AGENDA
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
REGULAR MEETING NOTICE
MARCH 17, 2026
PUBLIC MEETING 5:00 P.M.
MEMBERS
Tyron Hampton, Chair District 1
Jessica Rivas, District 5
Steve Madison, District 6
Jason Lyon, District 7
STAFF
David Klug, Economic Development Director
Dion O’Connell, Assistant City Attorney
Betty Gao, Recording Secretary
MISSION STATEMENT
The City of Pasadena is dedicated to delivering exemplary municipal services, responsive to our entire community and consistent
with our history, culture and unique character.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Assistive Listening Devices are available from the City Clerk’s Office with a 24-hour advance notice.
Please call (626) 744-4124 to request use of a listening device.
Language translation services are available for this meeting by calling (626) 744-4124 at least 24 hours in advance.
Habrá servicio de interpretación disponible para éstas juntas llamando al (626) 744-4124 por lo menos con 24 horas de anticipación.
Items on the agenda may not be called in order listed.
Agendas and supporting documents are available on the Internet at https://www.cityofpasadena.net/commissions/city-council-economic-development-technology/
Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the Economic Development and Technology Committee after distribution of the agenda packet will be posted online and listed as: “Supplemental Agenda Material Received after the Posting of the agenda”
PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY
COMMITTEE MEETING FOR
MARCH 17, 2026 AT 5:00 P.M. WILL BE ACCEPTED IN-PERSON AND BY VIDEOCONFERENCE/TELECONFERENCE.
Link to City Meeting Policy:
cityofpasadena.net/CityCouncilMeetingPolicy
TO VIEW A LIVE STREAM OF THE MEETING:
http://pasadena.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?publish_id=9 AND
WWW.PASADENAMEDIA.ORG
In order to facilitate public participation at meetings the City will accept public comment in the following manner:
1. Whether participating in-person or virtually at the meeting, members of the public may provide public comment by submitting a speaker card prior to the start of public comment on that item, at the following webpage:
www.cityofpasadena.net/commissions/public-comment/
If a public comment speaker wishes to speak on more than one agenda item, please indicate which items on the online form (multiple item speakers will be handled according to the process posted on the agenda and as specified in the City meeting policy). Public comments are limited to 3 minutes each, and the Chair and Committee may limit this time if reasonable under the circumstances.
2. In-person Meeting Participation: Complete an online speaker card at the following website: www.cityofpasadena.net/commissions/public-comment/ After submitting a public speaker card, members of the public may attend the meeting in-person by coming to the Pasadena City Council Chamber, Room S249 at City Hall at the date and start-time of the posted meeting.
Virtual Meeting Participation: For virtual participants, you may attend by connecting to the meeting using a computer, other electronic device, or by telephone. Please review the agenda to identify the published start time for the meeting and connect to the meeting just prior to, or at the start of the meeting.
To participate in public comment for an item and to be recognized to speak, it is required that the speaker login to the meeting using the same name or telephone number used on the Speaker Card form. This will allow City staff to locate and promote the speaker into the meeting when it is time for their public comment.
Participants’ phone calls to the Committee meeting will be recorded as part of the Committee meeting. By staying on the line and making public comment during the Committee meeting by phone, you are agreeing to have your phone call recorded. Following is the connectivity information for virtual participation:
Computer or electronic devices, join the meeting at: cityofpasadena.net/cczoom Telephone only dial-in: 1-669-900-6833, Meeting ID: 161 482 446
3. Speaker Card Help Line: If a public comment speaker needs assistance in completing a speaker card, please call the City Clerk’s Office at: (626) 744-4124.
Help line will open 30 minutes prior to the posted start time of the meeting.
4. Members of the public may submit correspondence of any length prior to the start of the meeting, at the following email address:
Correspondence will be forwarded to the City Council prior to the start of the meeting, posted online, and made part of the legislative record for the item.
LIVESTREAM WITH CAPTIONING IS AVAILABLE AT WWW.PASADENAMEDIA.ORG, WWW.CITYOFPASADENA.NET/COMMISSIONS/AGENDAS,
IF YOU NEED A REASONABLE MODIFICATION OR ACCOMMODATION PURSUANT
TO THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
BECAUSE YOU ARE UNABLE TO PARTICIPATE ELECTRONICALLY AS SET FORTH ABOVE, CONTACT THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AT (626) 744-4124 OR
[email protected].
CITY OF PASADENA
NOTICE OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
MARCH 17, 2026
PUBLIC MEETING 5:00 P.M.
PASADENA CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBER
100 NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE, ROOM S249
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the regular meeting of the Economic Development and Technology Committee, will be held on Tuesday, March 17, 2026, at 5:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber to discuss matters on the attached agenda.
_____________________
Tyron Hampton, Chair
Economic Development and
Technology Committee
I HEREBY CERTIFY that this agenda in its entirety, was posted on the Internet at https://www.cityofpasadena.net/commissions/city-council-economic-development-technology/ and on the Council Chamber Bulletin Board, Room S249, and the Bulletin Board in the rotunda area; City Hall, 100 North Garfield Avenue, this 12
th day of March 2026 by 5:30 p.m. and that copies hereof were emailed or delivered to each member of the City Council and to each local newspaper of general circulation, radio or television station requesting notice in writing, all of which recipients are identified on the distribution herein below.
Katrine Panoyan
City Manager’s Office
DISTRIBUTION:
City Council Los Angeles Times
City Manager Pasadena Journal
City Attorney Pasadena Now
Public Information Officer Pasadena Star News
Pasadena Weekly La Opinion
Pasadena Independent
REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
MARCH 17, 2026
Public Meeting: 5:00 P.M.
Council Chamber, Pasadena City Hall
100 North Garfield Avenue, Room S249
The City Council may take action on any item listed on this agenda as it deems appropriate following consideration and discussion of the matter.
PUBLIC MEETING – 5:00 P.M.
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Public comment will be limited to a total of 20 minutes at the beginning of the meeting and will continue at the conclusion of the meeting, if necessary.
Please limit comments to 3 minutes each.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
• JANUARY 29, 2026 - SPECIAL MEETING*
• FEBRUARY 17, 2026 – CANCELED*
NEW BUSINESS
1. 710 INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING AND FINANCING TOOLKIT OVERVIEW*
OLD BUSINESS
2. MICRO-ENTERPRISE HOME KITCHEN OPERATIONS (MEHKOs)*
3. UPDATE ON ADOPTED FEE REDUCTIONS FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION
OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES DESTROYED BY THE EATON FIRE AND
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLY EXPANDING THE FEE REDUCTIONS*
INFORMATION ONLY
4. CDBG PROGRAMS – FAÇADE IMPROVEMENTS AND MICROENTERPRISE GRANTS*
5. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UPDATE BY DAVID A. KLUG, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR*
ADJOURN
*Attachment
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
• JANUARY 29, 2026 – SPECIAL MEETING*
01 01/29/2026
CITY OF PASADENA
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE MINUTES
JANUARY 29, 2026 – 5:00 P.M.
SPECIAL MEETING
OPENING Acting Chair, Vice Mayor Rivas called the meeting of the Economic Development and Technology Committee to order at 5:08 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Staff:
Councilmember Tyron Hampton, Chair (Absent)
Vice Mayor Jessica Rivas, Acting Chair
Councilmember Steve Madison
Councilmember Jason Lyon
David Klug, Director of Economic Development
Teresa Garcia, Senior Project Manager
Dion O’Connell, Assistant City Attorney
Betty Gao, Recording Secretary
APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Councilmember Madison, seconded by Councilmember Lyon, to approve the minutes of November 18, 2025, and December 16, 2025, as submitted. ( Motion unanimously approved ) (Absent:
Councilmember Hampton)
NEW BUSINESS ROSE BOWL ANNUAL REPORT 2024-2025
Following a brief discussion, and by consensus of the Committee, the information was received and filed.
INFORMATION ONLY STATE OF CITY COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE MARKET — DATA
AND INSIGHTS
1. OFFICE UPDATE PRESENTED BY CBRE
2. RETAIL AND HOTEL DATA INSIGHTS PRESENTED BY COSTAR
David Klug, Director of Economic Development , provided introductory comments, and Jackie Benavidez, First Vice President from CBRE (City Consultant), and Dennis Lee, Account Executive from CoStar Group (City Consultant), jointly presented a PowerPoint presentation as part of her oral presentation, including providing information on market highlights and statistics, retail forecast and data, new tenants and lease renewals, and responded to questions.
Following discussion, on the order of the Acting Chair, and by consensus of the Committee, the information was received and filed.
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PRESENTED BY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
02 01/29/2026
David Klug, Director of Economic Development , provided introductory comments, and Teresa Garcia, Senior Proje ct Manager , presented a PowerPoint presentation on the item, including providing information on existing models and components; with both responding to questions.
Ms. Garica reported that the correct title of the item is “Commercial District Needs Assessment”.
Director Klug clarified that funding would be needed to conduct the assessment, and staff would explore potential support from Pasadena- based institutions. Councilmember Madison asked staff to return to the Committee with additional detail s on the assessment and potential support.
Councilmember Lyon expressed support for the proposed assessment initiative, particularly the focus on North Pasadena, noting the importance of equity. He also emphasized the need to balance this work with continued support for the City’s established economic drivers.
Following discussion, on the order of the Chair, and by consensus of the Committee, the information was received and filed.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UPDATE BY DAVID A. KLUG,
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
David Klug, Economic Development Director, summarized the staff memo as part of his oral presentation, including providing information on business development, special events and business support, business and markets update, awards and recognition, and responded to questions.
Councilmember Lyon shared his experience during Cheeseburger Week and encouraged colleagues to continue community outreach, exploring a variety of news and social media outlets.
Following discussion, on the order of the Chair, and by consensus of the Committee, the information was received and filed.
On the order of the Chair, the meeting of the Economic Development and Technology Committee was adjourned at 6:08 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT:
_________________________________
Tyron Hampton, Chair
Economic Development and Technology Committee
ATTEST:
____________________
Betty Gao
Recording Secretary
• FEBRUARY 17, 2026 – CANCELED*
01 02/17/2026
CITY OF PASADENA
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE MINUTES
PASADENA CITY HALL
100 NORTH GARFIELD AVENUE
COUNCIL CHAMBER – ROOM S249
FEBRUARY 17, 2026
MEETING
The meeting of the Economic Development and Technology
Committee, scheduled for Tuesday, February 17, 2026, at 5:30 p.m., was cancelled as ordered on February 11, 2025, and was posted.
ATTEST:
____________________
Betty Gao
Recording Secretary
__________________________
Councilmember Tyron Hampton, Chair
Economic Development and Technology Committee
NEW BUSINESS
1. 710 INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING AND FINANCING TOOLKIT OVERVIEW*
Prepared by:
Kosmont Companies
Infrastructure Financing District
Analysis Summary
March 2026
DRAFT
Background
2 • The City of Pasadena is evaluating the use of a special purpose financing district such as an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFD) to capture value from potential new development to fund critical infrastructure and community investment priorities
• EIFD tax increment financing (TIF) capacity is estimated to range of up to ~$230M on a present-value basis
• While a City-only financing district strategy would likely achieve favorable “return on investment” for the City, a broader partnership including the County of Los Angeles would further improve financial feasibility • In addition to the EIFD funding capacity, the EIFD would elevate the City’s ability to attract other public funding, particularly state and federal grants
• Subject to feedback from City staff and City Council, immediate next steps could include outreach to the County to confirm potential EIFD partnership, then City Council consideration of Resolution of Intention 3 $0M
$100M
$200M
$300M
$400M
$500M
$600M
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Years from District Formation
Note: Illustrative.
What is Tax Increment Financing (TIF) – Not a New Tax
Baseline Property Value at District Formation
All Property Tax Stays with General Fund
New Property Value from
New Development / Rehabilitation
Some Portion of Property Tax Available to TIF District, Remainder Stays with General Fund
Assessed
Property Value
within District
New Total
Value After
TIF District
All Property
Tax Goes to
General Fund
5 TIF District Alternatives
Climate
Resilience
District
(CRD)
Enhanced
Infrastructure
Financing
District
(EIFD)
Community
Revitalization
and
Investment
Authority
(CRIA)
SB 782
Disaster
Recovery
District
(DRD)
AB 1445 Downtown
Revitalization and
Economic Recovery
Financing District
(DRERFD)
Types of Projects EIFD Can Fund
Partial List
9 Roadway / Parking / Transit
Brownfield Remediation
Storm / Flood / Public Facilities Parks / Open Space / Recreation Libraries & Childcare Facilities
Affordable Housing
Broadband Small Business /
Nonprofit Facilities
Wildfire Prevention / Other
Climate Change Response
10 TIF Today versus Former Redevelopment Agencies
Sample of Differences
Former RDAs EIFDs / CRDs / CRIAs
Eligible Use of Funds • Infrastructure and affordable housing • Mixed-income housing
• Land clearing and parcel assembly
• Tax and other private business /
developer subsidies
• Public infrastructure (e.g., roads, flood
control, open space, utilities)
• Public facilities
• Affordable housing
Eminent Domain /
Condemnation
• Allowed • Not allowed
Eligible Areas • Must qualify as “blighted” • No “blight” finding required Governance • City Council or County Board
• School entity participation
• Public Financing Authority including
Public Members (no school entities)
Formation • Vote of governing body • 3 public hearings, majority protest opportunity from landowners and
registered voters within district
Comparison of TIF and Other Tools
Communicating in a Digital World
11 District Type Description Revenue
Source
Approval
Structure
Use of
Funds
TIF (e.g., EIFD, CRIA, IFD,
IRFD)
Incremental property tax
revenues from new
development used to fund
local infrastructure.
Max term is 45 years from
approval to issue debt.
Incremental (new development)
property tax revenues (incl.
VLF) – does not increase taxes
District formation – No vote, but
majority protest opportunity by
landowners and registered
voters
Bond issuance – None
• Infrastructure of regional or
communitywide significance
• Maintenance
• Affordable housing
Mello-Roos Community
Facilities District (CFD)
and/or Assessment
District
Additional assessment or
“special tax” used to fund
infrastructure / services that
benefit property.
Max term is 40 years from
date of debt issuance.
New property assessment or
tax – appears as separate line
item on tax bill
District formation – 2/3 vote of
landowners or registered voters
in district*
Bond issuance – vote of elected
body (City)
• Infrastructure capital
expenditures of benefit to
landowners
• Maintenance
• Public services (e.g., safety,
programs)
General Obligation Voter-approved debt that is
repaid with “override” to 1%
tax levy; City-wide
Direct property tax levied on all
properties at same millage rate
2/3 vote of registered voters in
entire City
• In accordance with bond
plebiscite
Lease Revenue / COPs General Fund-supported
borrowing, generally utilizing
City-owned assets to be
leased and leased back
General Fund (or other legally
available revenues as
determined by City)
Vote of elected body (City) • In accordance with bond
authorization
Potential funding strategy can utilize MULTIPLE mechanisms * For CFD formation, a vote of registered voters within the district boundary is required if 12 or more registered voters live therein (otherwise a vote of landowners prorated by acreage).
Why are Public Agencies Authorizing Financing Districts? Communicating in a Digital World
12 1. Return on Investment: Private sector investment induced by district commitment accelerates growth of net fiscal revenues, job creation, housing production, essential infrastructure improvements
2. Ability to attract additional funds / other public money (“OPM”) – tax increment from other entities (county, special districts), federal / state grants / loans (e.g., for transit-oriented development, water, housing, parks, remediation)
TIF Districts in Progress
Statewide
Fully Formed In Formation Process Under Evaluation
Jurisdiction Purpose
Artesia + L.A. County Transportation and affordable housing Barstow Industrial and housing supportive infrastructure Brentwood Housing, employment, and transit-supportive infrastructure Buena Park Mall reimagination, tourism-supportive infrastructure Calipatria (CRD) Economic and climate resilience infrastructure Carson + L.A. County Remediation, affordable housing, recreation Covina Downtown housing and blended use supportive infrastructure Downey + L.A. County Transit-oriented development, affordable housing Fresno Downtown, housing and transit-supportive infrastructure Humboldt County Coastal mixed-use and energy supportive infrastructure Inglewood + L.A. County (CRD) Transportation and affordable housing Imperial County Renewable energy, housing and infrastructure La Verne + L.A. County Housing and transit-supportive infrastructure Lakewood + L.A. County Mall reimagination, smart streets, affordable housing Long Beach Economic empowerment and affordable housing
Los Angeles (Palisades, Downtown, other) Affordable housing and transit-supportive infrastructure Los Angeles County Santa Monica Mountains Wildfire Recovery and Rebuild Los Angeles County West Carson Housing / bio-science / tech infrastructure Madera County (3 Districts) Water, sewer, roads and other housing infrastructure Modesto + Stanislaus County Downtown, housing, and recreation infrastructure Mount Shasta Rural brownfield mixed-use infrastructure
Napa Downtown, housing, tourism supportive infrastructure Norwalk + L.A. County Affordable housing and infrastructure Ontario Airport-related, blended use, infrastructure
Palmdale + L.A. County Housing, blended use, transit infrastructure Pittsburg Housing, commercial, and tech park infrastructure Placentia + Orange County Housing and TOD infrastructure Rancho Cucamonga Blended use and connectivity infrastructure Redlands Education related blended use, mall reimagination Redondo Beach + L.A. County Parks / open space, recreation infrastructure Riverside County Thousand Palms Housing, hospitality, medical supportive infrastructure Sacramento County (Unincorporated) Industrial / commercial supportive infrastructure Salinas Water, sewer, and other housing supportive infrastructure Sanger Commercial, hospitality, supportive infrastructure Santa Cruz Downtown, blended use, and climate resilience infrastructure Santa Fe Springs + L.A. County Housing and transit-oriented development infrastructure Santa Rosa + County of Sonoma Downtown investment, affordable housing, aging infrastructure Scotts Valley + Scotts Valley Fire Housing and mixed-use supportive infrastructure, fire facilities Sebastopol + County of Sonoma Housing, flood control, library, civic facilities Sonoma County West (Unincorporated) Housing, flood control, sewer, fire facilities Yucaipa Housing and commercial infrastructure
Potential EIFD Boundary
710 Area + Other SP Areas
14 • 710 Vision Plan area plus Lincoln Avenue, Fair
Oaks Avenue / Orange Grove Boulevard, and
North Lake Avenue Specific Plan areas
• Approx. 551 acres (~3.7% of City)
• $1.31 billion in existing assessed value (~3.2%
of Citywide value)
Source: Los Angeles County Auditor-Controller (2026)
Other Opportunity Site EIFD Parcels
City
21.0%
County
28.0%
Other / School
Entities (not eligible)
51.0%
15 • Primary non-school recipients and potential
contributors of property tax are the City and County
• City share varies by area and averages ~17% to 21%
each of every $1 collected in property taxes within the study area, not including the City’s voter-approved
retirement allocation
– City additionally receives equivalent of ~6% of property tax in lieu of motor vehicle license fees (MVLF), also
available to EIFD
• County General Fund share averages ~28% to 35%
– County additionally receives property tax in lieu of
MVLF, also available to EIFD, but not incorporated into this analysis to be conservative
• School-related entities cannot participate
As counties tend to rely more heavily on property tax revenue sources generated by new development within incorporated jurisdictions, it is Kosmont’s experience that it is not reasonable to assume allocation of property tax in lieu of MVLF by the County. As cities benefit from additional non-property tax revenue sources (e.g., sales tax, transient occupancy tax) from new development, it is Kosmont’s experience that it is reasonable for cities to consider contributing property tax in lieu of MVLF.
Post-ERAF (Education Revenue Augmentation Fund) distribution.
Source: Los Angeles County Auditor Controller (2026)
Property Tax Revenues Available to EIFD
Property Tax Distribution
Tax Rate Area (TRA) 07454
+ City MVLF of 6% = 27%
Los Angeles County EIFD Participation Policy
16 Property Tax Increment:
• City share contributed ≥ County share contributed
• County contributes less than 100% of its share
Fiscal Analysis: Positive net impact to County General Fund Board Priorities: Supports affordable housing, homeless prevention, workforce development, or sustainability
Regional and Community Significance: As related to Board priorities above, job creation, blight removal, or improvements to regional transportation
Affordable Housing: 20% of units or tax increment will be set aside for affordable housing uses “But for…” Test: Contribution of County property tax increment is necessary precondition for targeted projects
19 Potential Cash Flow / Debt Issuance Approaches
• Kosmont Financial Services is in active discussions with public finance underwriters regarding TIF debt issuances in other jurisdictions
• There are several approaches for the leverage of tax increment for accelerated debt issuance (e.g., 2-3 years from district formation), for example:
a) Tax increment only
b) Overlapping TIF and CFD (CFD Backstop) – landowners / developers must be willing to pay CFD special taxes in the short term (e.g., 5-10 years) until tax increment reaches a level to cover debt service
c) Tax increment with City or County general fund backstop • There are advantages and disadvantages with each approach (e.g., upfront proceeds available, public agency risk, cost of capital)
• Additional alternatives are available if private sector partners (e.g., landowners / developers are willing to advance infrastructure funding in exchange for reimbursement from TIF proceeds) 21 Financing Districts work better with a Multi-Agency Partnership & Attract Other Funding
Other Public Sources
Cap-and-Trade / HCD grant & loan
programs (AHSC, IIG, TCC,CERF)
Prop 4 climate funding
Prop 68 parks & open space grants
Prop 1 water/sewer funds
Caltrans ATP / HSIP grants
Federal EDA / DOT / EPA funding
Federal ARPA, Invest Act, IIJ Act
Other Private Sources
Development Agreement / impact fees
Benefit assessments (e.g., contribution from
CFD)
Statewide Community Infrastructure Program
(SCIP) pooled financing
Private investment
• Ideal strategy includes City and County partnership
• District which involve a City / County joint effort are more likely to win state grant funding sources • Districts explicitly increase scoring for CA state housing grants (e.g., IIG, AHSC, TCC) 24 Illustrative Financing District Formation Schedule
Tax increment allocation begins fiscal year following district formation Debt issuance, if desired, would occur after a stabilized level of tax increment has been established (may be 3-5 years) Target Date Task
Dec 2025 – Feb 2026
a) Conduct outreach/discussion among City staff and Council, County staff and Board of Supervisors, other relevant stakeholders
b) Final determination of EIFD boundaries, eligible projects, governing Public Financing Authority (PFA) Board Mar / Apr 2026 c) Participating taxing agencies adopt Resolution(s) of Intention (ROI) and formally establish PFA May 2026 d) PFA directs the drafting of the Infrastructure Financing Plan (IFP) June 2026 e) Distribute draft IFP to property owners, affected taxing entities, City Council, County Board of Supervisors July 2026 f) PFA holds an initial public meeting to present the draft IFP to the public and property owners August 2026 g) City Council/legislative bodies of other affected taxing entity contributing increment adopt resolution(s) approving IFP September 2026 h) PFA holds first public hearing to hear additional comments and take action to modify or reject IFP (at least 30 days after “f”)
October 2026 i) PFA holds second public hearing to consider oral and written protests and take action to terminate proceedings or adopt IFP and form the district by resolution (at least 30 days after “h”) 25 Potential Next Steps
• Address questions, receive and incorporate feedback from City staff, City Council • Outreach to the County to confirm potential EIFD partnership • Based on City/County feedback, next action would be City Council consideration of a non-binding Resolution of Intention to form the EIFD
26 THANK YOU
Questions?
Kosmont Companies
1601 N. Sepulveda Blvd. #382 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
Ph: (424) 297-1070 | Fax: (424) 286-4632
www.kosmont.com
Disclaimer
27 The high-level analyses, projections, assumptions, rates of return, and any examples presented herein are for illustrative purposes and are not a guarantee of actual and/or future results. Project pro forma and tax analyses are projections only. Actual results may differ from those expressed in this analysis.
Discussions or descriptions of potential financial tools that may be available to the Client and public agencies are included for informational purposes only and are not intended to be to be “advice” within the context of this Analysis.
Municipal Advisory activities are conducted through Kosmont Companies’ affiliate, Kosmont Financial Services, which is Registered as a Municipal Advisor with the SEC and MSRB.
OLD BUSINESS
2. MICRO-ENTERPRISE HOME KITCHEN OPERATIONS (MEHKOs)*
Public Health Department
Microenterprise Home Kitchen Operations
Economic Development & Technology Committee
March 17, 2026
Public Health Department
Background
• Overview of MicroEnterprise Home Kitchen
Operations (MEHKOs) presented to the Economic
Development & Technology (EDTech) Committee in
September 2025
> Committee requested staff explore establishing a
pilot program and return to the Committee
Public Health Department
Background
• In 2019, state of California amended CA
Health & Safety Code 114367
> Allows Microenterprise Home Kitchen Operation
(MEHKO), a new type of retail food facility
> Cities and counties with their own local health
jurisdiction have the option to authorize MEHKOs
> Authorization by ordinance or resolution is required
> If authorized, the MEHKO program would apply to all
areas of the City
Public Health Department
MEHKO Summary
• MEHKO: small-scale restaurant operated in a home
> Operated only by a resident in their own home
> Food must be made and served on the same day
> Food has to be sold or donated directly to a
customer for onsite consumption, pickup, or delivery
> Cannot operate as a caterer or temporary food
vendor
> Cannot operate as a cottage food facility unless
they register or obtain a separate Health Permit
Public Health Department
MEHKO Summary
• What can be sold?
> Individual food items and full meals (everything from appetizers to dessert) are allowed
> Alcohol can be served, with a Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license
> No production, service, or sale of raw milk products
> No raw bottled juice, oysters, or specialized food
preparation processes
Public Health Department
MEHKO Summary
• State exemptions and restrictions
> Exempt from plan review and most facility requirements > Any residential dwelling can operate a MEHKO (including rental/privately owned SFR, apartment, condo, etc.)
> Cities can not require rezoning, levy of any fees, or impose any other restrictions on MEHKO operations
> No change in occupancy for purposes of State Housing
Law, State Uniform Building Standards Code, or local
building and fire codes
Public Health Department
MEHKO Summary
• Only one MEHKO per residence
> 30 max meals per day/90 max meals per week
> $107,121 max annual gross sales cap
> Sales cap adjusts annually by CPI
• MEHKO with a commissary may store up to two
food carts onsite
• No exterior advertising signage allowed
• Must meet local noise ordinance requirements
Public Health Department
Potential Economic Development Benefits
• Lower-barrier pathway for micro-entrepreneurs
• Opportunity for individuals seeking to transition their operations to permitted status
• Possible increase to household income
• Stimulate local economy and job creation
• Support food security and access
• Act as an incubator for larger food businesses
• Diversify local food scene
Public Health Department
Permit Requirements
• State law requires MEHKO operators to satisfy
the following requirements:
> Obtain a Food Safety Certificate
> Submit a Health Permit application
> Submit standard operating procedures (SOPs)
detailing food types, preparation methods,
cleaning schedules, and operating hours
> Successfully pass an inspection
Public Health Department
MEHKOs in California
• 18 local health jurisdictions have authorized
MEHKOs including:
> Los Angeles (2024), Riverside (2019), Santa Barbara (2021), and San Diego (2022)
> 5 of 18 launched as pilot programs
• 1,200+ MEHKO permits issued across the state
Public Health Department
MEHKOs in California
• Statewide review of
permitting agency
complaint data
> 606 unpermitted
vendor complaints
> 32 MEHKO complaints
Source: The Home Kitchen Pathway, A Data-Driven Review of California’s MEHKO Program; Cook Alliance. Research Report — The COOK Alliance Accessed February 25, 2026.
Public Health Department
MEHKOs in California
• Additional complaint data
> 97% of MEHKO permitted operations in state have
not had a formal complaint of any kind
> Two foodborne illness complaints from 2019 to 2024
Source: The Home Kitchen Pathway, A Data-Driven Review of California’s MEHKO Program; Cook Alliance. Research Report — The COOK Alliance Accessed February 25, 2026.
Public Health Department
MEHKOs in California
• Additional data
> 79% of operators are from communities of color
> 70% of operators are women
> 73% of operators shared that MEHKOs offer
financial stability, work-life balance, and stronger
community ties
Source: The Home Kitchen Pathway, A Data-Driven Review of California’s MEHKO Program; Cook Alliance. Research Report — The COOK Alliance Accessed February 25, 2026.
Public Health Department
MEHKOs in Los Angeles County
• 220 MEHKO Permits issued in LA County
• MEHKO permits in neighboring cities
> Los Angeles: 66
> Burbank: 4
> Arcadia: 2
> La Canada Flintridge: 1
> Montrose: 1
> South Pasadena: 1
Public Health Department
Role of Pasadena Public Health
• If approved, Public Health Department would:
> Develop guidance materials for potential operators
> Review Health Permit applications
> Perform initial and annual public health inspections
> Conduct public health complaint investigations
> Provide food safety education and technical
assistance
> Support transition of unpermitted operations to
regulatory oversight
Public Health Department
Role of Pasadena Public Health
• Develop documents including:
> Food Safety Guidelines
Proper food handling and storage
Sanitation and hygiene practices
Allergen awareness and labeling
> Application Process Guide
> Frequently Asked Questions
Public Health Department
Role of Pasadena Public Health
• Pathway for MEHKO Permitting
> Operators submit Food Safety Certificate, Health Permit application, Proposed Menu, and Standard Operating
Procedures
> Operators pay Health Permit application Fee
> PPHD conducts initial inspection
> PPHD issues Health Permit upon successful inspection
> After successfully completing an annual inspection,
PPHD issues Health Permit renewal
Public Health Department
Role of Pasadena Public Health
• Staff Allocation
> Assign dedicated personnel for application review,
inspections, data collection, and enforcement activities • Training
> Ensure staff are trained in MEHKO regulations and
inspection procedures
• Database Management
> Adapt permitting system to track applications, permits issued, inspection results, and compliance status
Public Health Department
Other Enforcement
• Other City departments would respond to
relevant complaints
> Noise concerns and other municipal regulations
> Litter and Fats/Oils/Grease disposal
> Sidewalk vending enforcement
> Traffic and parking enforcement
> Business license
Public Health Department
Cost of Additional City Services
• Public Health
> Fees would be designed to recover permitting costs but unrecoverable costs are expected for unpermitted
operations enforcement and data collection
> Year 1 costs: $125K/Year 2 costs: $50K
General Fund support would be needed
• Other city departments
> Related costs are unknown at this time
> Any potential increases in service costs will be reflected in the annual budget process
Public Health Department
Recommendation
• Take steps to establish a two-year pilot program
authorizing MEHKOs in the City of Pasadena
> Align with state law
Max 30 meals per day and 90 meals per week
Max annual gross sales cap of $107,121, which will
be adjusted annually by CPI
> Collect data necessary for City Council to assess if
continuation of the program after two years is desired
Public Health Department
Potential Next Steps
• If EdTech Committee approves staff
recommendation, staff will present to City
Council
> Request City Council direct the City Attorney to
prepare amendments to the Pasadena Municipal
Code to establish a two-year MEHKO pilot
program
3. UPDATE ON ADOPTED FEE REDUCTIONS FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION
OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES DESTROYED BY THE EATON FIRE AND
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLY EXPANDING THE FEE REDUCTIONS*
MEMORANDUM
TO: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
FROM: JENNIFER PAIGE, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: MARCH 17, 2026
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON ADOPTED FEE REDUCTIONS FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION
OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES DESTROYED BY THE EATON FIRE AND
DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLY EXPANDING THE FEE REDUCTIONS
BACKGROUND:
On August 25, 2025, the City Council approved fee reductions for the reconstruction of eligible red-tagged structures destroyed in the Eaton Fire. The program waives all City of Pasadena plan check and permitting fees associated with the repair or reconstruction of red-tagged structures on eligible single-family properties. This includes not only fees for reconstructing a fire-destroyed home and garage, but also fees for rebuilding or repairing fire-damaged pools, covered patios, walls, and fences located on the affected property. The program does not waive the Construction and Demolition (C&D) Waste Management Deposit, which is instead reduced to a flat $1,000 for eligible red-tagged sites. The program also does not waive fees related to water service charged by Pasadena Water and Power, fees imposed by outside agencies such as the Pasadena Unified School District or the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, annual property tax assessments, fees for new structures that did not exist prior to the Eaton Fire or fees for fire-repair permits on sites that do not contain a red-tagged structure. Structures that have been red-tagged have been deemed by the City’s Building Official to be unsafe to enter or use where severe injury or death could result. Red-tagged structures are a collapse hazard, may be crushed by an adjacent building, or contain one or more hazardous conditions.
At the time of the program’s inception, staff estimated that 2/3 of approximately 125 sites would be eligible for the fee waivers. The estimated 125 single-family sites is greater than the actual number of single-family houses that were lost (117) to account for properties that only had an accessory structure, such as a garage or deck, that was red-tagged. Staff estimated that approximately one-third of the properties would not utilize the fee waivers for various reasons such as choosing to sell rather than rebuild, they plan to build larger than the “like-for-like” parameters established in the City’s Rebuilding Ordinance, or they were not owner-occupied.
Staff estimated that the City fees to reconstruct a 1,900 square foot single-family home and garage are approximately $49,123, although some sites may have higher fees depending on infrastructure costs for water and electricity. This estimate does not include the previously mentioned non-city fees such as property taxes, LA County Sanitation District fees, school fees, etc. Under the 1,900 square foot size example, an approved fee waiver application would mean
Economic Development and Technology Committee March 17, 2026 Fee Reduction Update for Homes Destroyed by the Eaton Fire and Possible Expansion of the Reductions
that the fees are reduced from $49,123 to $1,952, which includes the reduced $1,000 C&D deposit and the water-service fee (typically $952). Assuming that two-thirds of 125 sites are eligible for the fee waiver/refund, staff estimated the total program cost at $4.25 million.
To be eligible for the fee waiver/refund program, the properties must be owner‑occupied single‑family homes or condominiums as of January 7, 2025, and must contain one or more structures red‑tagged by the City of Pasadena due to fire damage from the Eaton Fire.
Reconstruction must comply with the City’s Rebuild Ordinance, including like‑for‑like limits.
Properties that have been sold or transferred on or after January 7, 2025, are not eligible unless the new owner is a family member, and properties currently listed for sale do not qualify.
Construction of new structures that did not exist prior to the fire, including converting a destroyed structure to a different use (such as converting a garage to an ADU), is also ineligible.
To determine eligibility, applicants must submit a completed fee waiver/refund application along with supplemental documentation including their plans for reconstruction. Upon approval, applicants will receive waivers for fees that have not yet been charged. Refunds are processed for eligible fees that have already been paid.
To date, 41 permit applications have been received, of which 38 have been approved for waivers or refunds, one was denied because the size of the rebuild did not comply with the Rebuild Ordinance, and two applications are in process. Among the 38 applications that have been approved, 36 are rebuilding larger than the size of the original home but still within the limits in the Rebuilding Ordinance, and six include plans to construct a new Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU). While the full amount of waived fees to date is still being calculated, staff has confirmed that the amount of fees refunded to date exceeds $276,000.
In regards to overall reconstruction efforts, the City has received applications to repair or rebuild on 80 red-tagged sites of which 15 sites, or one in every five rebuilds, are including a new ADU as part of the reconstruction, for a total of 95 permits. There are currently 37 issued permits and two sites where construction has been completed.
DISCUSSION:
Expanding the Fee Waiver Program
Staff was asked to return to Ed-Tech with an update on the fee waivers and to have a discussion of potentially expanding the fee waiver program to cover the cost of City permits for fire-related repairs to properties that were not red-tagged. This would expand the program beyond rebuilding sites to sites that need repairs only.
Damage assessments post Eaton Fire completed by the City and by CalFire focused on structures people live in and excluded damage to non-livable structures such as fences, driveways, block walls, etc. Sites were inspected and if it was determined that there was visible damage needing repair a “yellow tag” was assigned to the affected structure. Beyond yellow- tagged sites there is no inventory of sites that may require fire-related repairs. Structures that received a yellow tag can be used per the restrictions noted on the placard. Parts of the building may be usable, or the building can be entered briefly to obtain important possessions. However, parts of the building might be hazardous and use of these sections may not be allowed. Based on the City’s assessment, 17 sites were issued a yellow tag. Green tags were also issued for buildings that were assessed but had no apparent structural damage as of the date and time of the assessment. A total of 16 structures were issued a green tag. Refer to Attachment 1.
Economic Development and Technology Committee March 17, 2026 Fee Reduction Update for Homes Destroyed by the Eaton Fire and Possible Expansion of the Reductions
Staff reviewed permit records from January 7, 2025, through February 2026 to identify typical costs for fire‑related repairs citywide. This list of fire-repair related permits as outlined in Table 1 is not comprehensive, but it provides an overview of the types of repairs that have been needed following the fire and their associated permit fees. Some fees appear higher because additional work, such as remodels, were completed at the same time as the repairs. Fees also vary based on project size, fixture counts, and valuation.
Table 1 – Overview Permit Fees for Fire-Related Repairs January 2025- February 2026 Scope of Repairs Estimated Fees
Replace insulation and/or drywall $142.69 - $665.24
Replace fire-damaged water heater $159.40
Change out AC condenser, furnace and ductwork $188.52 - $344.52 Re-roof $290.47 – $546.26
Repair fire-damaged siding or stucco $499.46 – $514 Repair demising wall between condo units $1,351.68
*Large scope repairs (insulation, drywall, roof, windows, stucco, etc.)
$3,227 - $10,608.47
*These permits were more often associated with a larger remodel being done because of fire repair, so the fee range is higher
Staff also completed a review of the fee waiver programs by other jurisdictions affected by the fires and found that there is no consistency in how each agency is structuring their fee waiver programs:
• Los Angeles City (includes Pacific Palisades) – Waives both plan check and permit fees for all structures from residential to commercial, regardless of rebuild/repair scale, only up to the amount attributed to 110% of the original footprint. The program runs for three years with a $90 million cap on waived fees.
• Los Angeles County (includes Altadena)– Defers plan review and permit fees for eligible owner-occupied sites containing a home directly destroyed by the fires. Scope of rebuild can include the garage and a new ADU where the owner will temporarily occupy while the replacement primary home is built. Does not waive fees for repair permits or construction and demolition deposit fees. No deadline or cap on funding specified.
Although called a ‘fee deferral’ there is no plan to require repayment. • Malibu – Waives Planning and building permit fees for projects rebuilding or repairing eligible owner-occupied single-family and duplex structures only. Fee waivers are limited to damaged or destroyed structures (only like-for-like or like-for-like plus 10%), replacement or upgrade of onsite wastewater treatment systems, seawalls or other permitted infrastructure as required by the City, temporary water tanks or other suppression mechanism, damaged or destroyed accessory structures, hardscaping, and landscaping. Fee waiver application submittal deadline is June 30, 2028. • Sierra Madre – No fees are being waived.
• Pasadena (for comparison)- Waives City of Pasadena plan check and permitting fees for repair or reconstruction on eligible single-family or condominium sites that contain a red- tagged structure and were owner-occupied at the time of the fire. The rebuild must comply with the City’s Rebuilding Ordinance, including like-for-like (plus 10% or 200 square feet) limits, can be a relocated, prefabricated, or modular home which may exceed these limits up to the maximum floor area allowed by zoning, provided all other like‑for‑like requirements are met. Fees not waived include the reduced $1,000 C&D deposit, fees related to water service charged by the Pasadena Water and Power Economic Development and Technology Committee March 17, 2026 Fee Reduction Update for Homes Destroyed by the Eaton Fire and Possible Expansion of the Reductions
Department, non-city fees, and fees for new structures that did not exist prior to the Eaton Fire.
NEXT STEPS:
If EdTech supports expanding fee reductions for repairs beyond the Council approved fee program, staff will need guidance on areas such as:
• What sites would be eligible? For example, yellow tagged properties? • Would all repairs be eligible or only certain repairs, or certain dollar amounts? • Would repairs be eligible for sites that are not owner occupied?
Input provided will determine if an amendment to the Council adopted policy will be a future work program item for the department.
Attachments:
A. Windstorm and Wildfire Cases Map
B. Staff Report for adopted Fire Rebuild Fee Waiver program – August 25, 2025 ATTACHMENT A – Windstorm and Wildfire Cases Map
PAS-1b^0
^^^
0-7
•d *
(D z
<0 0<0 0
~^.<</ -0^ 0y '5^eo
Agenda Report
August 25, 2025
[
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Economic Development & Technology Committee (July 15, 2025) FROM: Planning & Community Development Department
SUBJECT: PROPOSED PERMIT FEE REDUCTIONS FOR EATON FIRE REBUILD SITES
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council:
1) Find that the recommended fee reductions are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines per Section 15061 (b)(3);
2) Adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 General Fee Schedule to reduce or waive various Plan Check and Permit Fees for rebuilding eligible residential structures destroyed in the Eaton Fire; and
3) Direct the City Attorney to prepare within 30 days an ordinance to amend Title 4 of the Pasadena Municipal Code (PMC) to exempt qualified reconstruction of eligible residential structures destroyed by the Eaton Fire from the City's fees for Construction Tax.
4) Direct staff to explore other means of recovering the foregone fees.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION:
On July 15, 2025, the Economic Development & Technology Committee (EdTech) recommended the City Council approve the proposed fee reductions for rebuilding eligible single-family structures destroyed in the Eaton Fire as follows:
1) Waive plan check and building permit fees collected into the Building Fund (204) and the General Fund (101) with a total estimated cost of $3,203,500; 2) Waive the Refuse Collection Administrative Fee and reduce the Deposit for the Construction & Demolition Waste Management collected in the Refuse Collection MEETING OF.08/25/2025AGENDA ITEM NO.17
Attachment B
Eaton Fire Rebuilding Fee Reductions
August 25, 2025
Fund (406) to a flat $1,000 per site reducing the overall funds collected from $1,500,000 to $125,000;
3) Waive Sidewalk Inspection and Repair Fees collected in the Project Management Fund (301) with a cost amount of $14,250 for the inspections and an estimated cost of $225,000 for the repairs for a total $239,250; 4) Waive Fire Sprinkler and Landscape Review Fees collected in the Building Fund (204) with a total cost amount of $303,625;
5) Waive Electric Service Fees collected in the Electric Service Fund (411) with a total estimated cost amount of $504,000;
6) Defer discussion for Pasadena Water and Power (PWP) fees collected in the Water Service Fund (412) with a total estimated cost of $3.5 million for PWP water service customers.
The reductions outlined above would apply to projects that meet all of the following (eligible sites):
1) Single-family properties that were owner-occupied as of January 7, 2025, and the same owner (or a member of the same owner's family) is the applicant; 2) The reconstruction of 'like-for-like' single-family properties as allowed under the City's Rebuild Ordinance adopted March 24,2025;and
3) The reconstruction of red-tagged structures (primary dwelling and required parking) and not to the construction of new detached structures such as an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) that did not exist prior to the fire.
Since the Ed-Tech Meeting of July 15, 2025 staff heard from rebuild property owners requesting that the fee waivers be expanded from the criteria above to include the following:
1) Owner-occupied condominium units;
2) Owners who select a relocated home or a prefabricated, modular home. This category may exceed the 10% or 200 square foot like for like square footage cap but must still meet all other like for like provisions (height, setbacks etc.) and meet the square footage requirements of the Zoning Code.
Staff is supportive of the expanded eligibility criteria. Only four condominium units on the same site were lost and relocated or manufactured homes are based on floor plans that in most cases cannot be modified. With all other zoning requirements being met, there will be little to no impact.
Eaton Fire Rebuilding Fee Reductions
August 25, 2025
BACKGROUND:
On January 7, 2025, the City was impacted by a severe windstorm and a destructive fire resulting in significant damage to private property. That same day, the Governor proclaimed a state of emergency for Southern California. On January 8, 2025, the City Manager declared a Local Emergency pursuant to Pasadena Municipal Code (PMC) Chapter 2.370, which was ratified by the City Council on January 13, 2025. The fire, referred to as the 'Eaton Fire', destroyed 185 structures in Pasadena, primarily single- family homes and accessory structures located in the Upper Hastings Ranch, Victory Rose, Dundee Heights, and NATHA neighborhoods (see map Attachment A). Most of the affected areas are zoned Single-Family Residential (RS), with large portions also within Hillside Development Overlays (HD, HD-1). Other affected areas are within Special Purpose Zoning Districts (OS, PS, and PD).
In March 2025, the City Council found that the destruction of structures and the displacement of residents posed an immediate threat to public health, safety, and welfare. The Council also determined that existing zoning code requirements would further exacerbate this threat by delaying the reconstruction of homes and other structures. In response, an ordinance was adopted by City Council on March 24, 2025 to facilitate timely rebuilding by temporarily suspending or modifying certain zoning development standards and extending applicable deadlines for entitlements and permits issued under Titles 14 (Buildings and Construction), 16 (Subdivisions), and 17 (Zoning Code) of the PMC. These amendments also included provisions on rebuilding which allow owners to rebuild to previous non-conforming setbacks, certain height limits and also allows owners to rebuild slightly larger than the building footprint of the destroyed home, up to 200 square feet or 10% of the gross floor area, whichever is greater (referred to as "like for like" standards). The Council also directed staff to look at potential fee reductions related to the issuance of a building permit and return with recommendations at a later date.
Rebuild and Recovery Updates
To date, all sites that opted in to the Private Property Debris Removal program have had their debris removed by the US Army Corps of Engineers. Properties that opted out or were ineligible have also completed debris removal with the exception of the St.
Luke's property and one residential property that experienced partial damage. These two sites are actively pursuing removal. Two City-owned properties and the former YMCA were approved by special inclusion to be cleared by USAGE and those sites have also been cleared.
Currently, 35 applications have been submitted for rebuilding and the City issued the first building permit to rebuild a single-family residence on June 9,2025. See Attachment B for a summary of the plan check submittals to date. A webpage is also available at CitvOfPasadena.NeVPasadenaRebuilds that tracks the status of all submittals.
Eaton Fire Rebuilding Fee Reductions
August 25, 2025
The City established a rebuild program immediately following the Eaton Fire which includes a dedicated Planner to assist with rebuild questions and a dedicated Community Connector to assist with the debris removal and non-rebuild matters. Staff has also conducted three virtual workshops for the rebuild sites to provide information and updates and these will continue throughout the rebuild process as needed. Staff will conduct a fourth workshop In September after the fee decisions are made by the Council.
Planning staff has also been participating in several inter-agency working groups including a group that is comprised of the County of Los Angeles and City of Pasadena focused on the development of Standard Plans that are compatible and contextual to the participating communities. A partnership was created with the Foothill Catalog Foundation a local non-profit organization offering a range of home designs developed by local architects and engineers. The catalog of plans can be accessed at:
www.FoothillCataloa.Org/Concept-Desicins. Property owners may purchase the plans at a reduced rate for submittal to their local permitting authority. The City of Pasadena will be choosing a few of the plan options to "pre-review". The pre-reviewed standard plans will take less time to review. This is similar to the pre-reviewed ADU standard plans that are available.
An interdepartmental review team is in place to expedite all rebuild plan check submittals and inspections related to the Eaton Fire whether or not they utilize standard plans.
EdTech Meeting of June 17, 2025
On June 17, 2025, the Planning & Community Development Department presented recommendations to the EdTech Committee to reduce fees for rebuilding properties destroyed by the Eaton fire. For the purposes of this discussion, staff presented plan check and building permit related fees for a 1,900 square foot single-family home and 2- car garage, which is the typical size of the single-family residences destroyed.
Estimated fees are $36,628, as illustrated in Table 1 which itemizes the fees and identifies the fund that these fees are allocated to.
Fees collected in Table 1 are for staff time related to the cost of reviewing the plans or issuing the building permit (including inspections). Those denoted with an * indicate a tax or fee collected for a specific purpose and not for staff time. The PUSD school fees are only collected if an addition of 500 square feet or larger is proposed. Fees that are not part of the plan check or building permit, such water and electric service fees and sidewalk repair fees, are not included in this table.
Table 1 Plan Check and Building Permit Related Fees (one sample site) Fee TypeFundExisting Fees
Plan Check Fees:
Building Division204 - Building Fund$5,157
D&HP Section101 -General Fund$337
Eaton Fire Rebuilding Fee Reductions
August 25, 2025
Zoning Section$487
Fire Department204-Building Fund
Transportation Department
$_
$
1,076
447
Public Works Department101 -General Fund$603
Building Permit Fees:
Building Permit
Records Mgt. Surcharge
Building Processing
Fire Processing
* Construction Notice Sign
204-Building Fund
$_
$_
$_
$_
$
3,439
360
74 36
15 * Construction Tax101 -General Fund$7,680
* General Plan Fee
* Technology Fee204-Building Fund
$
$
2,000
2,000
Other Permit Fees:
Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing204 - Building Fund$1,400 School District Impact Fee
CA Building Standards Fee
SMIP Residential
101 -General Fund
$_
$_
$
0 16
52 •AB 717 Training204 - Building Fund$34
C&D Admin Review406 - Refuse Collection$415
SUBTOTAL:
$25,628
Refundable Fees:
*
C&D Deposit406 - Refuse Collection$ 12,000
TOTAL:$ 37,628
"Collected for a tax or specific purpose (not staff time) Required only if rebuild is 500 SF larger than previous dwelling **
At this meeting, staff presented two recommendations aimed to significantly reduce the fees paid for plan check and building permit issuance:
1) Reduce plan check fees by 50% for rebuilt homes that utilize a Standard Plan approved by the City. Standard Plans will be 'pre-reviewed' meaning a time-savings in addition to the reduced plan check fees.
2) Reduce the Public Works Construction & Demolition (C&D) Performance Deposit from $12,000 to a flat fee of $2,000. The cost savings would be $10,000. Although the deposit is refundable upon compliance with debris removal requirements, this reduction would significantly reducing initial out-of-pocket expenses for applicants.
The proposed reductions would decrease fees by almost 40 percent if a Standard Plan were utilized, and by 28 percent for homeowners that prefer not to use a Standard Plan.
Public comments received at the meeting indicated a desire for deeper reductions, a sentiment which was supported by the EdTech Committee. The public also expressed concern over other fees charged by various city departments that were in addition to the plan check and permit fees but still required for rebuilding. EdTech asked staff to Eaton Fire Rebuilding Fee Reductions
August 25, 2025
consider reducing or waiving all fees to the maximum extent legally possible and to reduce the Construction & Demolition (C&D) Deposit collected to a flat rate of $1,000.
EdTech also asked staff to provide information for all fees charged by other City departments.
EdTech Meeting of July 15, 2025
At the EdTech meeting of July 15, 2025, staff presented an estimate of fees charged by all City departments for the reconstruction of a 1,900 square foot single-family residence and 2-car garage, including the plan check and permit fees presented at the June 17, 2025 meeting. As shown in Table 2, the total estimate of all fees paid to the City are $49,123. Fees that were not previously included were fees charged by the Fire Department for Fire Sprinkler and Landscape review, fees charged by the Public Works Department for a sidewalk inspection and possible repair of the sidewalk, and fees by the Department of Water and Power for water and electric service.
As shown in Table 2, Staff recommended to waive most fees except the sidewalk repair fee charged by the Public Works Department, and utility fees for electric and water service charged by the Department of Water and Power. Staff's recommended fee waivers would reduce the estimated fees by almost 80 percent from $49,123 to $9,952.
Staff explained that while most fees can be waived, there were specific reasons why the remaining fees were not recommended to be waived. The Public Works Department specified that the cost of covering sidewalk repair fees (estimated at $1,800 per site) cannot be absorbed by the 301 Fund. The Department of Water and Power (PWP) explained that although there are sufficient non-ratepayer revenues (e.g. interest accrued in the Electric Service Fund to cover waiving electric service fees/costs (estimated at $6,200 per site), it was recommended to instead utilize these interest funds towards the upcoming electric rate increase which will benefit all PWP electric service customers. PWP also recommended to defer discussion for water service fees until an assessment of the water service area needs is completed. PWP continues to work closely with the County of Los Angeles and partnering agencies on the development of fire flow and other requirements, which is necessary to finalize the assessment.
Table 2 - Estimated Total City Fees and Reductions Proposed on July 15, 2025 Fund/Fee TypeOne RebuildProposed Reductions
204 - Building Plan Check & Permit Fees$ 16,038$0
101 - Building Plan Check & Permit Fees$9,175$0
406 - Refuse Collection: Nonrefundable$415$0
204 - Fire Sprinkler & Landscape Review$2,429$0
301 - Sidewalk Inspection Fee$114$0
301 - Sidewalk Repair Fee*$1,800$1,800
Eaton Fire Rebuilding Fee Reductions
August 25, 2025
411 - Electric Service Costs*$6,200$6,200
412 - Water Service Costs
***
$952$952
TOTAL:$ 37,123$8,952
406 - Refuse Collection: Refundable Deposit$12,000$1,000 TOTAL INCLUDING DEPOSIT:$ 49,123$9,952
*Actual sidewalk repair fee will vary. Estimated at $1,800. **Most electric service costs will be $2,766-$6,200, though some may be higher. ***Most water service costs will be $200 or $952, though some may be higher.
After receiving the staff presentation and discussion with various city staff about their fees, EdTech directed staff to expand the fees waived to include the sidewalk repair fees and electric sen/ice fees, and they agreed to defer discussion on water service fees. EdTech also noted that they would like additional information on cost recovery efforts.
ANALYSIS:
PROPOSED FEE WAIVERS AND FUNDING
Total fee estimates for the proposed fee waivers are based on 125 rebuilds. This is greater than the actual number of single-family houses that were lost (117) to account for properties that only had an accessory structure (such as a garage) destroyed. Staff estimates approximately 1/3 of the properties will not utilize the fee waivers for various reasons such as planning to sell and do not want to rebuild, planning to build larger than the "like for like" parameters or they were not owner occupied. Staff is presenting the fee burden with all 125 sites as the outermost cost and the estimated 1/3 reduction of sites which is the more likely cost estimate.
Plan Check and Building Permit Fees - Planning & Community Development 1) Waive plan check and building permit fees collected into the Building Fund (204) and the General Fund (101) with a total estimated cost of $3,203,500; Staff is recommending to waive all plan check and permit fees under the Building Fund (204) and General Fund (101). Waived fees for special purpose funds like the Building Fund (204) must be replaced from another funding source. The total cost estimate to the 204 Fund would be $2.04 million for all 125 sites and $1.34 million for 2/3rds of the sites. There is currently $1.46 million in accrued interest from the Building Fund that can be used to cover Building Fund costs. Interest monies are collected annually on the Building Fund balance and would be available to cover this one-time cost.
Eaton Fire Rebuilding Fee Reductions
August 25, 2025
Refuse Collection Deposit and Sidewalk Fees- Public Works Department 2) Waive the Refuse Collection Administrative Fee and reduce the Deposit for the Construction & Demolition Waste Management collected in the Refuse Collection Fund (406) to a flat $1,000 per site reducing the overall funds collected from $1,500,000 to $125,000;
3) Waive Sidewalk Inspection and Repair Fees collected in the Project Management Fund (301) with a cost amount of $14,250 for the inspections and an estimated cost of $225, 000 for the repairs for a total $239,250; The C&D Refuse Collection Refundable deposit is paid by the applicant when plans are submitted for plan review- the funds are returned if the applicant demonstrates compliance with waste removal requirements. The recommendation is to reduce this deposit to a flat rate of $1,000 per rebuild site. Since this is a refundable deposit, and not a fee, a funding source is not necessary. Funds to cover the cost of the administrative fees would be $51 ,875 for all 125 sites and $38,585 for 2/3rds. Fund 406 would be utilized to cover the one-time fees for the C&D administrative review.
In addition to the C&D Waste Management deposit and fees collected as part of the building permit, the Public Works Department separately collects 'Sidewalk Assessment and Repair'iees which would apply to all fire rebuilds. The sidewalk repair fees are calculated based on the square footage of actual damaged concrete sidewalk.
There can be a large variance depending on the size and location of the property but for the purposes of this assessment, the Public Works Department provided an estimate of $1,800 as the average sidewalk repair fee charged on a single-family permit. The total cost estimate to the Project Management Fund (301) to waive the inspection fee would be $14,250 for all 125 sites and $9,500 for 2/3rds of the sites. The cost to waive the repair fees is estimated at $225,000 for all sites or $150,000 for 2/3rds. Funds from the annual $1,000,000 appropriation for sidewalk repairs would be used to cover this one- time cost.
Fire Sprinkler and Landscape/Defensible Space Fees - Pasadena Fire Department 4) Waive Fire Sprinkler and Landscape Review Fees collected in the Building Fund (204) with a total cost amount of $303,625;
In addition to the Fire Department plan check fee that is charged as part of the fees collected in Table 1, the Pasadena Fire Department charges fees for the plan check and permitting of fire sprinklers, which is a requirement for all rebuilt homes and is a separate submittal from the main building permit, as well as a landscape/defensible space plan check and inspection which involves an evaluation of vegetation and other potential fire hazards around a property to ensure it meets the standards for wildfire protection. These funds cover staff time to complete the review and inspection work.
The estimated cost of these services for the given scenario, is $2,429. The total cost estimate to the Building Fund (204) would be $303,625 for all 125 sites and $202,397 Eaton Fire Rebuilding Fee Reductions
August 25, 2025
for 2/3rds of the sites. Staff is recommending waiving these fees and the cost can be covered by the interest earnings in the Building Fund.
Utilities - Pasadena Department of Water and Power
PWP is a not-for-profit community-owned utility that provides both water and electric service within Pasadena, as well as water service to households and businesses in adjacent communities, such as parts of unincorporated Los Angeles County, including Altadena. As service costs are primarily driven by site-specific needs, costs may vary greatly accordingly. The following provides estimated ranges of costs based on a 1,900 square-foot single family 'like-for-like' rebuild. PWP continues to work closely with other utilities, and it should be noted that other utilities are not waiving similar costs/fees for fire rebuilds at this time.
Electric Service Costs
5) Waive Electric Service Fees collected in the Electric Service Fund (411) with a total estimated cost amount of $504,000;
Fees charged for electrical service by PWP are variable and depend on several factors, such as whether the connection is overhead or underground, the number of meters, the size of the service panel, whether temporary power is needed, etc. These Electric Service fees are classified as hard costs and represent equipment, materials, and labor combined.
Approximately one-halfthe sites currently have overhead service and the other half currently have underground electric service or ability to convert to underground electric.
The cost charged for the overhead sites is $2,766 for a 200-amp overhead service. The cost charged for the underground sites is $6,200 for a 200-amp underground service, which includes associated temporary electric service costs. The total cost estimate for both overhead and underground would be $504,000 for all 125 sites and $336,000 for 2/3rds of the sites. Non-ratepayer revenues from the Electric Service Fund (e.g., interest accrued from the Fund) would be used to cover waiving these fees/costs.
Waived fees for underground electric service will be limited to residences that were previously served by underground electric service or that are required by PWP to convert to underground electric service.
Water Service Costs
6) Defer discussion for PWP fees/costs collected in the Water Service Fund (412) with a total estimated cost of $3.5 million for PWP water service customers.
PWP provides water service to the City of Pasadena as well as other adjacent communities, including parts ofAltadena. The total number of potential impacted sites is approximately 354. As it relates to water service for reconstructed homes, costs vary Eaton Fire Rebuilding Fee Reductions
August 25, 2025
greatly. As shown in Table 3, all the fire rebuilds will need a Fire Hydrant Flow Test/Water Availability Test. Three possible scenarios are listed. Scenario 1 is estimated to apply to approximately 35% of the sites, Scenario 2 is estimated to apply to approximately 15% of the sites, and Scenario 3 would apply to under 10 properties.
Additionally, water main replacements may be needed for a few locations, which would incur additional costs. The costs listed represent a combination of equipment, materials, and labor that vary based on site-specific needs.
Table 3 - Water Service Cost Scenarios
DescriptionFundCostTotal Cost
All propertiesFi re Hyd ra nt Flow Test/Water Ava i ta bi Lity Test412$200$200 Scenario 1:Fi re Hyd ra nt Flow TesVWater Ava i la bi lity Test 1-inch meter set
412$200
$752
$952
Scenario 2:
Fire Hydrant Flow TesVWater Availability Test
1-inch Domestic Service Installation w/1-
inch water meter
3/4", I", 11/2" & 2" Service Abandonments
412
$200
At cost (Approx. $15,000-$25,000)
At cost (Approx. $5,000)
$ 30,200
Scenario 3:
Fi re Hyd ra nt Flow Test/Water Ava i la bi lity Test
1-inch Domestic Service Installation w/ 1-
inch water meter
3/4", I", 11/2" & 2" Service Abandonments
6-inch Fire Hydrant Installation
412
$200
At cost (Approx. $15,000-$25,000)
At cost (Approx. $5,000)
At cost (Approx. $25,000)
$ 55,2001
The total cost estimate to the Water Fund (412) would be $3.5 million for all 354 sites.
Like the Building Fund, the Water Fund and Electric Sen/ice Funds must find monies to replace the fees collected from non-rate payer funds.
Staff recommends the discussion for water service fees be deferred until an assessment of the water service area needs is completed. PWP continues to work closely with the County of Los Angeles and partnering agencies on the development of fire flow and other requirements, which is necessary to finalize the assessment.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION:
As shown in Table 4, the recommended fee reductions are:
1) Waive plan check and building permit fees collected into the Building Fund (204) and the General Fund (101) with a total estimated cost of $3,203,500; 2) Waive the Refuse Collection Administrative Fee and reduce the Deposit for the Construction & Demolition Waste Management collected in the Refuse Collection Fund (406) to a flat $1,000 per site reducing the overall funds collected from $1,500,000 to $125,000;
Eaton Fire Rebuilding Fee Reductions
August 25, 2025
3) Waive Sidewalk Inspection and Repair Fees collected in the Project Management Fund (301) with a cost amount of $14,250 for the inspections and an estimated cost of $225,000 for the repairs for a total $239,250; 4) Waive Fire Sprinkler and Landscape Review Fees collected in the Building Fund (204) with a total cost amount of $303,625;
5) Waive Electric Service Fees collected in the Electric Service Fund (411) with a total estimated cost amount of $504,000;
6) Defer discussion for PWP fees collected in the Water Service Fund (412) with a total estimated amount of $3.5 million for PWP water service customers.
Table 4 - Estimated Total City Fees and Proposed Reduced Fees (one site) Fund/Fee TypeCurrent Cost for
One Rebuild Site
Cost with Proposed Fee
Reductions
204 - Building Plan Check & Permit Fees$16,038$0
101 - Building Plan Check & Permit Fees$9,175$0
406 - Refuse Collection: Nonrefundable$415$0
204 - Fire Sprinkler & Landscape Review$2,429$0
301 - Sidewalk Inspection Fee$114$0
301 - Sidewalk Repair Fee*$1,800$0
411 - Electric Service Costs**
$6,200$0
412 - Water Service Costs*$952$952
TOTAL:$ 37,123$952
406 - Refuse Collection: Refundable Deposit$12,000$1,000 TOTAL INCLUDING DEPOSIT:$49,123$1,952
*Actual sidewalk repair fee will vary and may not be required. Estimated at $1,800. **Most electric service costs will be $2,766-$6,200, though some may be higher. ***Most water service costs will be $200 or $952, though some may be higher.
The reductions outlined above would apply to the following (eligible sites):
1) Single-family properties and condominium units that were owner-occupied as of January 7, 2025, and the same owner (or a member of the same owner's family) is the applicant;
Eaton Fire Rebuilding Fee Reductions
August 25, 2025
2) The reconstruction of 'like-for-like' single-family properi:ies as allowed under the City's Rebuild Ordinance adopted March 24, 2025. Applicants who select either a relocated home or a prefabricated, modular home may exceed the 10% or 200 provisions (height, setbacks etc.) and the allowed square footage permitted under the Zoning Code; and
3) The reconstruction of red-tagged structures (primary dwelling and required parking) and not to the construction of new detached structures such as an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) that did not exist prior to the fire.
Fee Waiver Application Reauirements
Owners requesting a waiver of fees must complete a Fee Waiver application form and demonstrate that the property destroyed by the Eaton Fire was their primary residence as of January 7, 2025. Fee waivers would be available to eligible sites as outlined in this report including those that have already paid their fees (a refund can be issued).
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
Find that the recommended actions are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines per Section 15061(b)(3). The reduction of plan check and permitting fees for the reconstruction offire-destroyed homes is covered by the commonsense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to the provisions of CEQA.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Staff is researching potential ways that the City could recover waived permit fees, such as through subrogation or from insurance carriers. Separate from the fee waivers but still related, the City is actively seeking other funding sources to offset costs. It should be recognized that the waived fees must be offset by other funding sources. The recommended fee reductions will impact the following:
Table 5 - Summary of Waivers by Fund (for 125 Rebuilds and 2/3rds Rebuilds) Fund/Fee Type125 RebuildsLikely Rebuilds
(2/3rds of sites)
Funding Source
204-Building Plan Checks
Permit
$ 2,004,750$ 1,336,367Fund 204 Accrued
Interest
204 - Fire Sprinkler &
Landscape Review
$ 303,625$ 202,397Fund 204 Accrued
Interest
101-Building Plan Check&
Permit
$ 1,146,875$ 764,507Fund 204 Accrued
Interest
Eaton Fire Rebuilding Fee Reductions
August 25, 2025
406 - Refuse Collection Admin
Review: Nonrefundable
$51,875$34,580Fund 406 Public
Works Permit Fees
406 - Refuse Collection Deposit:
Refundable
$ 1,500,000$ 125,000N/A
301 - Sidewalk Inspection &
Repair Fee
$ 239,250$ 159,500General Fund
411 - Electric Service Fund$ 504,000$ 336,000Fund 411 Accrued Interest
ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF
WAIVERS:
$ 4,250,375*$ 2,833,351*
*lncludes Refundable Refuse Deposit collected in Fund 406 Respectfully Submitted,
^^s.f^t^'s
A JENNIFER PAI($^,AICP
Director of Planning & Community
Development
Prepared ^y:^
GuillblNunez^ /
Princfpal Planner
Reviewed by:
^'M^
Jason Mikaelian, AICP
Deputy Director
Approved by:
^
r
^MIGUEl MAPTQUEZ
/ City Manager
Attachments (2):
Attachment A - Map of Fire Impacted Areas
Attachment B - Summary of Plan Check Submittals for Fire Rebuilds
INFORMATION ONLY
4. CDBG PROGRAMS – FAÇADE IMPROVEMENTS AND MICROENTERPRISE GRANTS*
Community Development Block Grants (CDBG):
Commercial Façade Improvement, and
Microenterprise Recovery Grant
March 17, 2026
Edtech Committee
CDBG Grant Timeline
2 • CDBG Application (Feb 2025): EconDev applied for City Set-Aside grant funds via Housing Department.
• City Council Approval (May 2025): Approved $200,500 for the Commercial Façade Improvement Program, and $125,500 for Microenterprise Recovery Grants. • Federal Update (July 2025): Executive order temporarily paused federal fund use. • EdTech Update (Aug 2025): Shared program updates.
• Edtech Update (Oct 2025): Commercial Façade program update • Applications Open (Nov 3, 2025): Commercial Façade Improvement program. • Applications Closed (Nov 30, 2025): Commercial Façade Improvement Program. • Federal Funds Received (Dec 2025): Housing Department received HUD funds. • Applicants Notified (Feb 2026): Commercial Façade Improvement applicants notified. • Façade plans in review (On-going): City departments including Housing Department are reviewing all improvement plans submitted by selected grantees. • Applications Open (March 19, 2026): Microenterprise Recovery Grant program. • Applications Closed (April 16, 2026): Microenterprise Recovery Grant program.
Commercial Façade Improvement Program
3 • Summary: This program supports businesses with
storefront upgrades, façade improvements, and
exterior renovations to help businesses.
• Goal: To support businesses in disadvantaged
areas, in particular low and moderate incomes
areas, to attract more foot traffic, increase
customer interest, and boost sales.
• Amount: Eligible businesses may qualify for up to
$20,000.
• Grantees: A total of 10 grantees were
anticipated to ensure the grant funding would
have a significant impact.
• Status: Applications are now closed, and the
grantees selected are currently working through
the City’s permitting process to receive
approval for their upgrades.
(Figure is for sample purposes only)
Outreach
4 • Information was shared via our EconDev newsletter.
• Application links and guidelines were provided to Council District liaisons, and North West Commission.
• Direct emails were sent to businesses to encourage them to apply. • Flyers were distributed to businesses at their business location the week of November 17th by EconDev staff.
• EconDev issued a press release on November 18, 2025.
Eligibility and Applications
5 • Eligible Area: Only areas within
CDBG benefit service areas were
eligible per federal guidelines.
• Selection Criteria: Applications were
evaluated on a 100-point scale
based on impact (35 pts), capacity
(30 pts), need (25 pts), and vision
(10pts).
• Selection Committee: Included
EconDev staff, and Deputy Director
of Parks, Rec & Community Services.
• Applications: We received a total of
16 applications, and 10 businesses
were selected to move forward.
Most businesses who were declined
were not in eligible locations.
Commercial Façade Improvement Program
Grantees
6 # Business Name Location Area
1 Maxwell Alexander
Gallery
1300 N Lake Ave Block 5 -
District 2
2 Associate Barbers
Studio
88 N Fair Oaks Ave Old Pasadena
District 3
3 Mi Casa Mexican
Food
812 N Fair Oaks Ave NW Pasadena
District 3
4 Pasadena Fish
Market
181 E Orange Grove NW Pasadena
District 3
5 Union Street Toys 65 N Madison Ave Playhouse Village
District 3
6 Annapurna Grill 929 E Colorado Blvd Playhouse Village District 5
7 Koko's
Mediterranean
Cafe
273 Shoppers Ln South Lake
District 7
8 Amigo’s Restaurant 1076 E Colorado District 7
9 Nine and Nine Thai
Kitchen
738 E Colorado Blvd Playhouse Village
District,
District 7
10 Amara Cafe &
Restaurant
55 S Raymond Ave Old Pasadena
District 6
Commercial Façade Improvement Grantees
7 # Business Name Improvements
1 Maxwell Alexander Gallery New lighting, windows, and doors 2 Associate Barbers Studio Decals for windows and new signage 3 Mi Casa Mexican Food New signage, paint refresh, and door replacement 4 Pasadena Fish Market New signage, updated lighting and paint 5 Union Street Toys New ADA accessible doors
6 Annapurna Grill New signage, replacement of window film and lighting 7 Koko's Mediterranean Cafe New fabric for existing awning 8 Amigo’s Restaurant Repaint of exterior, and new signage 9 Nine and Nine Thai Kitchen New exterior sign and lighting 10 Amara Cafe & Restaurant Anti-graffiti window film, and new exterior business sign Selected grantees are currently working through the City’s permitting approval process. Final scopes of work will depend on City department approvals.
Improvements are expected to be completed by the end of May 2026.
Before Photos of Grantees Locations
8 Façade Improvement Grants - Round 2
9 A total of $100,000 from the Dine Out grant program has been allocated to support façade improvement grants outside of CDBG funding.
• Application Period: Businesses will be provided a longer application period due to the program’s flexible timeline. Launch date will be early FY27.
• Eligible Area: Funding will be available to eligible businesses throughout the City-wide.
• Upfront Funding Not Required: This program will not operate on a reimbursement basis, meaning businesses will not be required to pay costs upfront to receive grant funds.
• Extended Outreach: The City will increase outreach efforts, more walk-through in the neighbors especially for those areas that didn’t have applicants in the first round of façade improvements grants.
Microenterprise Recovery Grant
10 • Summary: The program will assist local, low-to-moderate income, micro- enterprises impacted by the 2025 Eaton wildfires and windstorm. Microenterprises are those with 5 employees or less including owners.
• Eligible use of funds: Reimbursement-based grant to cover overhead and operational cost, rent and utilities, business inventory, salary and wages for employees, and marketing.
• Amount: Anticipate awarding a total of 25 micro-enterprises up to $5,000 each. $125,000 is available via CDBG funding.
• Status: Applications open March 19, 2026, and close April 16, 2026. • Eligible Applicants: Per HUD guidelines, eligible applicants are businesses that operate from a brick-and-mortar location within Pasadena city limits, qualify as a microenterprise with five or fewer employees (including owners), and have owners whose income is below 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI).
Grant Information & Outreach
11 Information will be shared via our newsletter, a press release, liaisons, and direct emails to encourage businesses to apply.
Information will be posted on our web page with an application link and guidelines.
End of Presentation
12 5. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UPDATE BY DAVID A. KLUG, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR*
MEMORANDUM
Date: March 17, 2026
To: Economic Development and Technology Committee
From: David A. Klug, Economic Development Director
Subject: Economic Development Update
The Economic Development Division is committed to supporting a thriving local economy. This memo provides an update on market conditions and the Division’s efforts.
1. Business Development
a. Notable Openings &
Successes
i. Escapology opened at The
Paseo on January 30. The
business provides themed
escape room experiences
designed for group
problem-solving and
collaborative activities. The
venue is positioned to
serve both recreational
visitors and organizations
seeking structured team-
building exercises.
ii. Wagyu Master Shabu House opened at The Paseo on January 1. The restaurant specializes in Japanese A5 Wagyu hot pot and offers an all- you-can-eat buffet with premium seafood, sushi, sashimi, and other dishes.
iii. Ry’s Poke Shack, located at 2700 E. Colorado Blvd., opened on February
7. The family-owned business began in Hawaiʻi and is known for traditional poke bowls and island-inspired dishes. The Pasadena location marks the brand’s second expansion to the continental U.S.
iv. Los Angeles Times food columnist Jenn
Harris, a Pasadena native, recently
published a feature on six bakeries within
a one-mile radius in Pasadena. The
article notes the City’s growing
concentration of specialty bakeries,
including Miopane, Hello You’re
Welcome, Bad Ash Bakes, Sweet Red
Peach, ID-Eclair, and Salted Butter
Company. This coverage reflects regional
media attention on Pasadena’s evolving
food landscape.
b. Rusnak Auto Group Porsche
Groundbreaking
Staff attended the February 18
groundbreaking for the new Rusnak Porsche dealership on East Colorado Boulevard in Lamanda Park. The project will deliver a modern showroom, expanded service bays, and upgraded customer areas, along with a planned sculptural installation developed with ArtCenter College of Design that will serve as a signature feature of the site. Mayor Gordo, Councilmember Masuda, the City Manager, and City leadership joined Rusnak Auto Group and the Chamber of Commerce in marking this significant investment in Pasadena.
c. Valued Pasadena Partners Breakfast
On February 12, Economic Development staff, in collaboration with Northwest manager Lola Osborne, hosted a breakfast at N.A.T.H.A. (Neighbors Acting
Together Helping All) to meet with local businesses, primarily those along Lincoln Avenue, to discuss business associations. Attendees included businesses such as Ferrazzani’s, Highlight Coffee, and the Pasadena Business Park, as well as Northwest Commissioners, Parks and Recreation staff, youth ambassadors, Councilmember Hampton, the Pasadena Women’s Business Center, the Pasadena Chamber of Commerce, and other community partners. The meeting provided an opportunity to review options for forming an association, the importance of engaging local businesses, and strategies for collectively advocating for the corridor’s needs.
d. Open Rewards Pilot Program
Since launching on October 1, Shop Local Pasadena has received strong community engagement. Over 1,100 local businesses are participating, and more than 800 users have downloaded the
app to start earning 5% cash back on
purchases. To date, the program has
generated an economic impact of over
$110,000. The initiative continues to
encourage residents, visitors, and workers to
shop locally while providing valuable insights
into Pasadena’s economic activity. The pilot
has been extended through June 30, 2026.
e. Business Retention & Attraction
Over the past month, Economic Development division staff sent letters congratulating 67 Pasadena businesses featured in the Los Angeles Business Journal's 2026 'The Lists'. The team also mailed recruitment brochures and Pasadena’s tech map 124 companies in the Los Angeles region, including biotech labs, venture capital firms, engineers, and more, featured in The Lists, inviting them to learn more about Pasadena as a great place to do business. Additionally, the team mailed letters and resources to over 300 Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services businesses across the nation, inviting them to meet with staff and explore Pasadena as a location for company growth.
2. Workforce & Small Business Support
a. Workforce Development
The Foothill Workforce Development Board hosted a recruitment event on Tuesday, March 3 for individuals interested in pursuing a career in client
services. Representatives from US Bank
and the FWDB provided an opportunity
for Pasadena residents to connect with a
major employer and explore positions in
banking and customer service.
b. Ascend LA Procurement Accelerator
The Division’s newsletter included
information on Ascend LA’s
Procurement Readiness Accelerator for
LA County small businesses. Rolling
applications will be accepted through
June 1, 2026, and the program began
March 5 with virtual and in-person
training focused on financial literacy,
strategic leadership, and bid readiness.
Participants will receive one-on-one coaching and connections to procurement networks to gain access to public- and private-sector contracts.
c. Support for Local Businesses and Contractors
Staff promoted three initiatives from The Center by Lendistry through the Division’s newsletter. The Digital Growth Accelerator offered free virtual training and one-on-one advising to help small businesses improve digital marketing and online presence.
The Contractors Accelerator helps
small and diverse contractors
compete in the clean-energy and
infrastructure economy by
providing technical assistance,
business advising, and access to
capital. Participants have already
secured $23 million in new
contracts and nearly $2 million in
capital.
The Main Street Goes Green
Accelerator provides training,
tools, and technical assistance to
help small businesses adopt cost-saving sustainability practices. The program focuses on energy efficiency, green business certification, and long-term
operational resilience, helping businesses reduce costs while contributing to local climate-action goals.
d. Construction Accelerator
Pasadena Women’s Business Center is offering
a no‑cost, 9‑week Construction Accelerator for
construction business owners beginning April 8
at Pasadena City College. The program covers
certifications, bonding, RFP preparation, and
bid‑day training, with participants presenting to
procurement leads and prime contractors at the
final session. Applications are due March 20,
and the cohort will gain access to resources
and contacts that support entry into
public‑sector contracting.
e. California Supplier Diversity Symposium
On March 18 the City of Pasadena’s Purchasing Division and Pasadena First Buy Local will host the California Supplier Diversity Symposium in partnership with the State of California. The event will take place at the Pasadena Convention Center and will be the City’s first supplier-diversity symposium organized with State collaboration. The program is designed to connect vendors with public-sector buyers and provide resources to help businesses navigate public procurement processes.
3. Major Events & Conferences
a. Major Events Webpage
Economic Development launched a Major Events webpage to provide information for businesses and residents on upcoming large-scale events, including the 2026 FIFA World Cup. The page includes guidance on planning
for increased activity and outlines compliance requirements for hosting watch parties. It explains how businesses can show matches without violating FIFA broadcast rules and offers resources to support event preparation.
b. Southern California Linux Expo (SCaLE 23x)
The Pasadena Convention Center hosted the 23rd annual Southern California Linux Expo (SCaLE 23x) from March 5-8. SCaLE is the largest community-run open-source conference in North America, attracting thousands of developers, IT professionals, educators, and enthusiasts. The four-day event featured keynote presentations, technical
sessions, and workshops across multiple
tracks, including security, cloud-native
technologies, and open-source AI.
Additional events hosted alongside SCaLE,
included DevOpsDayLA, Cloud Native Days
LA, and Open Source Career Day providing
additional networking and learning
opportunities.
4. Technology & Innovation
a. Congressional App Challenge Awards
On January 17, Rep. Judy Chu hosted the
7th Annual Congressional App Challenge
Awards at Caltech’s Hameetman Auditorium, celebrating middle and high school students from Chu’s 28th Congressional District. More than 50 apps were showcased, with winners including Fire Up (1st place), SCREAM++ (2nd), and EyeMAX (3rd). The first-place app will be displayed in the U.S.
Capitol and featured at the House of Code event in Washington, D.C. This
event highlights Pasadena’s role as a hub for innovation and STEM education.
b. JPL Technology to Track Ocean Plastic Pollution
NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) has developed imaging technology that could enable satellites to identify and monitor plastic pollution in oceans.
Originally designed for mineral mapping on the International Space Station, the sensors can detect unique spectral signatures of plastics. JPL researchers are building a reference library of more than 25,000 spectral fingerprints to support future satellite missions aimed at tracking marine debris and identifying pollution hotspots. This advancement positions Pasadena-based JPL at the forefront of global efforts to address ocean plastic pollution.
c. Caltech AI & Health Innovation Forum
On February 26, the Caltech Entrepreneurs Forum hosted Applied Machine Learning and AI Advancing Human Health. The program featured leading researchers, startup founders, and industry executives discussing how artificial intelligence is transforming drug discovery, biologics development, and patient care. Keynote speakers included Hosea Nelson, Ph.D., Professor of Chemistry at Caltech, and Debbie Lin, Ph.D., a life sciences executive and venture capital leader. The event underscored Pasadena’s role as a center for life sciences and technology innovation.