heads to maintain the public-facing AI registry on the City’s website, ensuring that the purpose and use of the City's approved AI systems are proactively communicated to the public in alignment with the City’s Guiding Principles.
 Employees and agents, whether regular, temporary, interns, volunteers, contractors, consultants, vendors, and other third parties operating AI systems on behalf of the City are required to abide by this policy and ensure that AI-generated content is reviewed and verified for accuracy before it is acted upon or published.

IV. Policy
When purchasing, configuring, developing, operating, or maintaining AI systems, the City will:

1. Uphold the Guiding Principles for Responsible AI Systems;

2. Conduct an AI review to assess the potential risk of any new AI systems. Risk assessments and independent audits of AI systems will also be conducted to ensure continued compliance, fairness, and security. The IT Manager is responsible for coordinating review of AI systems used by the City.

3. Obtain technical documentation about AI systems using the AI FactSheet or create equivalent documentation if internally developing the AI system. The IT Manager is PGCC 5-20-26

Page 366 ends

4910-9796-4971, v. 1
responsible for requiring vendors to complete the AI Fact Sheet or producing the equivalent documentation for internal solutions.

4. Require consultants and contractors to comply with this AI Policy. In the event of an incident involving the use of the AI system, the City will follow the Information Technology Department’s Incident Response Plan. The IT Manager is responsible for overseeing the security practices of AI systems used by or on behalf of City departments.

5. Ensure the appropriate use of City data within all AI tools in compliance with internal policies, standards, practices, and training requirements, including prohibiting the use of non-public or confidential information in publicly available AI tools.

Prohibited Uses
The use of certain AI systems is prohibited due to the sensitive nature of the information processed and severe potential risk. This includes the following prohibited purposes:
• Real-time and covert biometric identification;
• Emotion analysis, or the use of computer vision techniques to classify human facial and body movements into certain emotions or sentiment (e.g., positive, negative, neutral, happy, angry, nervous);
• Fully automated decisions that substantially impact the rights or safety of individuals with no meaningful human oversight;
• Social scoring, or the use of AI systems to track and classify individuals based on their behaviors, socioeconomic status, or personal characteristics; and • Cognitive behavioral manipulation of people or specific vulnerable groups.

If staff become aware of an instance where an AI has caused harm or been used for a prohibited purpose, staff must report the instance to their supervisor, the IT Manager, and the Office of Employee Relations no later than 24 hours after discovery.

Reporting AI Concerns and Incidents
The City is committed to the safe and equitable use of Artificial Intelligence. To support this:
o Proactive Reporting: If staff observe algorithmic bias, ethical concerns, or become aware of an instance where an AI system has the potential to cause harm, staff must PGCC 5-20-26

Page 367 ends

4910-9796-4971, v. 1
immediately suspend use of the tool and report the concern to their direct supervisor and the IT Manager.
o Incident Reporting: If an AI system has already caused unintended harm or a data breach, staff must report the instance to their supervisor, the IT Manager no later than 24 hours after discovery.
o Prohibited Use Reporting: If staff learn of the intended use of AI for a prohibited purpose, staff must report the instance to their supervisor, the IT Manager, and the Office of Employee Relations no later than 24 hours after discovery.

Public Records
The City is subject to the California Public Records Act (CPRA). City staff must follow all current procedures for records retention and disclosure. Information entered into AI systems could be subject to a CPRA request. This also applies when City data is processed in external AI tools.

Sunset Procedures
If an AI system operated by the City or on its behalf ceases to provide a positive outcome to the City as determined by the staff or IT Manager, then the City must halt the use of that system unless express exception is provided by the IT Manager. If the abrupt cessation of the use of that AI system would significantly disrupt the delivery of services, a gradual phased out approach must be approved by the IT Manager before sunsetting.

All measures to minimize the impact and recovery must be considered in the termination or phase out protocol, including but not limited to:
• Ownership and future access of data;
• Portability of the AI model, algorithm, and/or data; and • Impact to services, users, and residents
Violations of the AI Policy
Violations of any section of the AI Policy may be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination. Violations made by a third party while operating an AI system on behalf of the City may result in a breach of contract, termination of contract, and/or pursuit of damages. Infractions that violate local, state, federal or international law may be remanded to the proper authorities.

Restricted Platform Alternatives
If the City restricts access to certain AI platforms, whenever practicable, the City will PGCC 5-20-26

Page 368 ends

4910-9796-4971, v. 1
provide a URL redirect to an internal website that will provide the employee with alternative AI platforms which have been vetted and approved by the City for use.

The purpose of this policy is to help prevent the exfiltration of City data. This approach allows employees to choose amongst various platforms which meet applicable privacy and security standards established by the City to facilitate productivity. The IT Manager will perform regular assessments of AI platforms and to regularly monitor platforms so that the City can restrict and remove access in the event of a security or privacy incident.

VIII. Terms & Definitions
Artificial Intelligence: “Artificial intelligence” or “AI” to be a machine-based system that can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, make predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing real or virtual environments. Artificial intelligence systems use machine- and human-based inputs to perceive real and virtual environments; abstract such perceptions into models through analysis in an automated manner; and use model inference to formulate options for information or action.

Algorithm: A series of logical steps through which an agent (typically a computer or software program) turns particular inputs into particular outputs.

AI system: Any system, software, sensor, or process that automatically generates outputs including, but not limited to, predictions, recommendations, or decisions that augment or replace human decision-making. This extends to software, hardware, algorithms, and data generated by these systems, used to automate large-scale processes or analyze large data sets.

IX. Acknowledgement
Elements of this policy were derived from templates developed by GovAI Coalition, a coordinated efforts of over 150 California state and local agencies who are dedicated to the responsible and purposeful use of AI that benefits all members of the community.

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 369 ends

1 AI FactSheet
Please provide details regarding your artificial intelligence (AI) solution by filling out the AI FactSheet1 template below. This template was developed by the GovAI Coalition.

This AI FactSheet is for AI developers to complete. A developer is an entity that creates a standard software product or solution that is intended for many customers to use. These products may include AI systems built by the developer themselves, and/or a software solution that leverages third party AI tools within the product offering.

A service provider is an entity that guides, consults, advises, and supports agencies in navigating artificial intelligence (AI). A service provider may build custom AI solutions for a client, but does not sell the product as a standard solution to many customers on its own. If you are a service provider, please fill out the AI FactSheet for Service Providers instead.

Vendor Name Your “Doing business as” Name and Legal Name, if different.

Product Name Name of the AI product or suite of products.

Overview Brief summary of the AI system.

Purpose What function does the AI system perform, and for what purpose? If the system performs multiple functions, list each discretely and reference below.

For features that are configurable, please describe all configuration options and default settings.

Intended Domain What domain is the AI system intended to be applied in? Training Data How was the AI system trained? What data was used? How often is data added to the training set? Was all training data legally obtained and its use fully licensed?
Test Data What data was used to test system performance? Under what conditions has the system been tested?
Model Information General description of the model(s) used (e.g., large language model, transformer, deep learning, supervised learning, built on an existing open source model, computer vision)
Update procedure In general, how often are the models updated for users? Will the user have a choice in moving to the updated model or staying on the current model? What documentation is available for new versions of the model? Inputs and Outputs What are the inputs to the AI system? What are its outputs? What interfaces and integrations are supported?
Performance Metrics What are the performance metrics? What is your current level of performance on these metrics? How can the user monitor performance when deployed? 1 The FactSheet template is heavily inspired by the IBM Research AI FactSheets 360 project.

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 370 ends

2 Bias What biases does the tool exhibit and how does it manage that bias? This can include but is not limited to biases on human factors such as gender, race, socioeconomic status, disability, culture, age, or other protected classes, or biases on general factors such as a sampling bias, survivorship bias, detection bias, or observer bias.

Robustness How does the AI system handle outliers? Do overwritten decisions feed back into the system to help calibrate it in the future?
Optimal Conditions What conditions does the model perform best under? Are there minimum requirements for the quantity of records/observations?
Poor Conditions What conditions does the model perform poorly under? What are the limitations of the AI system? What kinds of errors can it make (e.g., hallucinations) and what conditions make those errors more likely? Explanation How does the AI system explain its outputs? Are the outputs of the AI system understandable by subject matter experts, users, impacted individuals, etc.? Data Protection List data protection frameworks you comply with (e.g., NIST 800-53, NIST AI RMF) and certifications (e.g., SOC II, HIPAA, FERPA, CJIS).

Environmental
Impacts
This can include, but is not limited to, energy and water consumption for training and/or per use of the model, sources of energy and water for your solution, and your organization’s approach to reducing environmental impact.

For energy consumption, report in megawatt-hours (MWh).2 For water consumption (in thousand liters), include the type of water (i.e., drinking water or reclaimed water) used in training and deploying the model (if the on-site water usage is unknown, use "1 L/kWh" as a default value).3 Ongoing Monitoring How is the AI system monitored to identify any problems in usage? Can outputs (recommendations, predictions, etc.) be overwritten by a human, and do overwritten outputs help calibrate the system in the future? Problems in usage can include false negatives, false positives, bias, hallucinations, and human-reported quality issues (such as poor translations or poorly generated images).

Independent
Evaluation
Have the vendors or an independent party conducted a study on the bias, accuracy, or disparate impact of the system? If yes, can the agency review the study? Include methodology and results.

This can include bias impact reports, algorithmic impact reports, or others.4 2 If you are unsure how to conduct energy measurements, see “A Beginner’s Guide to Power and Energy Measurement and Estimation for Computing and Machine Learning” published by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Intel. 3 If you are unsure how to conduct water impact measurements, see “Making AI Less 'Thirsty': Uncovering and Addressing the Secret Water Footprint of AI Models” published in Communications of the ACM. 4 See “Algorithmic bias detection and mitigation: Best practices and policies to reduce consumer harms” by the Brookings Institute for an example bias impact report template.

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 371 ends

3 Accessibility How does your solution accommodate a variety of users, such as users with disabilities?
Responsible AI
Strategy
Please share any relevant information, links, or resources regarding your organization’s responsible AI strategy.

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 372 ends

Agenda No. 13 A

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
300 Forest Avenue, Pacific Grove, California 93950
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Daniel Gho, Public Works Director/Deputy City Manager MEETING DATE: May 20, 2026
SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2026/27 Capital Improvements Program CEQA: {CEQA}

RECOMMENDATION
Received and approve the update, including the two additional projects, to the Fiscal Year 2026/27 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), and

1. Approve the commitment of $750,000 from General fund reserves for the Pier at Lover Point to act as a match for grant opportunities, and

2. 3. Approve a resolution adopting the FY 2026/27 Senate Bill 1 Project List, or

4. Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.

DISCUSSION
Two-Year Capital Improvement Plan
Annually the city adopts a budget for the upcoming fiscal year. The budget, which establishes the financial framework for the forthcoming year, is comprised of two primary components – the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and the Operating Budget.

Last year, the City transitioned to a two-year budget, encompassing the proposed expenses, revenues, and projects for FY25/26 and FY26/27. Biennial budgeting allows for enhanced efficiency and improves long-term planning.

The CIP presented in the two-year budget report spans FY25/26 and FY26/27. Prior to the start of FY26/27, any adjustments, including new projects prompted by more available funding or urgent need, have to be brought to Council for review and approval. In this report, staff will also present an SB1 Project List and Resolution specifying road segments to receive rehabilitation in FY26/27. This is in compliance with the California Transportation Commission’s (CTC) annual requirements.

What is a Capital Improvement and the CIP?
Council Policy 400-6, Budget and Financial Management, defines a Capital Improvement or asset as buildings or infrastructure with an original cost in excess of $50,000, machinery or equipment with an original cost in excess of $5,000 and a useful life of more than one year.

The CIP is a plan that:

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 373 ends

The CIP is a plan that:
• Identifies capital projects
• Provides an implementation schedule
• Identifies project financing and budgeting
• Links projects to Council strategic goals and initiatives, and • Provides project information and justification
Adopting a CIP allows systematic and comparative evaluation of multiple potential projects at the same time. The CIP also serves as a public relations and economic development tool and focuses on preserving infrastructure while ensuring efficient use of public funds. Additionally, the CIP promotes coordination of projects across city departments and helps identify efforts that may qualify for alternative funding.

Development of the CIP
Annually, the CIP process begins with a formal call for project submissions to staff. A call for projects was requested prior to FY 2025/26- 26/27 budget development. Generally, submitted projects are identified based on:
• Input received from the community
• Mayor and City Council priorities, projects or initiatives developed or identified during the year, and • Identified critical needs, including safety issues or mandated compliance.

Each submission is reviewed from a variety of approaches and criteria, including:
• Greatest need (mandates, public safety)
• Alignment with Council strategic goals and initiatives • Consequences of delay (potential to incur increased costs, asset preservation) • Readiness
• Feasibility
• Opportunities to accomplish multiple goals or align timing with other project(s) • Availability of funding (grants, community donations) Under the direction of the City Manager, the Public Works and Administrative Services Departments review the available funding levels and the proposed projects to prepare the CIP for consideration by the Mayor and Council. The proposed CIP is then presented, discussed, and acted upon by the City Council in public sessions during the budget hearings.

A solicitation for new projects was not conducted as part of the 2026/27 CIP update. As part of the 2-year budget development, solicitation for projects had been sought during the preparation of the FY 25/26 - 26/27 budget and administered during the 2 years.

Overview of the FY 2025/26 - FY 26/27 CIP
The proposed two-year CIP includes 16 projects for a total of $13.3 M from various funding sources.

The project list includes:
• 3 Multi-Funded Projects totaling $4.3M
o Funding for these projects comes from the General Fund and various non-general fund sources. o The General Funds total contribution is limited to $1M. • 11 Non-General Fund Projects totaling $9M
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 374 ends

o Project funding is derived from community donations, enterprise funds, and special revenue funds. o These projects do not impact the General Fund.

The projects span a variety of categories addressing needed upgrades to multimodal transportation, facilities, parks and recreation, and wastewater infrastructure.

Due to funding limitations, the proposed project list contains only the most critical infrastructure needs, mandated items, or requirements necessary to maintain eligibility for external funding.

General Fund
Of the total $13.3M proposed, only $1M ($500,000 per fiscal year) comes from the General Fund, reflecting minimal impact to the fund. Due to limited availability, General Funds have been harnessed solely for expenditures required to meet annual Maintenance of Effort (MOE) eligibility requirements that allow the city to receive a combined $1.2M of SB1/RMRA and Measure X funds annually. The General Fund contributions are label as “Fund 63, Capital Improvement Fund” below and in the attached supporting documents.

Non-General Funds
Where possible, non-general funds have been leveraged to support infrastructure needs, contributing a total of $12.3M across the various non-general fund sources and equating to 92% of the total proposed CIP budget.

A majority of these proposed expenditures, $11.3M, are derived from enterprise and special revenue funds, which will be harnessed to allow for critical and urgent repairs of failed infrastructure -- from degraded and leaking roofs and failed HVAC/plumbing systems to vital sewer upgrades and a life-saving altering system for our first responders. These funds have been harnessed, where applicable, to support the most urgent needs.

The non-general fund figure also includes generous community donations, totaling $1M, that will fund enhancements to existing facilities and meet community needs; these enhancements would otherwise go unfunded, as limited available funding is prioritized for mandates and essential repairs.

A high-level overview of the multi-funded projects and non-general fund projects is provided below.

The detailed list of projects, with their descriptions and requested budgets, is attached (Attachment 1 – CIP Project List).

Overview of Multi-Funded Projects
There are three (3) proposed Multi-Funded Projects:

1. Street Rehabilitation: FY 25/26 Street Rehab in progress: FY 26/27 Street Rehab list to be approved via resolution

2. Mandated ADA Improvements: Prescott Lane Sidewalk, completed in FY 25/26, & Lovers Point sidewalk under contract

3. Crack and Slurry Seal: Funding allocated for FY 26/27 These projects, funded from a combination of General Fund and non-General Fund sources, address the city’s aging road infrastructure network, pedestrian amenities, and accessibility.

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 375 ends

The Street Rehabilitation Project and Crack and Slurry Seal Project are critical investments in the aging road infrastructure network. They will enhance and preserve the pavement condition index and overall pavement health. The Street Rehabilitation Project targets roads that are rapidly deteriorating or in a failed state, while the Crack and Slurry Seal Project protects and preserves good roads for long-term durability.

The Mandated ADA Improvements Project addressed ADA compliance at Lovers Point and Prescott Avenue and is mandated by the court for completion in FY 25/26.

These projects are essential not only for addressing aging and deficient pavement and pedestrian infrastructure, but also for meeting MOE requirements necessary to secure ongoing Measure X and SB1/RMRA funding. Collectively, these three projects include a total General Fund contribution of $1M over two years ($500,000 per year) to meet MOE requirements.

These are the only proposed projects that include a General Fund contribution.

Overview of Non-General Fund Projects & Updates
There are 11 non-general fund projects:
• 4 projects are proposed to address failed facility infrastructure, including:
o Roof repairs at the Youth Center and Police Station to resolve known leaks and replace roofing systems that have exceeded their useful life: Completed FY 25/26 o Replacement of a deteriorated and damaged door and non-functional windows at City Hall that allow water intrusion and present security concerns: Under Contract and being constructed o Replacement of aged and non-repairable HVAC infrastructure critical for heating the Golf Course restaurant: Completed
• 2 projects address sewer system infrastructure deficiencies, including:
o Replacing the deteriorated force main on Arena Avenue. This segment is in dire need of replacement and has experienced two failures in recent years: Being Engineered; Construction in FY 26/27 o Repairing pumps and recalibrating meters for the Urban Diversion system, which is critical for stormwater diversion and reporting compliance: To occur in FY 26/27 • 1 project will allow critical upgrades to the Fire Station emergency alerting system by replacing the outdated, unrepairable system. It will ensure compatibility with Monterey County’s system and improve response times and clarity of alert messaging: Completed in FY 25/26 • 2 projects will continue multi-year efforts, which have been divided across fiscal years due to their large scope or permitting timelines. Engineering work for both of these proposed projects was funded in the prior year's CIPs and is in progress. The proposed additional funding allocations will allow for construction and support the prior investments of the council. These projects include:
o The Recreation Trail Improvements Project is adjacent to Esplanade Park. This project addresses pedestrian safety and continued access to the coastline and recreational amenities: Completed in FY 25/26
o Sewer Collection System Master Plan (SCSMP) Projects 1, 6 & 9. These projects address large-scale sewer deficiencies that were identified in the 10-year SCSMP plan. These are the last of the 10 sewer projects identified in the plan that have yet to be implemented. Engineering is underway, and the additional funding allocation will allow for construction in FY26/27: Construction commenced in FY 25/26 and will be completed in the winter of 26/27.
• 4 projects are proposed to address the community's desired upgrades to facilities and parks/recreation infrastructure, utilizing generous community donations. These projects include:
o 2 facility upgrades to the Pacific Grove Public Library funded by the Pacific Grove Library Friends and Foundation: Generator engineered and being permitted, and Pilar Booth being designed: Completed PGCC 5-20-26

Page 376 ends

in 26/27
o Upgrades to Chautauqua Hall funded by the Heritage Society’s Friends of Chautauqua Hall:

Architectural services underway; Anticipated release of RFP for construction in FY 26/27 o Chinese Pavilion and Moon Gate project at El Marie Dyke Park funded by the Monterey Bay Chinese Association (MBCA): Underway with Construction anticipated in FY 26/27 Formal funding agreements will return to the council following approval of the projects for inclusion in the CIP.

Funding for these projects has been approved through the FY 2025/26-26/27 by various funding sources.

FY 2026-27 CIP Additions
In addition to the projects that had been approved for funding through FY 2025/26 & 26/27, the City has two additions from non-general fund sources and one addition from the general fund, as noted below:
• Sewer System Master Plan: The City of Pacific Grove manages its sewer infrastructure through a Sewer Collection System Master Plan (SCSMP). These documents guide long-term maintenance, capital improvements, and capacity assessments for the City's 58 miles of pipelines and seven city-owned lift stations. The last SCSMP was approved by Council in 2014, which identified projects and conducted a rate study to properly generate funds for projects and operations. The City needs to commence a new SCSMP and rate study. Sewer Fund 76: $400,000 • Museum Fence Replacement Project: The fence that borders the Pacific Grove Museum of Natural History gardens needs to be replaced. There is ample funding in the Museum Improvement Fund to cover expenses. Museum Fund 8: $40,000
• Pier at Lovers Point: The 100+ year old pier structure has a big influence on the beach and the park at Lovers Point. The City developed a set of construction plans that will render identified deficiencies and allow for improvements that will enhance the safety of the pier structure. The City applied for a grant through the California Coastal Conservancy and has received a pledge of $750,000 towards the estimated repairs noted at $1.5 million. In order for the Coastal Conservancy to draft and execute an agreement for $750,000, the City needs to earmark the remaining $750,000 to act as a match for the pier repairs. The Department of Public Works is actively seeking other grants to bridge the gap, but in the meantime, a match needs to occur for final execution with the Coastal Conservancy. General Fund Reserves $750,000
CIP and the California Environmental Quality Act
The CIP document is a planning document; it does not constitute approval of any specific project.

Following budget adoption, staff will assess and address the CEQA process that applies to each individual project. Projects that exceed the City Manager’s spending authority will return to Council for approval; agenda reports will include an assessment of the CEQA determination.

Senate Bill 1 Project List
As part of the CIP process, staff is recommending approval of a Resolution adopting the SB1 Project List (Attachment 2). SB1, the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 was passed by the Legislature and signed into law by the Governor in April 2017.

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 377 ends

SB1 includes accountability and transparency provisions that will ensure residents are aware of the projects proposed for funding and which projects have been completed each fiscal year. One such provision is a requirement that the city adopt a resolution of all projects proposed to receive funding from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) by July 1 of each year.

The city is estimated to receive $420,261 in RMRA funding in FY 26/27. As indicated in the attached Project List, the city is planning to use this funding in conjunction with Measure X, the General Fund, and the Sewer Fund to complete essential road rehabilitation and maintenance as prescribed in the Pavement Management Program. Specifically, SB1/RMRA funds will be allocated to the Street Rehabilitation Project, which will address the following road segments:

1. 17 Mile Drive from Sunset to Sinex, with intersection improvements at Sinex and 17 Mile (PCI 41)

2. Central Avenue from Forest to Lighthouse (PCI 37)

3. 16th Street from Laurel to Lighthouse (PCI 41)
The attached SB1 Project List includes a detailed project description, project location, proposed schedule for completion and the estimated useful life of the improvement.

This is the ninth year the City will receive SB1 funding, which will enable essential road maintenance and rehabilitation projects, safety improvements, and increasing access and mobility options for the traveling public that would not have been possible without SB1.

OPTIONS

1. Take no action.

2. Propose modifications to the FY26/27 SB1 Project List.

3. Propose modifications to the FY26/27 CIP.

4. Request additional information.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The total fiscal impact for the proposed FY25/26 - 26/27 CIP is $13.7M. The adopted CIP was approved as part of the 2-year budget. The chart below provides the funding sources and proposed budgets for each of the two-fiscal years.

As noted above, the total impact to the General Fund is $1M across the two years. Non-general funding sources have been harnessed where appropriate to fund critical infrastructure needs.

Fund Fund Name FY25/26 FY26/27 TOTAL
63 Capital Improvement Fund $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 17 Measure X $820,000 $818,000 $1,638,000
47 RMRA/SB1 $570,096 $420,261 $990,357
76 Sewer Fund $1,050,000 $7,750,000 $8,800,000
8 Museum Improvement Fund 0 $40,000 $40,000
31 Operating Donations $1,075,000* - $1,075,000*
25 Recreation Donations $32,000 - $32,000
92 Mcindoo Donation $23,006 - $23,006
41 Yount Income $24,997 - $24,997
12 Fire Emergency Equipment $100,000 - $100,0000
77 Golf Course $40,000 - $40,000
TOTALS $4,235,099 $9,528,261 $13,763,360
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 378 ends

*This figure includes reimbursable community donations from the MBCA, The Public Library Friends and Foundation, and the Heritage Society’s Friends of Chautauqua Hall. As noted above, formal funding agreements will be brought forward to council for each of these items.

FOCUSED PRIORITY AREA: Infrastructure
Attachments
CIP List 25-26 26-27
SBI Resolution
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 379 ends

Reference # CIP Project Code Project Category Project Name Project Description/Justification Funding Notes Council Goal Alignment Funding Sources Fund Account Total Proposed Funding FY25/26 Funding FY26/27 Funding Fund 63
Capital Improvement
Fund
63-631-6041 $ 600,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000
Fund 17
Measure X 17-522-6041 $ 1,138,000 $ 570,000 $ 568,000
Fund 47
RMRA (SB1) 47-471-6041 $ 990,357 $ 570,096 $ 420,261
Fund 76
Sewer Fund 76-612-6051 $ 700,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000
Fund 63
Capital Improvement
Fund
63-631-6041 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ -
Fund 17
Measure X 17-522-6041 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ -
Fund 63
Capital Improvement
Fund
63-631-6041 $ 200,000 $ - $ 200,000
Fund 17
Measure X 17-522-6041 $ 250,000 $ - $ 250,000
Multiple Funds
(General & NonGeneral Funds)
3 CIP27-01 Transportation
Multiple Funds
(General & NonGeneral Funds)
CIP26-02
Multiple Funds
(General & NonGeneral Funds)
This project allows rehabilitation of road segments identified by the Pavement Management Program (PMP) as being in poor or failed condition, addressing and improving the aging road infrastructure network. This project also plays a vital role in ensuring MOE requirements are met to remain eligible for over $1M of external funding for roadways (see funding notes).

FY25/26
This project targets three road segments that have not received formal maintenance or rehabilitation in over 30 years. These segments have Pavement Condition Index (PCI) scores between 0 and 21, placing them in the "failed" category due to severe deterioration. The compromised pavement allows water intrusion, leading to dislodged sections and frequent potholes. Although crews perform regular patching to address safety hazards, these are only temporary fixes. Full rehabilitation is necessary to restore the integrity of these roadways. The segments to be addressed are:
(1) 10th Street (Central Ave to Lighthouse Ave) - PCI 10 (2) Del Monte Ave (Asilomar St to Coral St) - PCI 21
(3) Beacon (Coral St to Esplanade St) - PCI 0
The underground sewer infrastructure on each of these road segments will be videoed and addressed as an aspect of this project via the sewer fund.

FY26/27
This project will address three road segments that are heavily utilized by vehilces and pedstrian traffic. These segments have a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) scores between 37 and 41 and are nearing a failed state due to severe deterioration. Complete rehablilitation is neccesary. Along with road rehab, the City will also review the possiblity of curb ramps and sidewalks adjacent to 17 Mile and Sinex on the North East side of the roadway, adjacent to the park.
(1) 17 Mile Drive (Sunset to Sinex) - PCI 41 (2)
Central Avenue (Forest to Lighthouse) - PCI 37
(3) 16th Street (Laurel to Lighthouse)- PCI 41
1 CIP26-01 Transportation Street Rehabilitation

MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT COMPLIANCE
This project helps the City maintain eligibility for
ongoing Measure X and SB1/RMRA funding by
meeting Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirements.

Infrastructure
2 Transportation
This project addresses ADA compliance mandates from a court order requiring completion by specified deadlines in FY25/26. The locations for improvements are Lovers Point and Prescott Ave (between Divisadero and Forest).

Lovers Point Scope of Work:

Replace existing ADA ramps and construct new sidewalk at the triangle parking lot to comply with ADA standards. These improvements must be completed by October 31, 2025.

Prescott Ave Scope of Work:

Sidewalk infill, repairs, installation of ADA-compliant curb ramps, and upgrades to driveway approaches to meet accessibility standards. These improvements must be completed by December 31, 2025.

GENERAL FUNDING NOTE
This project has been budgeted using all anticipated
remaining balances for streets and pedestrian
infrastructure in FY25/26. Due to the limited availability of these funds, actual costs are expected to exceed
the proposed budget.

At this time actual costs are unknown. Once the
project is engineered and formally bid, staff will return with options to address potential funding deficits which may include project savings from road and
infrastructure projects from prior years.

MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT COMPLIANCE
This project helps the City maintain eligibility for
ongoing Measure X and SB1 funding by meeting
Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirements.

Infrastructure Mandated
ADA Improvements
Crack and Slurry sealing is a vital maintenance activity that helps preserve the City's roads against rapid deterioration and potholes due to inclement weather. This is a cost effective maintenance treatment that helps ensure roads remain in good condition for years to come.

Streets to receive the crack & slurry seal treatment are identified via the City's Pavement Management Program, maintenance logs, and in-field observations.

Crack & Slurry Seal

MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT COMPLIANCE
This project helps the City maintain eligibility for
ongoing Measure X and SB1 funding by meeting
Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirements.

Infrastructure
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 380 ends

Reference # CIP Project Code Project Category Project Name Project Description/Justification Funding Notes Council Goal Alignment Funding Sources Fund Account Total Proposed Funding FY25/26 Funding FY26/27 Funding 4 CIP26-03 Facilities Library Backup Power
System
This project will allow for the purchase and installation of a backup power system for the Pacific Grove Public Library. The Library is a beloved community facility that has the potential to serve as a vital community resource during prolonged power outages and/or emergencies. Today, the library has no generator or backup power source to support it's operations during outages.

Options for back up power sources include, but are not limited to, battery storage (e.g., Tesla Powerwall 3 or similar) and a natural gas generator connected to an existing gas line. These options will be further explored for feasibility following project approval.

FUNDED BY COMMUNITY DONATIONS
The Pacific Grove Library Friends and Foundation have
dedicated $80,000 to fund this project.

Infrastructure Non-General Fund Fund 31
Operating Donations 31-406-6001 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ -
5 CIP26-04 Facilities Pillar Privacy/Study
Booth ADA
This project will create a dedicated privacy/study booth in the Pacific Grove Public Library.

The Library currently lacks a private meeting space, and users have consistently requested one. This project responds to that need and enhances the Library’s ability to support virtual meetings, telehealth, and focused work.

The scope of work includes the purchase of the privacy booth, prep work and installation. It is anticipated that the private/study booth with be located near the existing DVD shelving.

FUNDED BY COMMUNITY DONATIONS
The Pacific Grove Library Friends and Foundation have
dedicated $25,000 to fund this project.

Infrastructure Non-General Fund Fund 31
Operating Donations 31-516-6021 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ -
6 CIP26-05 Facilities
Chautauqua Hall
Building
Improvements
This project will address the facility infrastructure improvements and maintenance tasks outlined in the 2024 WJE Chautauqua Hall Building Assessment Report.

Built in 1881, this beloved facility has served generations and remains a designated historic landmark and beloved community resource. The project ensures needed upgrades and improvements are made to allow the building’s continued function, in the long-term, and allow preservation of its historical integrity.

With strong community support, the Heritage Society's Friends of Chautauqua Hall has raised funding to carry out a wide range of improvements noted in the report, including repairs and upgrades to the drainage system, wood deck, roofing elements, cladding, windows, and doors.

FUNDED BY COMMUNITY DONATIONS
The Heritage Society's Friend of Chautauqua Hall have
raised $700,000 of community donations to facilitate
this project.

Infrastructure Non-General Fund Fund 31
Operating Donations 31-516-6021 $ 700,000 $ 700,000 $ - 7 CIP26-06 Facilities Chinese Pavillion and
Moon Gate
This project will support the construction of a traditional Chinese Pavilion and Moon Gate at El Marie Dyke Park, replacing the existing deteriorated gazebo.

The proposed location was approved by the City Council in 2024 following an assessment of locations. The project will be funded through donations from Monterey Bay Chinese Association. Following design development, the project will undergo the required permitting and review process by the appropriate boards/commissions.

FUNDED BY COMMUNITY DONATIONS
The Monterey Bay Chinese Association (MBCA) has
raised $200,000 of community donations to fund this
project.

Infrastructure Non-General Fund Fund 31
Operating Donations 31-516-6021 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ - 8 CIP26-07 Facilities Youth Center Roof
Repair
This project will address a known roof leak in the Youth Center above the restroom facility where deterioration has led to water intrusion through the light fixtures. The scope of work will include the replacement of the damaged roofing and rain gutters to restore the roof’s integrity and prevent further damage. Timely repairs are essential to avoid more costly future repairs and to ensure the continued operation of the recreational facility. Without a functional restroom, youth programming at this site would be unable to continue.

Infrastructure Non-General Fund Fund 25
Recreation Donations 31-516-6021 $ 32,000 $ 32,000 $ -
Fund 92
McIndoo Donation 95-519-6021 $ 23,006 $ 23,006 $ -
9 CIP26-08 Non-General Fund
This project will replace the front door and first-floor office windows in kind to match the original design of the City Hall Entrance.

The front door and surrounding trim have sustained significant termite damage, and the office windows no longer close properly. Water intrusion from the damaged windows is causing ongoing deterioration to interior plaster.

Timely replacement is necessary to prevent further structural and interior damage and ensure building security.

This project was called out as an "immediate need" in the 2024 City Hall Facility Conditions Assessment.

Infrastructure City Hall Window and
Door Replacement Facilities
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 381 ends

Reference # CIP Project Code Project Category Project Name Project Description/Justification Funding Notes Council Goal Alignment Funding Sources Fund Account Total Proposed Funding FY25/26 Funding FY26/27 Funding Fund 41
Yount Income 41-510-6021 $ 8,994 $ 8,994 $ -
10 CIP26-09 Facilities Fire Station Alerting
System
This project will replace the existing 14-year-old Fire Station alerting system, which dispatches emergency incidents from Monterey County Communications. The current system and speakers are outdated, no longer repairable, and incompatible with the IP-based paging system Monterey County is transitioning to. Since the manufacturer ComTech ceased operations in 2022, replacement parts are unavailable, and most vendors are unfamiliar with the legacy system, reducing reliability.

The new system will be fully compatible with Monterey County’s upgraded dispatch platform and will allow simultaneous unit dispatching, improving response times. Additional features include a mobile app for customizable alerts, a digital display with dispatch information, automated text-to-speech for location details, and enhanced audio clarity to reduce the need for repeated communication.

Infrastructure Non-General Fund
Fund 12
Fire Emergency
Equipment
12-353-6021 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ -
11 CIP26-10 Facilities Roof Repairs Police
Department
This project will address a known roof leak caused by the deterioration of the existing hot mop tar and rolled asphalt roofing, which is over 40 years old and beyond its serviceable life. While the roof has been temporarily patched, permanent repairs are essential to prevent further damage. The project will involve the installation of a new PVC membrane roof, ensuring longterm durability and avoiding more costly infrastructure repairs down the line.

Infrastructure Non-General Fund Fund 31
Operating Donations 31-516-6021 $ 70,000 $ 70,000 $ -
12 CIP26-11 Facilities Point Pinos Grill Boiler
replacement
This project will replace the existing 20-year-old boiler with a new high-efficiency unit. The current boiler has exceeded its serviceable life, is leaking significantly, and replacement parts are no longer available, making repairs unfeasible.

The boiler is essential for providing baseboard heating to the restaurant and pros hop. Previous facility upgrades, funded via the CIP, included installing a separate water heater for hot water needs, reducing the boiler’s load. As a result, a smaller, more energy-efficient boiler can now be installed, creating a more efficient and redundant system.

Infrastructure Non-General Fund Fund 77
Golf Course Fund 77-622-6021 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 $ -
13 CIP26-12 Wastewater
Sewer Force Main
Replacement - Arena
Avenue
This project involves installing a new force main on Arena Avenue (from Sunset Dr to Asilomar Ave) to address known deficiencies in the sewer system. The replacement is critical to maintaining reliable sewer service, protecting the environment, and preventing spills.

The existing line has experienced two leaks in this area and is in urgent need of repair to ensure continued safe operation.

Infrastructure
/Environmental
Stewardship
Non-General Fund Fund 76
Sewer Fund 76-612-6051 $ 600,000 $ 600,000 $ -
9 CIP26-08 Non-General Fund
This project will replace the front door and first-floor office windows in kind to match the original design of the City Hall Entrance.

Timely replacement is necessary to prevent further structural and interior damage and ensure building security.

This project was called out as an "immediate need" in the 2024 City Hall Facility Conditions Assessment.

Infrastructure City Hall Window and
Door Replacement Facilities
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 382 ends

Reference # CIP Project Code Project Category Project Name Project Description/Justification Funding Notes Council Goal Alignment Funding Sources Fund Account Total Proposed Funding FY25/26 Funding FY26/27 Funding 14 CIP26-13 Wastewater
Urban Diversion
Station Repair and
Recalibration
This project will allow a contractor to repair pumps and recalibrate meters for the Urban Diversion System. The Urban Diversion System diverts stormwater runoff from the 8th St and 17th St storm drain outfalls to Monterey One Water via the Sewer System.

Repairs are required to ensure accurate reporting to Monterey One Water regarding the amount of stormwater being placed into their systems.

Completion of this work is necessary to maintain compliance with reporting requirements and regulatory standards.

Infrastructure
/Environmental
Stewardship
Non-General Fund Fund 76
Sewer Fund 76-612-6051 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ -
15 CIP26-14 Facilities
Fence Replacement
Museum of Natural
History
The Fence that boarders the Museum of Natural History gardens needs to be replaced. Infrastructure Non-General Fund Museum Improvment Fund 8-412-6021 $ 40,000 $ 40,000
16 CIP26-15 Wastewater Sewer Collection
System Master Plan
The City provides sewer collection services for residences and commercial businesses over an area of approximately 1,414 acres with a population of approximately 15,040 residents. The City’s collection and conveyance system is comprised of approximately 58 miles of pipelines:
57 miles of gravity pipelines.

The Sewer Collection System Master Plan (SCSMP) helps drive the City's long-term sewer collection system asset management needs by identifying CIP projects and necessary upgrades to the collection system. The last SCSMP was approved by Council in 2014 which identified projects and conducted a rate study to properly generate funds for projects and operations. The City needs to commence a new SCSMP and rate study.

Infrastructure
/Environmental
Stewardship
Non-General Fund Fund 76
Sewer Fund 76-612-6051 $ - $ 400,000
17 CIP24-04 Wastewater
Sewer Collection
System Master Plan
Projects
1, 6 & 9
The City provides sewer collection services for residences and commercial businesses over an area of approximately 1,414 acres with a population of approximately 15,040 residents. The City’s collection and conveyance system is comprised of approximately 58 miles of pipelines:
57 miles of gravity pipelines.

The Sewer Collection System Master Plan (SCSMP) helps drive the City's long-term sewer collection system asset management needs by identifying CIP projects and necessary upgrades to the collection system. Over the years the City has completed several of the noted SCSMP CIP Projects and the following three remain:

This multi-year project will allow the City to complete SCSMP Projects 1, 6 & 9:
-SCSMP #1 - 17 Mile Dr - Upgrade ~3,000LF of sewer main due to capacity deficiencies -SCSMP #6 - Hilcrest Ave - Replace ~4,250LF of sewer main due to root intrusion -SCSMP #9- Highway 68 - Protect exposed pipe from damage This project will allow completion of these projects. These are large scale, multi-year projects.

MULTI-YEAR PROJECT
As an element of the FY23/24, $1.8M of sewer funding
was allocated to allow for engineering, permitting and
environmental. This is currently underway and will
continue through FY25/26 using the initial funding
allocation.

Construction is anticipated to begin in FY26/27 with a
preliminary cost estimate of approximately $7M. This is a rough estimate and may be updated as an
engineers estimate is developed.

Infrastructure
/Environmental
Stewardship
Non-General Fund Fund 76
Sewer Fund 76-612-6051 $ 7,000,000 $ - $ 7,000,000
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 383 ends

Reference # CIP Project Code Project Category Project Name Project Description/Justification Funding Notes Council Goal Alignment Funding Sources Fund Account Total Proposed Funding FY25/26 Funding FY26/27 Funding 18 CIP 25-10 Parks & Recreation
Recreation Trail
ImprovementsEsplanade Park
In Perkins Park, the Recreation Trail adjacent to Esplanade Park from Beach Street to Coral Street consists of a thin band of land which keeps getting thinner due to coastal erosion, particularly around Esplanade Park. Just east of Esplanade, the otherwise continuous shoreline trail essentially disappears for a stretch, forcing pedestrians onto a thin strip of dirt right next to Ocean View Boulevard.

The Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) proposed conceptual improvements . The SMP suggest eliminating the ocean-side parking lane and shifting the street curb inland by 7–8 feet, reclaiming approximately 500 feet of space for a pedestrian trail. This would entail the potential loss of about 25 on-street parking spaces. The SMP stated design details would be refined in collaboration with the public and stakeholders, with efforts to mitigate the loss of parking where possible.

This multi-year project initiates the process of addressing the unsafe conditions on the Recreation Trail at this specific location. Year 1 will involve public outreach and design, while Year 2 will focus on permitting, bidding, and construction.

MULTI-YEAR PROJECT
As an element of the FY24/25 CIP, $20,000 was
allocated from the Strong Disbursement Fund to allow
for design/engineering of these vital pedestrian
improvements. To date, minimal funding has been
expended. Although the remaining unused funding
will be carried forward, additional funding is needed to accommodate construction, which is anticipated to
be ~$35,000. The initial funding source, the Strong
Disbursement Fund, has been depleted. The Yount
Income fund is proposed to bridge the gap needed
for construction.

Infrastructure Non-General Fund Fund 41
Yount Income 41-510-6021 $ 16,003 $ 16,003
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 384 ends

RESOLUTION NO. 26-xxx

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE ADOPTING A LIST OF PROJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 FUNDED BY SB 1:

THE ROAD REPAIR AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2017

FINDINGS

1. Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (Chapter 5, Statutes of 2017) was passed by the Legislature and Signed into law by the Governor in April 2017 to address the significant multi-modal transportation funding shortfalls statewide; and

2. SB 1 includes accountability and transparency provisions that will ensure the residents of our City are aware of the projects proposed for funding in our community and which projects have been completed each fiscal year; and

3. The City must adopt by resolution a list of projects proposed to receive fiscal year funding from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA), created by SB 1, which must include a description and the location of each proposed project, a proposed schedule for the project’s completion, and the estimated useful life of the improvement; and

4. The City, will receive an estimated $420,261 in RMRA funding in Fiscal Year 2026-27 from SB 1; and

5. This is the ninth year in which the City is receiving SB 1 funding and will enable the City to continue essential road maintenance and rehabilitation projects, safety improvements, and increasing access and mobility options for the traveling public that would not have otherwise been possible without SB 1; and

6. The City has undergone a robust public process to ensure public input into our community’s transportation priorities/the project list; and

7. The City used a Pavement Management System to develop the SB 1 project list to ensure revenues are being used on the most high-priority and cost-effective projects that also meet the communities priorities for transportation investment; and

8. The funding from SB 1 will help the City maintain and rehabilitate three (3) road segments throughout the City this year and similar projects into the future; and

9. The 2021 California Statewide Local Streets and Roads Needs Assessment found that Monterey County streets and roads, which includes the City of Pacific Grove, are in an “at risk” condition and this revenue will help us increase the overall quality of our road PGCC 5-20-26

Page 385 ends

system and over the next decade will bring our streets and roads into a “Good” condition; and

10. The SB 1 project list and overall investment in our local streets and roads infrastructure with a focus on basic maintenance and safety, investing in complete streets infrastructure, and using cutting-edge technology, materials and practices, will have significant positive co-benefits statewide.

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

1. The 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. The following list of newly proposed projects will be funded in-part or solely with Fiscal Year 2026/27 Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account revenues:

Project Title: FY26/27 Road Rehabilitation Project
Project Description: Rehabilitation of approximately 89,600 SF of roadway Project Location:

1. 17 Mile Drive from Sunset to Sinex, with intersection improvements at Sinex and 17 Mile (PCI 41)

2. Central Avenue from Forest to Lighthouse (PCI 37)

3. 16th Street from Laurel to Lighthouse (PCI 41)
Estimated Project Schedule: August 2026– August 30, 2027 Estimated Project Useful Life: 15-20 years

3. The FY26/27 SB1 Project List is hereby approved as attached to this Resolution, which by this reference are incorporated as set forth in its entirety.

4. This Resolution shall become effective immediately following passage and adoption thereof.

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

AYES:

NOES:

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 386 ends

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
_______________________________
NICK SMITH, Mayor
ATTEST:

DATED:_______________________
_______________________________
SANDRA KANDELL, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
Alex Lorca, City Attorney
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 387 ends

Agenda No. 14 A

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: May 20, 2026
SUBJECT: Update on Monterey Regional Airport
CEQA: {CEQA}

RECOMMENDATION
Receive the presentation.

Attachments
PPT Presentation
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 388 ends

Monterey Regional Airport

THE EASY AND CONVENIENT WAY TO TRAVEL
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 389 ends

MONTEREY PENINSULA AIRPORT DISTRICT
• Public Agency formed in 1941 by the California Legislature as an Independent Special District to own and operate the Monterey Regional Airport
• Not affiliated with any other governing body and has all authority of a city or municipality
• Fully self-sufficient enterprise fund operation
• Generate all revenues through fees and charges for on-Airport activities • Responsible for public safety on Airport property, including infrastructure, maintenance, property management, and police
and fire protection
2 PGCC 5-20-26

Page 390 ends

AIRPORT VALUE AND OVERSIGHT
• MRY provides access to the movement of goods and services, and transports residents and visitors during diverse situations
• Medical emergency services
• Serve as a lifeline during emergencies
• Evacuation
• Fire fighting
• Urgent relief with supply delivery
• Community structural fire support (on-Airport ARFF facility) • Economic Development: The local economy thrives on the presence of consistent air service, Businesses large and small depend on reliable flights
• Regulatory Oversight by Federal Government Code of Federal Regulations, Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Transportation Security Administration, Caltrans Division of Aeronautics
3 PGCC 5-20-26

Page 391 ends

About MRY Air Service

MONTEREY REGIONAL AIRPORT
4 PGCC 5-20-26

Page 392 ends

NONSTOP

DESTINATIONS
• 30 total combined arrivals
and departures daily
• 9 nonstop destinations • With one stop connections
across the world
• 4 commercial airlines • Alaska Airlines • Allegiant Air • American Airlines • United Airlines 5 PGCC 5-20-26

Page 393 ends

SEASONAL SUMMER

HOP-ON JET SERVICE
• Operated by JSX
• Flights depart out of and arrive at
Monterey Jet Center
• 200 Sky Park Drive, Monterey
• Seasonal service
• June through September
• Two destinations
• Operates four days per week
6 BURBANK

ORANGE COUNTY
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 394 ends

About the Airport Master Plan

SAFETY IS ALWAYS OUR FIRST PRIORITY
7 PGCC 5-20-26

Page 395 ends

8 $200M

TOTAL SEP

COST ESTIMATE
ENSURE

COMPLIANCE

WITH FEDERAL
SAFETY

STANDARDS
FUNDED

THROUGH

FEDERAL

GRANTS AND

AIRPORT

REVENUES
COMPREHENSIVE

SUSTAINABILITY

INITIATIVES

TO-DATE

RECEIVED
$130M

FEDERAL

FUNDING
Plus/$20M
local match
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 396 ends

ULTIMATE PROJECT GOAL • Phase 4
Shift Taxiway
1,850’ “A” – 52.5’
south to
increase
runway-taxiway
centerline to
centerline
9 PGCC 5-20-26

Page 397 ends

10 PHASE 1 NORTHEAST

GENERAL AVIATION

REPLACEMENT

INFRASTRUCTURE
Enhancements Include:

Constructed the northeast general
aviation ramp civil infrastructure
(2020)
• Constructed the replacement
Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting
Facility (ARFF) (October 2023)
Constructed the replacement
hangars (relocated from the
southside) ( November 2023)
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 398 ends

PHASE 1B CONSTRUCTED THE REPLACEMENT ARFF FACILITY 2023 PHOTOGRAPHY BY RUSSELL ABRAHAM | DESIGN BY MARJANG ARCHITECTS 11 BEFORE
AFTER
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 399 ends

12 PHASE 2 COMMERCIAL

RAMP CONSTRUCTION
Enhancements Include:
• Construct relocated airline parking
(ramp) completed September 2025
• Demolish southside Aircraft Rescue
and Firefighting Facility (ARFF)
• Demolish southside General Aviation
(GA) hangars including maintenance
hangars
• Construct temporary relocation of
passenger long term parking
(opened June 14, 2024)
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 400 ends

13 REPLACEMENT TERMINAL

PROJECT GOALS
Safety
Runway Separation
Sustainable Goals
LEED Platinum
Zero Net Energy Ready
All Electric Design
Design
Affordable, Beautiful,
Innovative
Timeless
Sense of Place
Community-Centered
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 401 ends

14 GATE LOUNGE TERMINAL AND CIRCULATION
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 402 ends

INTEGRATED SYSTEMS
15 1. Mass Timber Structure

2. Acoustic Panels

3. Direct / Indirect Light Fixtures

4. HVAC Air Supply

5. Clerestory with Automated
Shades

6. HVAC Ceiling Fan Coil Unit

7. Passive Exterior Shading

8. High Performance Glazing
5 2
1 3
4 6
7 8
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 403 ends

16 GATE LOUNGE
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 404 ends

17 GATE LOUNGE
BUILDING FOOTPRINT APRIL 2026 STEEL INSTALLATION MAY 2026 PGCC 5-20-26

Page 405 ends

18 PROJECT CONSTRUCTION RECAP
Project Description
• 62,725 sq ft passenger terminal
• 1 security checkpoint, and space for
concessions
• 5 gates with passenger boarding bridges
• Net-zero energy ready
Project Status and Timeline
• Design: Completed in 2024
• Construction: October 2025 – June 2027
• Terminal - Construction Manager-asConstructor (CMaC): Helsel Phelps • Road and Parking -Construction Manager-atRisk (CMaR): Otto Construction Highway 68

PREMIUM LOT

LONG TERM LOT
Future Frontage Rd
Fred Kane Dr

READY/RETURN

TERMINAL FACILITY

AIRFIELD

CIRCULATION AND PARKING IMPROVEMENTS
PGCC 5-20-26

Page 406 ends

Thank you!
FLY LOCAL. FLY MRY.

PGCC 5-20-26

Page 407 ends

Pacific Grove City CouncilMay 20, 2026

Pacific Grove City Council
May 20, 2026