PINOLE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL
Vincent Salimi, Mayor
Devin Murphy, Mayor Pro Tem
Anthony Tave, Council Member
Maureen Toms, Council Member
Norma Martínez-Rubin, Council Member
TUESDAY
March 1, 2022
VIA ZOOM TELECONFERENCE
5:00 P.M.
Please note the early start time
DUE TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA’S DECLARATION OF EMERGENCY – THIS MEETING IS BEING HELD VIA VIDEOCONFERENCING PURSUANT TO AB 361 - CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSION MEETINGS ARE NO LONGER OPEN TO IN-PERSON ATTENDANCE.
How to Submit Public Comments:
Written Comments: All comments received before 3:00 pm the day of the meeting will be posted on the City’s website on the agenda page (Agenda Page Link) and provided to the City Council prior to the meeting. Written comments will not be read aloud during the meeting.
Email comments to [email protected]
Please indicate which item on the agenda you are commenting on in the subject line of your email.
To Participate in Public Comment During the Meeting:
Members of the public may submit a live remote public comment via Zoom video conferencing. Download the Zoom mobile app from the Apple Appstore or Google Play. If you are using a desktop computer, you can test your connection to Zoom by clicking here. Zoom also allows you to join the meeting by phone.
From a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89335000272
Webinar ID: 893 3500 0272
By phone: +1 (669) 900-6833 or +1 (253) 215-8782 or +1 (346) 248-7799 • Speakers will be asked to provide their name and city of residence, although providing this is not required for participation.
• Each speaker will be afforded up to 3 minutes to speak. • Speakers will be muted until their opportunity to provide public comment.
When the Mayor opens the comment period for the item you wish to speak on, please use the “raise hand” feature (or press *9 if connecting via telephone) which will alert staff that you have a comment to provide and press *6 to unmute. To comment with your video enabled, please let the City Clerk know you would like to turn your camera on once you are called to speak.
CORONAVIRUS ADVISORY
INFORMATION:
CLICK HERE for City Updates
CLICK HERE for County Updates
1 of 153
City Council
Agenda – March 1, 2022
WAYS TO WATCH THE MEETING
LIVE ON CHANNEL 26. They are retelecast the following Thursday at 6:00 p.m. The Community TV Channel 26 schedule is published on the city’s website at www.ci.pinole.ca.us.
VIDEO-STREAMED LIVE ON THE CITY’S WEBSITE, www.ci.pinole.ca.us. and remain archived on the site for five (5) years.
If none of these options are available to you, or you need assistance with public comment, please contact the City Clerk, Heather Bell at (510) 724-8928 or [email protected] .
Americans With Disabilities Act: In compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, if you need special assistance to participate in a City Meeting or you need a copy of the agenda, or the agenda packet in an appropriate alternative format, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (510) 724-8928. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
Note: Staff reports are available for inspection on the City Website at www.ci.pinole.ca.us. You may also contact the City Clerk via e-mail at [email protected] .
Ralph M. Brown Act. Gov. Code § 54950. In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly. The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies, which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.
2 of 153
Pinole City Council
Agenda –March 1, 2022
1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present, and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.
3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision: (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself /herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov't Code § 87105.
4. CONVENE TO A CLOSED SESSION
Citizens may address the Council regarding a Closed Session item prior to the Council adjourning into the Closed Session, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk.
A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: City Manager Andrew Murray, City Attorney Eric Casher, Human Resources Director Stacy Shell and Gregory Ramirez (IEDA)
Employee Organization: PPEA
5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION
6. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker. Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting. PLEASE SEE THE
COVERSHEET OF THE AGENDA FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO SUBMIT PUBLIC COMMENTS
7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Mayor Report
1. Announcements
B. Mayoral & Council Appointments
C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
E. City Manager Report / Department Staff
3 of 153
City Council
Agenda – March 1, 2022
F. City Attorney Report
8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS A. Proclamations
1. Celebrating 125 Years – 32nd District PTA
2. Recognizing Former Assistant City Manager Hector De La Rosa in the Event of His Retirement
B. Presentations/Recognitions
1. Update from Contra Costa County District Attorney, Diana Becton
2. Presentation from Costa Workforce Development Board by Patience Ofodu, Business Services Manager and Tamia Brown, Executive Director
9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine or noncontroversial. These items will be enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any interested party or Council member(s) wishes to comment on an item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of the Consent Calendar.
A. Approve the Minutes of the February 15, 2022 Meeting B. Receive the February 12, 2022 -February 25, 2022 List of Warrants in the Amount of $520,875.11 and the February 22, 2022 Payroll in the Amount of $481,165.67
C. Resolution Confirming Continued Existence of Local Emergency [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Casher)]
D. Placement Of Liens for Delinquent Unpaid Waste Collection Charges Falling Delinquent Between September and December 2021, Considered at an Administrative Hearing on February 3, 2022 [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Bell)]
E. Approve An Amendment to The Contract and Issue a Task Order for Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers for Professional Engineering Services for An Amount Not to Exceed $54,910 [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Mishra)]
F. Adopt A Resolution Approving a Revised Compensation and Benefits Plan for Management and Confidential Employees [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Shell)]
G. Declare the Listed Property as Surplus and Designate a Purchasing Officer to Dispose of the Listed Property in Accordance with the City of Pinole Financial Policies - Capital Assets Policy and Procedures [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Mishra)]
4 of 153
City Council
Agenda – March 1, 2022
H. Pinole Trustee Reappointment to the Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control Board [Action: Approve Reappointment per Staff Recommendation (Bell)]
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Citizens wishing to speak regarding a Public Hearing item should fill out a speaker card prior to the completion of the presentation, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk. An official who engaged in an ex parte communication that is the subject of a Public Hearing must disclose the communication on the record prior to the start of the Public Hearing.
None
11. OLD BUSINESS
None
12. NEW BUSINESS
A. Provide Direction on Potential Ballot Measure to Become a Charter City and Enact a Real Property Transfer Tax [Action: Discuss and Provide Direction per Staff Recommendation (Casher/Guillory)]
B. Review Two Design Alternatives for Replacement of The San Pablo Avenue Bridge Over Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (CIP Project # Ro1710) Update [Action: Discuss and Provide Direction (Kaur)]
C. Receive The Fiscal Year (FY) 2021/22 Mid-Year Financial Report and Adopt a Resolution Approving Budget Adjustments, and Approve the Modified Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 Budget and Long-Term Financial Plan Development Process [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Guillory)]
13. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Continued from Item 6) (Public Comments) Open only to members of the public who did not speak under the first Citizens to Be Heard, Agenda Item 6
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes for City Council items and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker. Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future meeting.
14. ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting of March 15, 2022 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.
I hereby certify under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing Agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of Pinole City Hall, 2131 Pear Street Pinole, CA, on the City’s website, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date set forth on this agenda.
POSTED: February 24, 2022 at 4:00 P.M.
5 of 153
City Council
Agenda – March 1, 2022
_________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
6 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
February 15, 2022
1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS
The City Council Meeting was held via Zoom videoconference and broadcast from the Pinole Council Chambers, 2131 Pear Street, Pinole, California. Mayor Salimi called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 5:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.
3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision; (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself/herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov. Code § 87105.
A. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT
Vincent Salimi, Mayor
Devin Murphy, Mayor Pro Tem
Norma Martinez-Rubin, Council Member
Anthony Tave, Council Member
Maureen Toms, Council Member
B. STAFF PRESENT
Andrew Murray, City Manager
Heather Bell, City Clerk
Eric Casher, City Attorney
Alex Mog, Assistant City Attorney
Maria Picazo, Recreation Manager
Chris Wynkoop, Fire Chief
Markisha Guillory, Finance Director
Lilly Whalen, Community Development Director
Stacy Shell, Human Resources Director
Sanjay Mishra, Public Works Director
Misha Kaur, Senior Project Manager
Roxane Stone, Deputy City Clerk
City Clerk Heather Bell announced the agenda had been posted on Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 4:00 p.m. with all legally required written notices. 9A
7 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Written comments had been received in advance of the meeting and had been distributed to the City Council and posted on the City website.
Following an inquiry, the Council reported there were no conflicts with any items on the agenda.
City Clerk Bell also announced the implementation of new City Council Procedures based on updates the City Council had approved during its February 1, 2022 meeting. She identified the changes to the meeting agenda at this time and detailed the instructions for members of the public to enable their video when making comments.
4. CONVENE TO A CLOSED SESSION
Citizens may address the Council regarding a Closed Session item prior to the Council adjourning into the Closed Session, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk.
A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Gov. Code § 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: City Manager Andrew Murray, City Attorney Eric Casher, Human Resources Director Stacy Shell and Gregory Ramirez (IEDA) Employees: Unrepresented Managers (Management Compensation Plan)
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Roxane Stone advised there were no comments from the public.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION At 6:05 p.m., Mayor Salimi reconvened the meeting into open session and announced there was no reportable action from the Closed Session.
6. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.
Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.
Jeff Rubin, Pinole, President, Pinole Historical Society and Pinole History Museum, understood the City Council was concerned about the return on investment the City would derive from renovating the Faria House. He asked that the cost and return on investment be put into perspective, particularly given the fact the City provided funds for the Skate Park which served a small segment of the community and produced no revenue, and had ongoing expenses related to funding the hours of operation for the Pinole Library which also produced no revenue to the City. By the year 2025, the City would have spent more than $1 million for both projects combined.
The City had also provided funding for other items which produced no revenue to the City but provided a level of service to the community that could not be quantified in revenue production, and he suggested a museum would be included in that category. 8 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Mr. Rubin also commented that Pinole 4 Fair Government’s chief opponent had argued that if the Faria House were to be renovated, it should be used for a revenue generating purpose such as a café but there were many eating establishments in the area and he questioned how many more such businesses were needed. He hoped the City Council had read an article on the revenue that museums generated, which had been included in the 2022 winter issue of the Pinole Historical Society Newsletter available on-line at the Pinole Historical Society website. He suggested a museum would serve the community better than another eating establishment.
Irma Ruport, Pinole, stated that City Council meetings were for and by the people, not for special interest groups or self-serving people who used their position for their own benefit. She read into the record Government Code Section 54950 related to the Ralph M. Brown Act and asked the City Council to keep its deliberations and comments to specific agenda items rather than personalizing items. She urged the City Council to move forward and not waste time or money on useless projects. She emphasized the City had a lot of need and priorities. She otherwise commented that three Council members would be up for election in November and would likely want their time in office to be well spent and forthright rather than lose time and waste money on projects that did not serve all residents.
7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Mayor Report
1. Announcements
Mayor Salimi wished everyone a Happy Lunar New Year and Black History Month. He reported he and Mayor Pro Tem Murphy had attended a celebration of Lunar New Year at Shannon Elementary School, which had been well attended.
B. Mayoral & Council Appointments
None
C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy reported a Marin Clean Energy (MCE) Board meeting would be held on Thursday, February 16 at 7:00 p.m. with all agenda information available on the MCE website; Contra Costa County Library would host a community meeting about Measure X on February 16 with information on the Contra Costa County website; Pinole Valley High School Black History Jubilee celebration had been scheduled for February 19 at 1:00 p.m.; and he would be hosting his monthly coffee chat on February 20 at 9:00 a.m. with more information on these activities on his social media website at www.murphyforpinole.com.
Council member Tave reported he had attended a RecycleMore Board meeting and Communications Committee meeting, and briefed the Council on the discussions.
Council member Martinez-Rubin wished everyone a Happy Lunar New Year. She reported she had chaired a statewide League of California Cities Revenue and Taxation Policy Committee and WestCAT Board meetings, and briefed the Council on all presentations and discussions. 9 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Council member Toms reported she had attended meetings of the East Bay Wildfire Joint Powers Authority (JPA); Bay Front Chamber of Commerce State of the City Breakfast; WestCAT Board; and the League of California Cities Housing, Community and Economic Development Policy Committee; and briefed the Council on all presentations and discussions D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy requested a future agenda item to discuss how the City would comply with Senate Bill (SB) 9. Consensus given.
E. City Manager Report / Department Staff
City Manager Andrew Murray reported two informational memorandums had been distributed to the City Council regarding new road maintenance equipment the City had purchased to address road conditions, and an update of the Parks Master Plan. He also provided a preview of potential agenda items for the March 1, 2022 City Council meeting.
F. City Attorney Report
City Attorney Eric Casher reported that during the February 1, 2022 City Council meeting the City Council had directed staff to convene a Closed Session for a discussion of the Faria House. There were limited purposes for the City Council to meet in Closed Session, one of which was to conduct real property negotiation which included a requirement for a notice to the negotiating parties, and which required an offer in hand for the property or some interested party to be in negotiation.
There were currently no offers or interested parties for the discussion of disposition of real property. The City Council had been informed of these items and the fact there were no immediate plans to convene a Closed Session to discuss the Faria House. Those circumstances may change but currently there were no immediate plans to convene to Closed Session.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafael Menis, Pinole, spoke to the reports provided by Council members Martinez-Rubin and Toms on their attendance of WestCAT meetings and his understanding that BART would be withholding half of the revenue for funding connector costs paid to WestCAT. He asked for more information on the basis for which BART was withholding funding.
Council member Toms reported the General Manager of WestCAT had been notified by staff from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) of BART’s plans to withhold 50 percent of the revenue for the service referenced, and where the WestCAT General Manager was following up with the parties involved.
Council member Martinez-Rubin offered additional details on the discussions with more information to be provided at future WestCAT meetings and with the public encouraged to raise any concerns with BART’s General Manager.
Irma Ruport, Pinole, asked for consideration of a future agenda item to provide information to the public to place the Faria House on the November ballot. 10 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Tony Vossbrink, Pinole, found the meeting procedures to be confusing. He understood the public would be able to comment on any agenda item.
Mayor Salimi again clarified the new meeting procedures as earlier described by the City Clerk.
Public comments at this time were only being taken for agenda Item 7.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMUNITY EVENTS
A. Proclamations
1. Lunar New Year
The City Council read into the record a proclamation recognizing Lunar New Year.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Christy Lam-Julian, Pinole, received the proclamation, and thanked the City Council for the recognition on behalf of Asian Americans in Pinole including the Co-Founder of Shannon Village, which had been created to address missed opportunities to promote and engage the Asian American community in inclusion, unity, social equity and to celebrate diversity. She looked forward to working with the community in that regard.
Cordell Hindler, Richmond, thanked Ms. Lam-Julian for her work, the information provided on Lunar New Year, and the City of Pinole for the proclamation.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
The City Council thanked Ms. Lam-Julian for her contributions to the Shannon Elementary School Lunar New Year celebrations.
B. Presentations / Recognitions
None
9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any interested party or Council member(s) wishes to comment on an item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of the Consent Calendar.
A. Approve the Minutes of the February 1, 2022 Meeting.
B. Receive the January 29, 2022 – February 11, 2022 List of Warrants in the Amount of $786,195.59 and the February 4, 2022 Payroll in the Amount of $485,026.89 11 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
C. Resolution Confirming Continued Existence of Local Emergency [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Casher)]
D. Fiscal Year (FY) 2021/22 Second Quarter Report on Implementation of Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Projects [Action: Receive and File Report (Kaur)] E. Receive the Quarterly Investment Report for the Second Quarter (Ending December 31, 2021) [Action: Receive and File Report (Guillory)] F. Resolution in Support of Bay Adapt: Regional Strategic Plan for A Rising Bay [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Whalen)] G. Receive the Quarterly Report on Implementation of The Strategic Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2021/22 Second Quarter [Action: Receive and File Report (Murray)] H. Receive Quarterly Update on Greenhouse Gas Inventory Effort [Action: Receive and File Report (Whalen)]
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafael Menis, Pinole, referenced Item 9E, which had shown the net yield for the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) lower than long-term funds, although members of the Federal Reserve stated the intent to increase the baseline interest rate repeatedly over the course of the year. He asked whether the City anticipated changes in the revenue flows due to changes in yield from various investments due to the Federal Reserves planned actions. He asked whether there were any plans for potential action to address that issue.
For Item 9G, Mr. Menis suggested it would be worthwhile to modify the table as shown for Strategy 3 on Page 4 of the February 15, 2022 staff report to be ongoing rather than for a single year, since the City would be working on affordable housing projects over time and not just for one year. As to Strategy 5 as shown on Page 4, until a public engagement plan was fully developed, he asked whether the City had a point of connection for communication like the City Manager’s Report or a social media role from the City Manager’s Office. He asked whether there was anything in place now prior to the completion of Strategy 5.
Debbie Long, Pinole, referenced Item 9C and questioned whether it was essentially the same as Item 11A.
Cordell Hindler, Richmond, referenced Item 9A and expressed concern with the length of the February 1, 2022 City Council meeting, which was a burden to City staff. He recommended the City Council consider continuing items to a future meeting in the event of time constraints. For Item 9G, he was pleased the City had a new Human Resources Director and had ideas for the City’s reorganization plan, compensation study and provided information on the processes used by the City of Richmond. He otherwise found the City Manager had done a good job with the Strategic Plan and hoped it would be implemented.
PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED
12 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
City Attorney Casher described the differences between Items 9C and Item 11A as two distinctly different agenda items. He advised the City Council may approve Item 9C and still take action later for Item 11A and there would be no conflict.
Finance Director Markisha Guillory reported she would have to do more research to respond to the questions related to Item 9E and would get back to Mr. Menis with clarifying information.
City Manager Murray provided clarification for Item 9G and explained that the strategy to create affordable housing had been identified as a one-year project in the Implementation Action Plan, Attachment A to the staff report, although there would be continued work on partnerships for affordable housing. The Strategic Plan strategies were not being updated at this time. In terms of communication and engagement, the City was in the process of developing a Communication and Engagement Plan and was taking steps to improve communication and engagement. In the meantime, and while the plan was being finalized, there was a staff person responsible for coordination of communication and engagement on a citywide basis in the City Manager’s Office.
Although the position was currently vacant it was hoped the position would be filled soon. The main communication channels included the City website, bi-weekly administrative report, City Hall Facebook page and interested persons could contact the City Manager directly with any questions on citywide communication and engagement via the contact information on the City website.
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy thanked staff for the quarterly financial reports and quarterly report on the Strategic Plan. He encouraged the public to read all of the reports provided. He also commended Community Development Department staff for the information contained in Item 9H.
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Murphy/Council member Toms to Approve Consent Calendar Items 9A through 9H, as shown.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Citizens wishing to speak regarding a Public Hearing item should fill out a speaker card prior to the completion of the presentation, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk. An official who engaged in an ex parté communication that is the subject of a Public Hearing must disclose the communication on the record prior to the start of the Public Hearing.
A. Adopt Resolution of the City of Pinole Confirming the Costs of Nuisance Abatement at 2718 Silverado Drive and Ordering a Special Assessment in the Amount of $10,088.46 Against the Subject Property to Fully Recover All Abatement Costs [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Whalen)]
Community Development Director Lilly Whalen presented the staff report, stated the City Council had been provided written correspondence from the property owner dated “received February 15, 2022,” which had also been posted on the City website.
13 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Ms. Whalen recommended the City Council adopt the resolution contained in Attachment A to the staff report which confirmed the costs incurred by the City to abate a code violation and nuisance at 2718 Silverado Drive, Pinole, and order a special assessment to be levied against the subject property in the amount of $10,088.46 to recover all abatement costs.
Responding to the Council, Code Enforcement Officer Justine Sidie explained how the contractor who had removed the trees had been selected via the least expensive bid provided. She again identified all of the notices provided to the property owner as outlined in the February 15, 2022 staff report. She also had two separate telephone calls with the property owner on two separate occasions at which time the property owner (Martin Eyestone) had stated he would be reaching out to companies to inspect and provide quotes for tree removal. Mr. Eyestone had later informed her via voicemail a contractor he had previously contacted fell through and he would be contacting other companies to obtain quotes for tree removal. She left a voicemail with Mr. Eyestone on August 8, 2021 to inquire of the status and had received no response after that time.
Ms. Whalen clarified the citations costs had not been included in the assessment to be levied against the property. The Pinole Municipal Code (PMC) was clear that only abatement costs could be assessed as a special assessment to a property owner. The special assessment to be levied against the property would be required to be paid upon the next payment of municipal taxes, although the City Council had the option to place the assessment as a lien on the property and the lien would be paid at the time the property transferred ownership.
City Attorney Casher explained if the City Council adopted the staff recommendation and issued a special assessment, it would be added to the property tax to the property, to be collected as part of property taxes paid to Contra Costa County, which would be the enforcement agency for collections. Whether the special assessment could be paid over time or over multiple years, he advised the City Council may direct City staff to pursue various forms of recovery of the amounts owed and if the direction of the City Council was to spread the payment over a few years that could be considered; however, efforts to recover costs to date had been unsuccessful.
City Attorney Casher again identified the staff recommendation to order a special assessment to be levied against the subject property in the amount of $10,088.46 to recover all abatement costs to be collected as part of annual property tax payment. As an option, the City Council may place a lien on the property to be paid at the time the property transfered ownership. He understood that $10,088.46 was the actual costs incurred by the City which was what the City was looking to recover but he would look into whether interest would apply if the payment were to be paid over time.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Martin Eyestone, 2718 Silverado Drive, Pinole, the property owner, commented that the money due for the abatement represented around 12 percent of his annual income. He reported he had received nothing from Code Enforcement Officer Sidie or a bill indicating the costs incurred by the City. He had first learned of the matter on November 29, 2021 when papers had been posted near his garage informing him when the abatement would take place. He had received no information about fines. He asked Code Enforcement Officer Sidie the morning the abatement had taken place why his car had to be towed and had been informed it was because a crane would be brought in to do the work, although a wood chipper had been used which had impacted the neighborhood with dust and noise.
14 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Mr. Eyestone stated the towing service hired did not have the proper equipment to move his vehicle, and because of that his vehicle had been damaged after it had been dragged when it was removed and thereafter returned. The company hired to abate had not conducted any cleanup, left debris in his yard and damaged a fence. In addition, there had not been two trees to abate until the morning of the abatement.
Mr. Eyestone stated he had informed Code Enforcement Officer Sidie of his efforts to bring in a contractor to remove two trees and only at that time had Code Enforcement Officer Sidie asked the contractor conducting the abatement to remove the two trees. While he had been told the removal of the two trees would not cost more money, additional fees had been imposed. He suggested there was incompetence involved in this situation and stated he had everything documented in photographs including the damage to the fence and debris left on the property.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Council member Toms clarified with Code Enforcement Officer Sidie the notices notifying the property owner of the requirement to abate and all citations had been mailed certified receipt request. Some receipts had been mailed back and signed received and some had been returned unclaimed.
Council member Tave supported the option of a lien or a payment program. He wanted the City Council to consider either option as a possible compromise.
Council member Toms understood the assessment to be placed on the property would require payment in the next property tax cycle scheduled for November 10, 2022. If a lien were placed on the property payment would not occur until the property was sold, which may not occur until years in the future and there was a chance the City would not be paid depending on the circumstances at that time. She understood the potential action the City Council may impose would be setting a precedent on how the City dealt with code violations. She realized that adding the assessment would not be easy for the property owner.
Council member Martinez-Rubin wanted more information on a possible payment plan. She found that the property owner had been appropriately notified of the requirements and reasons for the abatement. She suggested the property owner must bear some responsibility for those consequences. If a payment plan could be considered it would allow some flexibility for the property owner to pay the assessment. She also recognized pursuant to correspondence received from the property owner that there were some health issues and differences in opinion in how the City had provided notices, but she found the appropriate process had been followed by staff and pointed out there were consequences to not responding to a potential threat to the public. She again asked that staff consider a payment plan for the assessment which would require a conversation with the County Assessor’s Office.
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy acknowledged the difficult situation for the property owner which had occurred in the midst of the pandemic. Based on the information provided and depending on how the Council moved forward this matter would be in the hands of the County Assessor’s Office. He detailed all of the possible options and asked if they were options provided by the City or the County Assessor’s Office.
15 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
City Manager Murray reported it was up to the City Council to consider the mechanism to be pursued in collecting the amounts owed. Based on the discussion, he suggested an assessment over a period of two years would allow the homeowner time to arrange his finances. He pointed out the homeowner was aware of the need to remediate the situation and remove the trees and again detailed the City’s efforts to perform that work. The homeowner was faced with paying to remove the trees irrespective of the City’s involvement and as noted, there were certain responsibilities with being a homeowner.
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy would consider the new option offered by the City Manager. He found that staff’s efforts had been holistic but given all of the options he asked whether the current policies or whether the PMC would consider community service to the City in order to decrease the costs incurred, to which City Manager Murray responded that he was unaware of any such mechanism that could be considered.
City Attorney Casher concurred there was no mechanism within the PMC that would allow community service to pay down an assessment although all options were on the table for City Council consideration. The PMC allowed interest on a payment and if the City Council were to elect to break the payment into two different assessments and over two years, the City may impose up to 8 percent interest on the second payment. If the property owner did not pay the assessment at the end of the year, he was uncertain of the consequences.
Assistant City Attorney Alex Mog advised that once an assessment had been added to a property tax bill the County had a process for recovery over time if not paid. It was possible non-payment of property taxes could result in foreclosure at some point. He also understood the County charged interest on unpaid property taxes.
Mayor Salimi asked staff to get back to the City Council on the options such as the County’s process to spread out the payments. He did not want to set a precedent on something that had not been done before.
Council member Toms suggested the following modification to Page 2, Section 4 of the resolution contained in Attachment A, as follows:
SECTION 4. That the County Auditor-Controller is respectfully requested to enter the amount of the special assessment on the County Tax Roll opposite of the parcel of land referred to, and that thereafter said amount shall be collected 50 percent for Fiscal Year 2022/23 and 50 percent plus interest for Fiscal Year 2023/24 at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary municipal taxes.
Council member Toms understood if the item were continued it would not require another notice of the public hearing and if the resolution in Attachment A were to be adopted it must be in a format that was acceptable to the County Assessor’s Office.
City Manager Murray provided an overview of a program he understood was available from the State Controller’s Office regarding tax postponement. If the City decided to impose the assessment over one year, or multiple years, and the property owner was unable to pay the taxes there were also deferral options or programs available to the property owner that the City may not provide through Contra Costa County or the state.
16 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Council member Tave asked that the item be continued to allow staff time to review a payment plan and update the staff report to reflect the direction from the City Council.
City Attorney Casher confirmed that the resolution could be amended to reflect the City Council direction. He understood there was consensus to break up the assessment over two years. The question was whether the County needed two separate resolutions or whether the action could be provided in one resolution. He recommended the public hearing be continued to allow staff to obtain that confirmation from the County and bring the item back to the City Council for formal approval.
Mayor Salimi asked that the resolution in Attachment A be retained, and staff return with the options to create a payment plan at the next meeting of the City Council.
Council member Toms pointed out if a payment plan were to be considered the resolution would have to be modified. If the Mayor wanted to retain the resolution, the City Council could move the item and rely on the payment plans available through the County and the state.
City Attorney Casher suggested that would be a good idea. The resolution in Attachment A could be amended to reflect the language proposed by Council member Toms breaking up the payments over two years and staff could submit that to the County and inform the County of the City Council’s direction. If for whatever reason the County required something different, the item could be brought back to the City Council for further consideration.
City Manager Murray added for a second hearing information could be added to the staff report about the deferral and installment programs provided by the state and the County.
Mayor Salimi allowed the property owner the opportunity to speak again at this time.
Mr. Eyestone found the matter to be one-sided in terms of incompetence. He reiterated he had been in the process of obtaining a contractor to remove both trees for $5,000 or less when the City stepped in and took over. He had signed nothing related to this matter and had no return address on anything. He found the situation had been mishandled and asked how the City would address the damage to his property and vehicle. He objected to the way the abatement had been handled and emphasized the number of times he had attempted to contact Code Enforcement Officer Sidie but she had never been at her desk.
In response to the Mayor, City Attorney Casher clarified if the City Council moved the item a second public hearing would not be required.
ACTION: Motion by Council members Toms/Tave to adopt a Resolution of the City of Pinole Confirming the Costs of Nuisance Abatement at 2718 Silverado Drive and Ordering a Special Assessment in the Amount of $10,088.46 Against the Subject Property to Fully Recover All Abatement Costs, as originally presented.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
17 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
11. OLD BUSINESS
A. Resolution Continuing Authorized Remote Teleconferenced Meetings Pursuant to AB 361 [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Casher)] City Attorney Casher presented the staff report and asked the City Council to adopt the resolution contained in Attachment A to the staff report.
Responding to the Council, City Clerk Bell explained that staff had been able to create a model where citizens may participate in City Council meetings remotely via Zoom and also simultaneously in the Council Chambers, with the Zoom participants’ images projected in the Council Chambers and with a video feed of the Council Chambers for any participants in-person visible to those participating by Zoom. She detailed the current regulations of AB 361 and noted the technology was there for a hybrid meeting format, but testing would need to be continued. If the City Council directed staff to proceed with a hybrid format staff would need to do a run through and work out any kinks in the hybrid model. At this time, with new safety protocols and making sure staff was ready to facilitate a hybrid model, she suggested it would be possible for the City Council to meet in-person on March 15, 2022. That schedule would allow staff time for additional testing.
Human Resources Director Stacy Shell detailed the safety protocols that staff had discussed pursuant to the recommendations from the County Health Department including a recommendation that all participants be masked, and if possible, to implement social distancing.
City Manager Murray added a new Health Order was anticipated that would change the requirements for masking effective February 15, 2022, and he detailed the new requirements that were anticipated for masking and social distancing. Current guidelines from the County Health Department required masking, social distancing and symptom monitoring as much as possible.
For the hybrid format for in-person/virtual Council meetings, all in-person attendees (including Council members) would be required to do a self-test, wear a mask except when speaking, and maintain social distancing which would be possible in the Council Chambers. Air purification and filtering systems could be provided upon Council direction with the specifics of two different approaches/levels to air filtration/purification detailed at a cost of around $7,000. That equipment could be made ready for the March 15 City Council meeting.
As to whether contact information would be required of in-person attendees, City Clerk Bell advised that staff had received recommendations from the County Health Officer via a revised notice dated February 2, 2022. A voluntary attendance sheet had been recommended with some contact information. This could be considered as part of any self-test the public would do with the contact information to be used only in the event of a need to contact the public, which would be done on a voluntary basis.
City Attorney Casher commented that if the City Council adopted the resolution in Attachment A there would be the flexibility to have some Council members be present in-person in the Council Chambers and some virtually. If the City Council decided to meet in-person on March 15 but if a Council member was not comfortable meeting in-person, staff had discussed having Council member(s) be physically present on-site in the Conference Room to be able to meet the requirements of the Brown Act to have a majority of members physically present. 18 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
City Clerk Bell clarified if the City Council did not authorize the continuation of AB 361 and the authorizations it provided, the City Council would have to meet the strict requirements of the Brown Act which meant if a Council member was not present in the Council Chambers but wanted to participate in the meeting, their location would be required to be noticed to the public, the locations listed on the meeting agenda and the members of the public afforded the opportunity to participate from those locations.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafael Menis, Pinole, understood that AB 361 would expire at the end of March 2022. He asked that a future agenda item be considered to request that state representatives consider extending AB 361 beyond March 2022 given that some of the Brown Act restrictions could be mildly absurd.
As to the hybrid in-person model for City Council meetings, he had concern how mask wearing indoors would be enforced over the course of the meeting to ensure people remained safe. As to the recommendation for contact information to be provided voluntarily, he asked whether the information would be used for contact tracing or for any purpose needed by the City. He suggested the purpose of collecting that information should be clearly stated to the public.
Cordell Hindler, Richmond, agreed that meetings should return to an in-person format. He noted the City of Berkeley had held hybrid format meetings and suggested Pinole should consider the same.
Debbie Long, Pinole, emphasized it was time to open the Council Chambers to the public. The staff report presented by the City Attorney had included information about state guidelines but did not include the most recent requirements from Contra Costa County, which she detailed. The staff report written by the City Attorney offered reasons to extend the remote teleconferenced meetings but provided no information why it would be safe to open meetings to an in-person format. She also spoke to the impacts from the Omicron variant which was no more or less than the cold or flu. She suggested by not opening up meetings, it was apparent the City Council did not want the public to scrutinize how the City Council was conducting the business of the City.
She pointed out the differences between the virtual and in-person formats, with the virtual format making it difficult for the public to read documents and the clarity of the audio was very poor.
Ms. Long asked the City Council to take a commonsense approach and reopen the Council Chambers for City Council meetings, otherwise she would have to conclude that transparency and accountability was not a platform the City Council subscribed. She hoped that at the least the City Council would hold a hybrid meeting on March 15.
Peter Murray, Pinole, was pleased with the County Health Department’s new guidelines and lifting of mask wearing for various uses and businesses. He suggested it was time to reopen the Council Chambers given there were serious discussions on numerous items of public concern, including many of the subject agenda items. He suggested most people in Pinole had been vaccinated and there should be little worry about any safety issues. He urged the City Council to reopen the Council Chamber and get back to the routine business of the City.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy stated a March 15 return to in-person meetings for a hybrid model was reasonable and supported a letter of support for Governor Newsom’s extension of AB 361. 19 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Council member Martinez-Rubin supported the recommendations from the County Health Officer.
Council member Toms supported authorizing the continuation of AB 361. She suggested the March 15 City Council meeting could be a test for Council members comfort level meeting inperson.
Council member Martinez-Rubin offered a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Murphy to adopt the staff recommendation.
On the motion, Mayor Pro Tem Murphy requested that direction be provided to staff to return with guidelines for a hybrid meeting format to ensure clarity. He supported the resolution, as is.
Mayor Salimi asked that the motion clarify that the City Council would return to a hybrid meeting on March 15, 2022.
Council member Martinez-Rubin did not see that needed to be included in the motion since it was procedural although she suggested the City Attorney provide direction.
City Attorney Casher suggested the City Council adopt the resolution as is, and then subsequently provide direction to staff via a motion regarding a March 15, 2022 City Council meeting and any parameters to be implemented as part of a hybrid format for the meeting.
ACTION: Motion by Council member Martinez-Rubin/Mayor Pro Tem Murphy to adopt a Resolution of the City of Pinole Authorizing Continued Remote Teleconference Meetings Pursuant to AB 361.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Mayor Salimi offered a motion, seconded by Council member Martinez-Rubin to resume in-person City Council meetings starting March 15, 2022 in a hybrid format based on the following direction to staff: give the public options for self-testing to ensure no symptoms prior to entering the Council Chambers, wear a mask and social distance in the Council Chambers, and provide two-level ventilation upgrade and implement the mechanism for voluntary contact tracing with the information to be used for contact tracing purposes only, as needed.
On the motion, Council member Toms noted that indoor masking requirements had been lifted in most circumstances as of February 15. Rather than have the City Council and the public be required to wear masks, she suggested following the recommendations of the County Health Officer.
City Manager Murray commented that due to the length of the Council meetings and proximity of seating, even with social distancing, people would have longer than average exposure which was why staff was interested in seeing people wear masks even if not required in the Council Chambers.
20 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Salimi/Council member Martinez-Rubin to resume in-person City Council meetings in a hybrid format starting March 15, 2022, with the following direction to staff: give the public options for self-testing to ensure no symptoms prior to entering the Council Chambers, wear a mask and social distance in the Council Chambers, and provide two-level ventilation upgrade and implement the mechanism for voluntary contact tracing with the information to be used for contact tracing purposes only, as needed.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Mayor Salimi declared a recess at 8:45 p.m. The City Council meeting reconvened at 8:50 p.m. with all Council members and staff present via Zoom.
B. Options for City-Sponsored Fourth of July Fireworks Show for 2022 [Action:
Discuss and Provide Direction (Picazo)]
Recreation Manager Maria Picazo provided a PowerPoint presentation of the staff report, and asked the City Council to receive the report on the options for a City-sponsored Fourth of July celebration for 2022 and provide direction to staff. Staff also recommended the City Council consider allocating $30,000 from the $100,000 already budgeted for unspecified community events to support the 2022 Car Show, and review and approve the list of City-sponsored community events for 2022, as outlined in the February 15, 2022 staff report.
Responding to the Council, Ms. Picazo again clarified the alternatives to a Fourth of July Fireworks celebration, as outlined in the staff report, and the fact the City of Hercules would be finalizing its fireworks celebration plans this week and Hercules had expressed the willingness to be open to possible collaboration with Pinole.
City Manager Murray understood the City of Hercules’ preference was for a land-based launch site for their fireworks display and the city was evaluating its options and expected to make a decision this week. If there was another launch site on land, the question was whether it would be visible and accessible to Pinole residents, and then whether some cost sharing could be considered. Pinole staff was in a wait-and-see pattern but the City Council could provide direction to staff if a Hercules site was equally accessible to Pinole residents that staff collaborate with Hercules on a fireworks show. If Hercules selected a site that was not accessible to Pinole residents, staff could proceed to Plan B. He added the Pinole Car Show had been tentatively scheduled for June 26, 2022, a week prior to the Fourth of July and confirmed Pinole had not had back-to-back events in the past and he was uncertain whether that would diminish one or the other events.
City Manager Murray added that the vendors had provided costs for the proposed Fourth of July event options, which costs varied depending on the dates identified in the staff report. There was little difference in the costs provided. The City Council should decide the ideal date for the event in that staff had no preference.
21 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Council member Toms reported she and Council member Rubin had spoken with a Hercules Council member and had been provided cost estimates on fireworks displays. If Hercules could have a fireworks program from a barge or display that was visible from Bay Front Park that would be the best route, since it could be a longer fireworks show and would benefit both Hercules and Pinole residents. If staff later learned the fireworks display in Hercules was not visible to Pinole residents at that point the City Council could consider the other options listed in the staff report and time an event in Pinole that did not overlap the Hercules fireworks display.
Ms. Picazo and City Manager Murray again detailed the staff recommendation and the request for the City Council to consider allocating $30,000 from the $100,000 already budgeted for unspecified community events to support the 2022 Car Show and review and approve the list of City-sponsored community events for 2022, as had been outlined in the staff report. It was clarified the City Council had approved City support for the 2021 car show in an amount up to $15,000.
City Attorney Casher clarified that the City Council could move forward with direction to staff on any variety of the proposals being advanced. Staff could be asked to enter into an agreement with the amounts proposed as outlined in the staff report.
Ms. Picazo again detailed the list of 2022 Community Events which had been budgeted with the exceptions of the Car Show and Fourth of July events.
Finance Director Guillory clarified the Car Show had been budgeted at $15,000 and other Cityevents at the $100,000 included in the adopted budget for 2022.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Cordell Hindler, Richmond, suggested Option 1 for the laser show as outlined in the staff report should be considered since it would be inexpensive, reasonable and would offer a nice display for Pinole.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Ms. Picazo again clarified the cost estimates for the vendor proposals as outlined in the staff report for the laser and drone light shows with the cost estimates and dates for fireworks displays having been included in the February 1, 2022 staff report, as Attachment B to the February 15 staff report.
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy explained that he had requested some alternative options during the February 1 City Council meeting and he thanked staff for the information provided. He spoke to his efforts for sustainable practices and noted that the alternatives technically were a bit more sustainable and less expensive. He encouraged consideration of a public awareness campaign to discourage individual fireworks in the community and encourage residents to patronize a community fireworks display. He found that a fireworks display would be a valuable opportunity to bring the community together particularly when moving out of the pandemic. He supported the execution of a great fireworks show and consideration of a Summer Festival staff had outlined in the staff report.
22 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy urged that any celebration stay within environmental and sustainable practices for the programming schedule. He supported a fireworks display as a great tradition to the community and that the Fourth of July celebration also include the Summer Festival and the laser light show and include a mechanism to survey residents about what they liked about the Fourth of July celebrations with an evaluation process during and after the program.
Council member Tave wanted the City to partner with the City of Hercules and allocate funds to that effort. He understood the celebration for the Fourth of July was evolving and agreed they should get community input about the celebration. He emphasized that a fireworks display would be great for the community, had not occurred for a while and there was a lot of sentiment around the holiday.
Council member Toms was interested in pursuing a partnership with the City of Hercules for an extended fireworks show if it could be made to work.
Council member Martinez-Rubin agreed with the need to partner with the City of Hercules and if that did not work to then consider the alternatives.
Mayor Salimi suggested the City of Pinole should move forward with its own fireworks display to avoid the need to return to the City Council for more direction. He wanted to see Pinole’s Fourth of July event to be held on July 2, 2022 at a cost of $15,000. He recommended the City organize its own fireworks display because it would allow the option to have it paid and planned in the event Hercules was unwilling to partner with Pinole. He wanted to extend to the City of Hercules Pinole’s willingness to partner, but if Hercules was unwilling it would allow the option for Pinole to keep its dates and not lose time. In addition, he asked the City Council to consider the creation of a Summer Festival to also be held on Saturday, July 2. If Hercules was willing to partner with Pinole they could then work with Hercules. He did not want to lose the date and if Hercules wanted to work with Pinole they could move forward together.
Council member Martinez-Rubin advised that Hercules had a set date of July 4 for its Fourth of July fireworks show with the location yet to be determined, as discussed.
Ms. Picazo again clarified the cost estimates for the fireworks displays as shown in the February 1 staff report and the available dates. The Summer Festival, which had been outlined in the February 15 staff report, involved a separate cost.
Mayor Salimi was informed there was another public comment and City Attorney Casher advised that reopening the public comment was at the discretion of the Mayor, who did not reopen public comment at this time.
Council member Tave recommended an event be held on the Fourth of July and again suggested the City should start with its own fireworks display. He suggested the Summer Festival would be too much to tackle at this time, and recommended a 20- to 30-minute fireworks show as more appropriate. While he understood that would overlap with Hercules’ fireworks plans and while there was a desire to coordinate city efforts, he recommended the City Council move forward with its own fireworks display.
Mayor Salimi suggested a Summer Festival would increase revenue for the City and benefit local businesses. He re-opened public comment at this time but the speaker was unavailable. 23 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Council member Tave offered a motion to move forward with a fireworks display, with Pinole staff to reach out to Hercules staff to determine whether or not a combined show could be considered.
If efforts with Hercules were unsuccessful, a 10- to 20-minute fireworks display on July 4 could be held.
City Manager Murray reiterated the City of Hercules would make a decision by the end of the week. He restated the motion for Pinole staff to approach the City of Hercules with an offer to cost share on a fireworks show on July 4, 2022 (with a deadline of Friday, February 18, 2022 at 5:00 p.m.), and assuming a Hercules fireworks show would be at a location viewable to Pinole residents. If unfeasible, the City of Pinole to move forward with its own fireworks show on July 4.
He noted a vendor did not have to be identified at this time but the cost for the fireworks show needed to be identified by the City Council for approval.
Council member Tave again restated the motion for Pinole staff to approach the City of Hercules with an offer to cost share on a fireworks show on July 4, 2022 (with a deadline of Friday, February 18, 2022 at 5:00 p.m.), assuming it would be at a location viewable to Pinole residents. If unfeasible, the City of Pinole to move forward with its own fireworks show on July 4. Again, a vendor did not have to be identified but the cost for the fireworks needed to be identified.
As outlined in the February 1 staff report, Ms. Picazo advised the total costs including staff time for a fireworks show on July 4, 2022 would be $54,770. It was noted that the motion as stated by Councilmember Tave included a cost of $54,770 for the fireworks show.
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy seconded the motion and clarified the intent for the Fourth of July event to be held on July 4, 2022, which would also be a City holiday. As to the Summer Festival activities, he understood the available date for the vendors had been identified as July 2, 2022 given that most of the vendors had already been booked for the holiday weekend.
ACTION: Motion by Council member Tave/Mayor Pro Tem Murphy to direct Pinole staff to approach the City of Hercules with an offer to cost share for a fireworks show on July 4, 2022 (with a deadline of Friday, February 18, 2022 at 5:00 p.m.), assuming it would be at a location viewable to Pinole residents. If unfeasible, the City of Pinole to move forward with its own fireworks show on July 4, 2022, at a cost of $54,770.
Vote: Passed 4-1
Ayes: Salimi, Murphy, Tave, Toms
Noes: Martinez-Rubin
Abstain: None
Absent: None
After the motion was made and in order to provide clarification to the Mayor, City Manager Murray stated the motion was clear in the event Hercules did not want to cost share, the City of Pinole would move forward with its own fireworks show, pursuant to the stated and adopted motion.
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy again wanted the City Council to consider a community centered and focused event and consider ways to allow community groups to table prior to the commencement of a fireworks show. He expressed the willingness to partner in that effort and emphasized the importance of community connection.
24 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
City Manager Murray understood the Mayor Pro Tem was suggesting some ancillary activity and opportunity for the community to gather at some point on July 4 in advance of the fireworks show, and at a park location at a time for community groups and City staff to table, which would be feasible and would not include vendors, but be a different kind of event. He asked that the City Council offer a motion for said direction.
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy offered a motion, seconded by Mayor Salimi in the spirit of the Fourth of July to create some kind of “Fourth of July democracy circle” that allowed for a space for City Departments and local organizations to table before the July 4 event and provide information.
On the motion, Council member Toms asked whether campaigning would be allowed in a City park or whether they were speaking of non-profits, and City Manager Murray deferred to the City Attorney whether the organizations allowed to table would be restricted.
City Attorney Casher commented that if the City Council moved forward with the motion, as stated, staff would provide direction to those who may be interested in tabling and place restrictions that may be necessary to restrict political activities.
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy clarified his intent for a public event.
Council member Martinez-Rubin supported the vendors being non-profits and private sellers who had been permitted in the past and that campaigning not be permitted.
City Clerk Bell restated the motion, when asked, to direct staff to organize a “Fourth of July Democracy Circle” or space where information could be shared in the hours preceding the Fourth of July fireworks show to be arranged for July 4, 2022.
City Manager Murray commented that there had been a reference to vendors but there would be no vendors, just local organizations to share information. He was uncertain a local non-profit could be prevented from campaigning.
City Clerk Bell acknowledged the concerns and noted that City resources could not be used in campaigning activities. She suggested that with the City Attorney’s assistance specific guidance could be provided, which would occur after the meeting.
City Attorney Casher noted this would be a City-sponsored event and there were questions about the level of resources that could be committed. He would like to defer that decision until he had the opportunity to conduct some analysis.
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy reiterated his intent for an event to allow a discussion of what was freedom for people. It would be a public event consistent with one of the activities staff had outlined in the February 15 staff report. He would leave it to the City Clerk and the City Attorney to identify what organizations may or may not be allowed to use City resources. He asked that the motion be considered.
Council member Toms commented that Bay Front Park was a small space, and any tabling would require clearing tables out of the lawn area, which would become busy with spectators and there needed to be a time when the tabling ended and the lawn was opened for spectators to watch the fireworks show.
25 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Mayor Salimi was informed there was public comment but again stated the public comment period had been closed.
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Murphy/Mayor Salimi to direct staff to organize a “Fourth of July Democracy Circle” or space where information could be shared in the hours preceding the Fourth of July fireworks show to be arranged for July 4, 2022.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
C. Receive Information and Provide Direction on Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Projects [Action: Discuss and Provide Direction per Staff Recommendation (Mishra)]
Senior Project Manager Misha Kaur provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Projects, and asked the City Council to receive the information and provide direction on the implementation in the Capital Improvement Plan FY 2021/22 – 2025/26 as contained in Attachment A.
Responding to the Council, Ms. Kaur highlighted the CIP Projects for FY 2021/22 currently underway, some of which involved multi-year efforts and those staff recommended be deferred, which had been outlined in depth in the February 15 staff report. She again explained why the list of deferred projects had been recommended for deferral. If the City Council agreed with the list of deferred projects, staff was considering the possibility of categories for scoring and a matrix for prioritization which would come back to the City Council for a future discussion. A list of the CIP projects for FY 2021/22 absent the deferred projects were also highlighted as shown in the staff report.
Public Works Director Sanjay Mishra provided additional clarification how the CIP projects had been prioritized and City Manager Murray described the evolution of the CIP process leading to prioritization and again detailed the reasons for the recommended list of deferred projects, with staffing and limited resources some of the main reasons.
Mr. Mishra confirmed in response to the Mayor that a Master Schedule and baseline chart identifying when a project started and was due for completion could be provided and the reasons for any delay. The history of the project such as the ongoing earned value, planned value, original cost, and forecasted costs could be provided after research. The oldest project in the CIP was Project No. FA1703 Paint City Hall, which was from year 2017 and on the list of deferred projects.
As to the completion of the Park Master Plan and what that meant for park maintenance, City Manager Murray spoke to the challenges with some of the City’s facilities and stated the CIP did not reflect everything the City was doing to maintain its facilities but had identified the capital projects. He provided an overview of the maintenance activities in City parks.
Referencing the Senior Center Auxiliary Parking Lot, Ms. Kaur confirmed there were different options for the City Council to consider to be able to continue progressing on the design. 26 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Ms. Kaur again asked the City Council to consider the staff recommendation to consider the approval of the list of deferred projects. If the City Council made no decision on the deferred projects, staff would need direction on how to move some of the projects. She again detailed the list of CIP projects for FY 2021/22 as outlined in the staff report, some which were multi-year projects and noted not all would be completed by June 30, 2022.
Project No. FA1901, Senior Center Auxiliary Parking Lot, was highlighted with staff seeking direction on the preferred build-out scenario. Funding from MCE had been presented at either the full build out of the alternative for five Level Two Charging Ports and a discount and rebate the City would receive for each port for a total of $15,000. For the parking lot to be solar ready, not solar installed, it would cost an additional $160,600. Based on the Council direction, staff could return with additional information if the desire was to move in a solar direction or both.
Staff did not want to progress with the design absent direction from the City Council. The alternatives were the Full Alternative or the Alternative Build Out. The Full Alternative would involve fully paving the lot, including striping, lighting, landscaping, storm water retention and installation of electric vehicle (EV) charging stations. The Alternative Build Out would be a gravel lot, would not trigger storm water retention, and the option of including or not including the EV charging stations.
Julia Harberson, Consultant, added that to make the Senior Center Auxiliary Parking Lot EV ready would involve small incremental costs. A full solar installation would cost $160,600.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafael Menis, Pinole, expressed concern with the practicality of the Alternative Build Out and gravel lot alternative for the Senior Auxiliary Parking Lot, particularly for senior citizens and the use of the adjacent Fowler lot. As to the deferred projects, he cited CIP Project Nos. FA1702 Citywide roof repairs and replacement; PA2001, Bocce Ball Court; and SS2101, Secondary Clarifier Center Column Rehabilitation. Project Nos. SS2101 and FA1702 had been identified as high priority items but had continued to be delayed. Also, trash bins were to have been installed as part of the Park Master Plan. He otherwise asked whether the project numbers in the CIP corresponded to the year of the project.
Cordell Hindler, Richmond, echoed the comments raised by Mr. Menis and asked that staff return with more detailed information on the costs for the CIP projects that had been identified.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Murphy/Council member Tave to extend the City Council meeting to 11:30 p.m.
Vote: Passed 4-1
Ayes: Salimi, Murphy, Tave, Toms
Noes: Martinez-Rubin
Abstain: None
Absent: None
27 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Ms. Kaur reiterated the staff recommendation as outlined in the staff report and direction on the preferred build out for the Senior Center Auxiliary Parking Lot.
Council member Tave requested more information on the staff recommended projects to be deferred with more discussion by the City Council. He supported the full build out of the Senior Center Auxiliary Parking Lot, to be solar ready and with EV charging stations installed. He agreed with the concerns raised with a gravel parking lot alternative.
Council member Toms and Mayor Pro Tem Murphy also supported full build out of the Senior Center Auxiliary Parking Lot to be solar ready and with EV charging stations installed.
ACTION: Motion by Council members Tave/Toms to support the full build out alternative for the Senior Center Auxiliary Parking Lot, to be solar ready and with EV charging stations installed.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
On the issue of the deferral of the CIP projects that had been identified, Mayor Salimi agreed that staff should return with more information on how the projects had been prioritized.
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy commented the CIP was one of the most important processes for the City, but he found it difficult to discuss with his constituents why decision points were being made.
Before the City Council moved forward with any projects, he wanted to see the creation of a metric to showcase the deferred projects and why they were being recommended for deferral. Some of the deferred projects were urgent but that information had not been reflected in the explanation for the deferred projects or in the projects staff had recommended be on the CIP list for this Fiscal Year.
Mayor Salimi also wanted a better understanding and suggested the consideration of a Gantt Chart to identify the last five years of CIP projects, including information when the projects were to start with the year 2017 as the baseline. He wanted to see the start and finish dates anticipated and the current status of the projects on a yearly basis on an updated schedule from 2017 to 2022, and from there the City Council may determine the cause of delay which would allow the City Council to review the budget accordingly. He expressed concern that many projects had been deferred for years.
Council member Toms found the information would be useful, but expressed concern with potential delays to other projects, pulling staff to conduct this exercise. If a contract engineer or someone not on staff/consultant could pull that information together that would be preferred.
City Manager Murray suggested that the effort should start in a more recent year given current staff had not been present in 2017 and may not be able to divine the cause of delays. The start could be from 2020 and determine the cause of any delays. If a shorter time period, that could be something that staff could pull together.
28 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Mr. Mishra stated he could reach out to consultants to work with staff, and the Mayor expressed the willingness to work with staff to prepare a schedule.
Council member Tave agreed with the Mayor and recognized there was new staff, but stated the City Council had to explain to constituents why some projects had not been completed in order to provide a better understanding of how to move forward. He encouraged the Public Works Director to prepare that information and he looked forward to a future presentation.
Council member Martinez-Rubin agreed it was important to understand why a project had been deferred to help inform the public and understand why some problems had not been addressed.
She noted that many complaints received from residents had a common thread, did not always appear as a CIP project, but may be related, and information in a written format would be helpful.
Mayor Salimi advised that the direction to staff would be to defer the item with staff to provide the City Council with a baseline schedule starting in 2017 to 2022 on the deferred projects, with the start and finish date on a yearly basis and a reason for the deferral for 2022 and 2021. He expressed the willingness to work with staff on that effort.
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy also asked that the same information be provided for the current CIP projects in the future.
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Salimi/Council member Toms to direct staff to prepare a Gantt Chart summarizing the list of deferred CIP projects as shown in the February 15, 2022 staff report, with a baseline schedule starting in the year 2017 and an updated schedule showing the start and finish dates for years 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022, and with staff to provide an explanation why the project had been deferred for the years 2021 and 2022.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Mr. Mishra clarified in response to public comments the corresponding CIP Project Nos. referred to the facility and the year the project had been placed into the CIP. He also explained why Project No. SS2101, Secondary Clarifier Center Column Rehabilitation had been deferred since that particular clarifier was not in operation.
12. NEW BUSINESS
A. Provide Direction on Potential Ballot Measure to Become a Charter City and Enact a Real Property Transfer Tax [Action: Discuss and Provide Direction per Staff Recommendation (Murray)]
Council member Tave requested that Items 12A and 12B be continued to the next meeting of the City Council given the depth needed for each item and the lateness of the hour to commence with such discussions.
Mayor Salimi asked staff whether a two-week continuance would impact the schedule proposed for Item 12A.
29 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
City Attorney Casher advised a decision needed to be made sooner rather than later related to Item 12A since public hearing dates were critical and there may be difficulty bringing any consultants on board for polling. If the item were continued to the meeting of March 1, 2022, it may impact the ability to bring a consultant on-board, but he recognized the lateness of the hour.
City Manager Murray agreed if the City Council decided to take the next step in the process for Item 12A, a consultant would need to be hired to evaluate the community priorities. Taking that step and research would not commit the City to moving forward with a ballot measure since it was just an information gathering process. Staff could be directed this evening to proceed to identify a consultant to do that work and if the City Council continued the item to the March 1 City Council meeting, the City Council could actually execute a contract with a firm to conduct that work.
Mayor Salimi asked the City Manager to proceed with the staff presentation.
Council member Tave stated that any direction to staff would require a discussion and public comment. He understood the importance of the item and while not opposed to moving forward, again given the lateness of the hour he preferred Items 12A and 12B be continued.
Council member Toms asked that Items 12A and 12B should be continued with the City Council to move onto Item 13. She could not agree to extend the City Council meeting beyond 11:30 p.m.
Mayor Salimi understood a continuance of Item 12A may jeopardize the potential ballot measure.
Council member Martinez-Rubin pointed out as part of the prior agenda item many CIP projects had been deferred since the City Council had not been thoughtful about the suggestions.
Tiredness and time constraints did not make for a thoughtful discussion and approach in making decisions. The same issues had occurred with the budget discussions in 2021 with meetings late into the evening.
City Attorney Casher clarified for Item 12A a public hearing would have to be conducted by June 7, 2022 with a second public hearing by July 12, 2022, and with the ballot measure to be sent to the County in August. The Assistant City Attorney was prepared to make a presentation but it could be continued to March 1. He reiterated the potential for a time crunch on the ability to retain consultants. While time sensitive, the item merited a discussion.
Council member Tave sought a full discussion, which was why he wanted the item continued. In terms of polling, he asked whether the City Council could provide direction to staff to move forward with polling whether they moved forward with a transfer tax or not, to which City Attorney Casher advised if the item were continued to March 1, staff could do preliminary research on consultants who could do polling in order to best position the City if the City Council ultimately decided to move forward with the ballot measure. He recommended the item be continued to a date certain of March 1, 2022.
ACTION: Motion by Council members Tave/Toms to continue Items 12A and 12B to a date certain of March 1, 2022, with the caveat that staff would do some research for polling companies to be presented to the City Council on March 1, 2022.
Vote: Passed 5-0
30 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Ayes: Salimi, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Murphy/Council member Tave to extend the City Council meeting to 11:50 p.m.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
B. Receive the Fiscal Year (FY) 2021/22 Mid-Year Financial Report and Adopt a Resolution Approving Budget Adjustments [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Guillory)]
Item continued to a date certain of March 1, 2022
13. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Continued from Item 6) (Public Comments) Only open to members of the public who did not speak under the first Citizens to be Heard, Agenda Item 6.
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.
Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.
Rafael Menis, Pinole, spoke to the risks of COVID-19 and referenced the conclusions of a study that had been published on January 7, 2022 titled Long-Term Cardiovascular Outcomes of COVID-19 in Nature, which he raised in terms of personal risk tolerance and whether people were wearing masks or not. He commented on the effectiveness of vaccines which waned over time which was why booster shots had been recommended and he cited case data from Contra Costa County. Although people may have been vaccinated and boosted, mask wearing should still be done. In regards to the discussion for Item 11B, he commented on the challenges for drawing a line between political and non-political purposes in terms of whether organizations could have a table at a community event on the Fourth of July. He suggested the City carefully consider the First Amendment implications.
14. ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting of March 1, 2022 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.
At 11:33 p.m., Mayor Salimi adjourned the meeting to the Regular City Council Meeting of March 1, 2022 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.
31 of 153
Pinole City Council
Minutes – February 15, 2022
Submitted by:
_________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
Approved by City Council:
32 of 153
33 of 153
34 of 153
35 of 153
36 of 153
37 of 153
38 of 153
39 of 153
40 of 153
41 of 153
42 of 153
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9C
DATE: MARCH 1, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: ERIC CASHER, CITY ATTORNEY
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION CONFIRMING CONTINUED EXISTENCE OF LOCAL
EMERGENCY
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution confirming the continued existence of a local emergency.
BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION
On March 18, 2020, the City Manager, acting as Director of Emergency Services, proclaimed a local emergency pursuant to California Government Code Section 8630 and Pinole Municipal Code Chapter 2.32. The emergency declaration was based on public health and safety concerns for persons and property within the City as a consequence of the global spread of novel coronavirus 2019 ("COVID-19"), including confirmed cases in Contra Costa County, as well as, the Contra Costa County Department of Health’s shelter in place order dated March 16, 2020 and California Governor Newsom’s State of Emergency proclaimed on March 4, 2020.
The City Council subsequently adopted a resolution affirming the City Manager’s emergency declaration. On November 10, 2021 Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-21-21 extending California’s State of Emergency previously set to expire on December 31, 2021, through March 31, 2022.
The California Emergency Services Act requires the City Council to review the need for continuing the local emergency at least once every 60 days. Although the local emergency does not end until terminated by the City Council, the Pinole Municipal Code requires the City Council to periodically review the need for continuing the local emergency. Thus, the City Council has a standing opportunity to review current conditions and determine whether public health and safety concerns for persons and property within the City of Pinole continue to exist. Following ongoing review, the City Council has continuously confirmed the existence of the local emergency since the emergency was first declared, most recently on February 15, 2022.
Although the number of cases within Contra Costa County is beginning to improve as the Omicron surge is believed to be subsiding, community transmission of COVID-19 continues to occur at a high rate. There have now been over 186,478 43 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022
confirmed cases of COVID-19 within the County and approximately 1,200 deaths.
The case rate within the County for fully vaccinated individuals is approximately 72 new case per day per 100,000 people (41 if fully vaccinated and has received booster). The case rate within the County for unvaccinated individuals is approximately 149 cases per day per 100,000. There have been over 4,448 new cases in the last 2 weeks alone. In Pinole, the rate of new cases over the last 14 days is approximately 536 new cases per 100,000 people.
In Contra Costa, several health orders remain in effect, including workplace vaccine verification requirements for healthcare workers, first responders and congregate care workers. On February 16, 2022, in alignment with the health order issued by the State of California Department of Public Health, Contra Costa County lifted the universal mask requirements for vaccinated people in most indoor public settings.
State and County guidelines continue to require masking for unvaccinated individuals in all indoor public settings and requires masking for all individuals regardless of vaccination status in higher risk settings like public transit, K-12 schools and childcare, and congregate living. Masks continue to be recommended for all persons in all indoor public settings, and State and local government offices that serve the public. Workplaces must continue to follow the COVID-19 prevention standards set by CalOSHA including adherence to the latest order from the California Department of Public Health. Bay Area health officers continue to strongly recommend masks be used as an effective tool to prevent the spread of the virus especially when case rates are high, or when additional personal protection is needed.
Public health and safety concerns for persons and property within the City as a consequence of the global spread of novel coronavirus 2019 continue to exist.
If the proposed resolution is adopted, the City Council will confirm the continued existence of the local emergency. In accordance with state law and the Municipal Code, the City Council will review the emergency declaration periodically until the conditions warrant a termination of the emergency declaration.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact from the adoption of the resolution ratifying a local emergency.However, the City will consider all options available to seek reimbursement for indirect expenses and fiscal impacts through the appropriate authorities.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution Confirming Continued Existence of Local Emergency 5068616.1
44 of 153
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE
CONFIRMING THE CONTINUED EXISTENCE OFA LOCAL EMERGENCY DUE TO COVID-19
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 8630 and Pinole Municipal Code Section
2.32.060 authorize the Director of Emergency Service to proclaim a local emergency when conditions of disaster or extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the territorial limits of a city exist if the City Council is not in session and provides that the City Council shall ratify the proclamation within seven days thereafter; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 8630 and Pinole Code Section 2.32.060, the Director of Emergency Services proclaimed the existence of a local emergency caused by the Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19), a respiratory disease first identified in China that may result in serious illness or death that is easily transmissible from person to person, on March 18, 2020; and
WHEREAS, on March 24, 2020, the City Council ratified and confirmed the proclamation of the existence of a local emergency issued by the Director of Emergency Services; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 8630 and Pinole Municipal Code Section 2.32.060, the City Council must periodically review the need for continuing the local emergency; and
WHEREAS, the conditions that prompted the original declaration of a local emergency continue to exist; and
WHEREAS, the recitals contained in Resolution No. 2020-13, adopted by the City Council on March 24, 2020, are incorporated into this Resolution as if stated herein; and WHEREAS, there have now been over 186,478 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and approximately 1,200 deaths within the County; and
WHEREAS, the case rate within the County for fully vaccinated individuals is approximately 72 new case per day per 100,000 people (41 if fully vaccinated and has received booster) and the case rate within the County for unvaccinated individuals is approximately 149 cases per day per 100,000; and
WHEREAS, in order to maintain progress in containing the spread of COVID-19 and continue the reduction in transmission of COVID-19, the public must continue to practice appropriate safety measures; and
ATTACHMENT A
45 of 153
2 WHEREAS, the public health and safety concerns for persons and property within the City as a consequence of the global spread of COVID-19 continue to exist; and WHEREAS, the health, safety, and welfare of Pinole residents, businesses, visitors, and staff is of utmost importance to the City and additional future measures may be needed to protect the community; and
WHEREAS, the City may require additional assistance in the future, and a formal declaration of emergency allows the City to access resources in a timely manner in a timely fashion; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the territorial limits of the City related to COVID-19 pandemic continue in existence; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that extraordinary measures are required to protect the public health, safety, and of persons and property within the City that are or are likely to be beyond the control or capability of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has continuously confirmed the existence of a local emergency following periodic review since it was first declared on March 18, 2020; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to confirm the continued existence of a local emergency within Pinole due to COVID-19.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Pinole hereby declares as follows:
1. The local emergency declared by Resolution No. 2020-13 due to the COVID-19 Pandemic continues to exist within the City of Pinole.
2. During the existence of the declared local emergency, the powers, functions, and duties of the City Manager, acting as Director of Emergency Services, and the emergency organization of this City shall be those prescribed by State law and by ordinances and resolutions of the City of Pinole.
3. The declaration of local emergency shall remain in effect until such time that the Council determines that the emergency conditions have been abated.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 1st day of March, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
46 of 153
3 I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced, passed, and adopted on the 1st day of March, 2022.
____________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
47 of 153
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
9D
DATE: MARCH 1, 2022
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: HEATHER BELL, CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: PLACEMENT OF LIENS FOR DELINQUENT UNPAID WASTE
COLLECTION CHARGES FALLING DELINQUENT BETWEEN
SEPTEMBER AND DECEMBER 2021, CONSIDERED AT AN
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING ON FEBRUARY 3, 2022
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the placement of liens for the purpose of collecting outstanding payments for garbage collection services pursuant to PMC Section 8.08.110 (b) and (c).
BACKGROUND
Pursuant to Section 8.08 of the Pinole Municipal Code, an administrative hearing was held on February 3, 2022, regarding unpaid garbage collection services that fell delinquent between September and December 2021. No parties attended the hearing to protest the charges. The administrative hearing was the final step in the process to collect the delinquencies, prior to Council approval to place the liens on the subject properties to recover the full amount owed, including delinquent charges and administrative fees.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City of Pinole receives an administrative recovery charge for each lien at the time of tax settlement or payment of the lien. There are 105 properties on which liens are being imposed, representing a total of $42,883.95 in delinquent service charges. The total administrative recovery fee is $60 per lien; a portion of which is remitted to Contra Costa County. The administrative recovery fees are $6,300.00; the total lien amount including recovery fees are $49,183.95.
Following approval by Council, a revised list will be provided to the City Clerk for recording, removing properties where accounts have been brought current since the publication of this report.
ATTACHMENT
A: Resolution
48 of 153
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-___
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF PINOLE, CALIFORNIA, PLACING LIENS
ON PROPERTIES SITUATED IN THE CITY OF PINOLE, COUNTY OF CONTRA
COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
UNPAID WASTE COLLECTION CHARGES FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING CONDUCTED FEBRUARY 3, 2022
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Code of the City of Pinole, Chapter 8.08, Section 8.08.090, subscription to garbage collection service is required for all premises in the City of Pinole, and the premises described in Exhibit "A" located in the City of Pinole, County of Contra Costa, State of California, were provided with garbage collection services as required by PMC, Chapter 8.08; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section 8.08.110, the owners of said premises were notified in writing of their requirement to subscribe to and make payment for garbage collection services as provided in said Code Section; and WHEREAS, the owners of the premises failed to make payment for garbage collection services as required (collection charges fell delinquent between September and December 2021); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section 8.08.110, a hearing was held on February 3, 2022; and
WHEREAS, as a result thereof, the City of Pinole has incurred expenses for delinquent collection charges and administrative costs as enumerated in Exhibit "A"*, which amounts remain unpaid.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that pursuant to Section 8.08.110 of the Municipal Code of the City of Pinole, the City Council of the City of Pinole does hereby place a lien against said premises for the amounts as described above and as applicable to each specific premise identified as Exhibit "A" attached hereto and, by this reference, incorporated herein; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby directed to record this resolution with the Office of the Recorder of Contra Costa County, California.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of March 2022, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
I, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on this 1st day of March 2022.
_________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
* Exhibit A is not included as an attachment to this resolution that is posted on the City website or disseminated as part of the City Council Agenda Packet. The names of the individuals are confidential until the liens are recorded and become public record. 49 of 153
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
DATE: MARCH 1, 2022
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: SANJAY MISHRA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT AND ISSUE A
TASK ORDER FOR SCHAAF & WHEELER CONSULTING CIVIL
ENGINEERS FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR
AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $54,910
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the on-call contract with Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers creating a task order for providing professional engineering design services and construction support services in an amount not to exceed $54,910; and
2. Authorize the Finance Director to amend the budget to allocate $14,930 to design from the available contingency of $50,000 under SW1901- Hazel Street Strom Drain Improvements project.
BACKGROUND
The existing stormwater collection facility at the end of Hazel Street is an open channel.
The City’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) 2021/22 includes a project (SW1901- Hazel Street Strom Drain Improvements) to replace the existing facility by installing an underground conveyance system, connecting the existing storm drain network within Hazel Street between 1087 Hazel St (eastern limits) and 1081 Hazel St. (western limits), so that a through road can be constructed. The project has a total allocated budget of $399,980.
On November 13, 2018, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2018-101 approving on-call contract services for several consulting firms, which included Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers for a period of four years, ending November 13, 2022, with the understanding that any contract amendments in excess of $45,000 be presented to the City Council for approval.
In January 2020, the City contracted with Schaaf and Wheeler to prepare the preliminary design of the Hazel Street Strom Drain Improvements project, which includes plan and profile of the pipe and technical specifications. A task order was executed on 2/29/2020 for a not to exceed amount of $39,980.
9E
50 of 153
City Council Meeting
March 1, 2022 2
REVIEW & ANALYSIS
During the design development process, a discrepancy was identified between the assessor’s map provided by City of Pinole and the County GIS parcels map. It was decided that a supplemental survey was necessary (not included in original scope of Schaaf and Wheeler) for the design team to update plans to properly reflect the exact location of the existing storm drain easement and the location of the existing infrastructure.
A pothole for the existing force main (existing sewer pipe which carries wastewater under pressure from the Sewer Lift station located in Hazel St.) was completed by the City and recorded by the surveyors. During design review meetings it was determined that the best course of action is to replace a portion of the existing Force Main (not included in original scope of Schaaf and Wheeler) to avoid conflicts with the new storm drain.
Remaining portions of the original budget were re-allocated to complete the survey and rectify the existing plans to match the survey data. Therefore additional $14,930 budget is requested, which will bring the total contract amount to $54,910. This $14,930 would primarily cover the cost of designing the Force Main replacement and incorporating into the details to existing Project Construction Documents.
FISCAL IMPACT
This authorization will add $14,930 to the existing task order of $39,930 and bring the total contract value to a not to exceed amount of $54,910. CIP project SW1901 has adequate funds in the contingency to cover this budget request.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Schaff and Wheeler Proposal
C. Schaff and Wheeler Contract Amendment Task Order
51 of 153
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE,
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ON CALL CONTRACT WITH
SCHAAF & WHEELER CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $54,910 WHEREAS, the City has awarded a task order on 2/29/2020 for professional engineering services to provide design and construction support services to Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers to improve the existing open channel storm water drainage system at Hazel street for a not to exceed amount of $39,980.; WHEREAS, on November 13, 2018, the City Council approved several on-call contracts which included CSG for a period of four (4) years ending November 13, 2022 with the understanding that any contract amendments more than $45,000 be presented to the City Council for approval; and
WHEREAS, the due to conflicting utility easement information between the parcel map and assessor’s map further survey work was needed and the new information from the survey required additional design work for a successful project; and WHEREAS, Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers have provided us with a cost proposal for the additional scope; and
WHEREAS, the City needs to move forward with the design work to complete the Capital Improvement Projects for the Financial Year 2021/22; and WHEREAS the additional cost for this amendment for Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers to complete the design and provide construction support services is expected to be $14,930; and
WHEREAS, Capital Improvement Plan FY 2021/22 has an allocated budget of $399,930 for SW1901 - Hazel Street Storm Drain Improvements project and has a $50,000 contingency.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole does hereby take the following actions:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the On-Call contract with Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers for a Task Order for providing professional engineering design services and construction support services in an amount not to exceed $54,910; and
2. Authorize the Finance Director to amend the adopted budget to allocate $14,930 to Design from the available Contingency of $50,000 under SW1901- Hazel Street Strom Drain Improvements project.
52 of 153
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pinole held on the 1st day of March 2022, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 1st day of March 2022.
___________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
53 of 153
City of Pinole Council Report
Mar 1, 2022 ATTACHMENT B
HAZEL STREET ADDITIONAL DESIGN SERVICES – SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN DESIGN
: ADDITIONAL TASK DETAILS AND COST PROPOSAL:
Brief Summary:
After submitting 95% plans, the City of Pinole provided the design team with an assessor’s map document that showed the existing storm drain easement on the north side of Hazel Street; however, when mapped using the County GIS parcels, it seemed that the current structure did not fall entirely within the existing easement. Therefore, a supplemental survey was necessary (not included in original scope) for the design team to update plans to properly reflect the exact location of the existing storm drain easement and the location of the existing infrastructure. A pothole on the existing FM was also completed by the City and picked up by the surveyors, based on this new information, it was determined through discussions with the City that the best course of action would be to replace a portion of the existing Force Main (not included in original scope) to avoid conflicts with the new storm drain.
Remaining portions of the original budget were re-allocated to complete the survey and rectify the existing plans to match the survey data. This additional budget would primarily cover the cost for designing the Force Main replacement and incorporating into the existing Project Construction Documents. Construction Support Services were included in the original scope; but were part of the funds re-allocated to complete the survey; therefore, cost for Construction Support Services has been included.
Hazel Street Additional Design Services - SS FM
Design
February 8
Schedule of Hours and Rates by Task
Schaaf & Wheeler
Subtotal
TASK
Principal
Senior Engineer
Assistant Engineer
Hourly Rate (2019) $235 $210 $170
TASK 1 Coordination 6 $ 1,260
TASK 2
SS FM Design Docs (Plans/Specs/Cost
Estimate) 6 16 32 $ 10,210
Task 3 Construction Support Services 4 12 $ 3,460
Total 10 34 32 $ 14,930
54 of 153
AMENDMENT TO THE
CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PINOLE AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF PINOLE AND
SCHAAF & WHEELER CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS
Amendment Number 2022-01
This Amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement dated November 20, 2018 (the “Agreement”), between the City of Pinole, a general law city and municipal corporation, (“City”) and Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers (“Consultant”) (together sometimes referred to as “Parties”) is approved as of the date executed below.
Effect of Amendment. The terms and conditions of this Agreement are intended by the Parties to modify the Agreement. To the extent there is any inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and the terms of the Agreement and/or its Appendix, the terms of this Amendment shall control.
Exhibit A shall read as follows:
Task Order to provide design services for the storm drain system within the undeveloped portion of Hazel Street within City limits in an amount not to exceed $54,910.
With the exception of the foregoing, all other terms, and conditions in the Services Agreement, dated November 20, 2018, remain in force and effect.
The Parties have executed this Amendment to the Agreement as of the date signed by the Authority.
City of Pinole Contractor
____________________________ _______________________
Andrew Murray
City Manager
Dated: _____________________ Dated: __________________
Approved as to Form
Eric S. Casher
City Attorney
Dated: _____________________
ATTACHMENT C
55 of 153
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
DATE: MARCH 1, 2022
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: STACY SHELL, HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REVISED COMPENSATION
AND BENEFITS PLAN FOR MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL
EMPLOYEES
RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution (Attachment A) approving a revised Compensation and Benefits Plan for Management and Confidential Employees.
BACKGROUND
The City Council adopted the City of Pinole Compensation and Benefits Plan for Management and Confidential Employees (the “Plan”) on November 17, 2020. On January 19, 2021, June 15, 2021, and August 17, 2021, the City Council approved revisions to the Plan which specified the hourly pay rate for all classifications covered under the Plan; incorporated a higher rate of leave accrual for the Fire Battalion Chief classification based on its higher number of annual hours worked; established the salary ranges for the Community Development Director, Public Works Director, Community Services Director, Deputy City Clerk, Human Resources Director, and Assistant to the City Manager classifications; and incorporated language modifications into some Plan provisions that were unclear or inadvertently overlooked in previous versions. Staff is now recommending some additional revisions to the Plan.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
City staff has determined that additional modifications to the Plan are necessary to address changes in the City’s organizational structure and other employment related matters. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution (Attachment A) approving a revised version of the Plan (Exhibit A to Attachment A). A redlined copy of the proposed revised version of the Plan is attached as Attachment B.
The proposed revisions to the Plan are as follows:
• Section 3 (Classifications) – Add Capital Improvement and Environmental Program Manager and Human Resources Analyst;
• Section 13 (Holidays) – Add Juneteenth Day (June 19th); 9F
56 of 153
City Council Report
Meeting Date: March 1, 2022 2
• Section 20 (Section 125 Flexible Benefit Plan) – Establish and offer an optional flexible benefit plan;
• Section 24 (Incentive Benefits) – Offer a bilingual pay stipend of $200.00 per month;
• Section 25 (Retirement Plan for Employees) – Set the total employee contribution (standard employee contribution plus employee-paid employer contribution) to CalPERS to 15% for classic CalPERS member employees effective FY 2022/23; and
• Exhibit “A” (Management Group Salary Ranges) – Reassign Police Lieutenant to salary range $71.5637 - $86.9860 per hour and Public Works Manager to salary range $59.1438 - $71.8891 per hour to reflect market rate adjustments and internal equity alignment; assign newly created Capital Improvement and Environmental Program Manager classification to salary range $59.1438 - $71.8891 per hour and reactivated Human Resources Analyst classification to salary range $40.1763 - $48.8343 per hour.
FISCAL IMPACT
The fiscal impact of adding new classifications to the Plan, the observance of the new federal holiday, the establishment of an employee-funded flexible spending plan, and the establishment of bilingual pay is expected to be de minimis. The estimated fiscal impact of the proposed changes to the salary ranges is $26,599, funding for which staff will request of City Council. The estimated fiscal impact of the reduction in the CalPERS member contribution and employer contribution cost sharing rate is $123,600, which will be incurred beginning in FY 2022/23 and budgeted in the FY 2022/23 budget.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
Exhibit A - Compensation and Benefits Plan for Management and Confidential Employees – Revised March 1, 2022
B. Compensation and Benefits Plan for Management and Confidential Employees – Revised March 1, 2022 (Redline)
57 of 153
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-___
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE, COUNTY OF
CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REVISED
COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS PLAN FOR MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL
EMPLOYEES
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the City of Pinole Compensation and Benefits Plan for Management and Confidential Employees (the “Plan”) on November 17, 2020; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted revisions to the Plan on January 19, 2021, on June 15, 2021, and on August 17, 2021, to add benefits currently available to Management and Confidential employees and to clarify other employment related matters; and
WHEREAS, City staff is proposing further revisions to the Plan to add the Capital Improvement and Environmental Program Manager and Human Resources Analyst classifications, the Juneteenth Day holiday, establish and offer an optional flexible benefit plan, and offer a bilingual pay stipend; and
WHEREAS, City staff is proposing revisions to the Plan’s salary ranges to reassign the Police Lieutenant to salary range $71.5637 - $86.9860 per hour and Public Works Manager to salary range $59.1438 - $71.8891 per hour; assign Capital Improvement and Environmental Program Manager to salary range $59.1438 - $71.8891 per hour and Human Resources Analyst to salary range $40.1763 - $48.8343 per hour; and WHEREAS, City staff is proposing revisions to the Plan’s CalPERS member contribution and employer contribution cost sharing rate to set the total employee contribution (standard employee contribution plus employee-paid employer contribution) to CalPERS to 15% for classic CalPERS member employees effective FY 2022/23; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Pinole does hereby approve the revised City of Pinole Compensation and Benefits Plan for Management and Confidential Employees, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference, effective March 1, 2022.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 1st day of March 2022 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
58 of 153
Pinole City Council
Resolution No. 2022-__
Page ___
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 1st day of March 2022.
____________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
59 of 153
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF PINOLE
COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS PLAN
FOR
MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL
EMPLOYEES
Effective Date November 17, 2020
Revised January 19, 2021
Revised June 15, 2021
Revised August 17, 2021
Revised March 1, 2022.
60 of 153
2 CITY OF PINOLE COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS PLAN
MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES
Table of Contents
CITY OF PINOLE COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS PLAN............................................... 2 CITY OF PINOLE........................................................................................................................ 4 ARTICLE ONE: INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 4 SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSE.................................................................... 4 SECTION 2. ADMINISTRATION OF THE PLAN.................................................................... 4 SECTION 3. CLASSIFICATIONS .............................................................................................. 4 SECTION 4. AT-WILL STATUS ................................................................................................ 5 SECTION 5. TRANSITION TO THE PLAN .............................................................................. 5 SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE ................................................................................................ 5 ARTICLE TWO: COMPENSATION ...................................................................................................... 6 SECTION 7. MANAGEMENT SALARY RANGES .................................................................. 6 SECTION 8. COST OF LIVING AND PAY RANGE ADJUSTMENTS ................................... 6 SECTION 9. MERIT INCREASES AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS ......................... 7 SECTION 10. EQUITY ADJUSTMENTS................................................................................... 8 SECTION 11. SEVERANCE PAY .............................................................................................. 8 ARTICLE THREE: BENEFITS ............................................................................................................... 9 SECTION 12. SICK LEAVE........................................................................................................ 9 SECTION 13. HOLIDAYS .......................................................................................................... 9 SECTION 14. ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE ............................................................................. 10 SECTION 15. OTHER LEAVES ............................................................................................... 11 SECTION 16. VACATION ........................................................................................................ 11 SECTION 17. MEDICAL BENEFITS ....................................................................................... 11 SECTION 18. DENTAL INSURANCE ..................................................................................... 13 SECTION 19. VISION INSURANCE........................................................................................ 13 SECTION 20. SECTION 125 FLEXIBILE BENEEFIT PLAN .............................................. 13 SECTION 21. LIFE INSURANCE ............................................................................................ 14 SECTION 22. DISABILITY INSURANCE ............................................................................... 14 SECTION 23. DOMESTIC PARTNER MEDICAL COVERAGE ............................................ 14 SECTION 24. INCENTIVE BENEFITS .................................................................................... 15 SECTION 25. RETIREMENT PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES ....................................................... 15 61 of 153
3 SECTION 26. DEFERRED COMPENSATION – 457 PLAN ................................................... 17 SECTION 27. CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT ALLOWANCE ............................................. 17 SECTION 28. AUTO ALLOWANCE ....................................................................................... 17 SECTION 29. CELLPHONE ALLOWANCE ........................................................................... 18 SECTION 30. FIRE BATTALION CHIEF BACKFILL FOR PARTNER AGENCY .............. 18 SECTION 31. LONGEVITY PAY ............................................................................................. 19 SECTION 32. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ............................................................... 19 EXHIBIT “A” ............................................................................................................................. 20 62 of 153
4 CITY OF PINOLE
MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES
COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS PLAN
ARTICLE ONE: INTRODUCTION
SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSE
The City of Pinole (“City”) wishes to establish and maintain a plan of compensation and benefits for management and confidential personnel of the City. Accordingly, the City sets forth this “Management and Confidential Employees Compensation and Benefits Plan” (also known as the “Plan”).
The purpose of this Plan is to establish the compensation and benefits applicable to the City’s management and confidential employees beyond those already approved in the Personnel Rules or other legislative actions of the City Council. Should there be any conflicting provisions between this Plan and the Personnel Rules, the Plan shall supersede.
SECTION 2. ADMINISTRATION OF THE PLAN
The Plan shall be administered by the City Manager or his/her designee. The City Manager shall have the authority to establish and revise policies and procedures to ensure fair and equitable administration of the Plan.
SECTION 3. CLASSIFICATIONS
The following management and confidential classifications are covered by this Plan. • Assistant City Manager
• Assistant to the City Manager
• Capital Improvement and Environmental Program Manager • Community Development Director
• Community Services Director
• Deputy City Clerk
• Development Services Director / City Engineer
• Finance Director
• Fire Battalion Chief
• Fire Chief
• Human Resources Analyst
• Human Resources Director
• Human Resources Specialist
• Planning Manager
• Police Chief
• Police Lieutenant
• Public Works Director
63 of 153
5 • Public Works Manager
• Recreation Manager
• Wastewater Treatment Plant Manager
SECTION 4. AT-WILL STATUS
All employees covered by this Plan are employed on an “at will” basis. Accordingly, both the City and the employee have the right to terminate the employment relationship at any time, with or without advance notice, and with or without cause.
SECTION 5. TRANSITION TO THE PLAN
The terms and conditions regarding compensation and benefits for the employees in classifications covered under this Plan have been set forth in individual employment agreements (“IEA”). This Plan and the provisions herein shall replace any and all IEAs upon the expiration of the IEAs. Conversely, employees may elect to voluntarily transition to the Plan prior to the expiration of their IEA and may do so in a written document signed by both the employee and the City Manager. The written document will state that the employee has voluntarily terminated their IEA and will be covered under the Plan going forward. When an employee transitions from an IEA to the Plan, the City Manager shall set the employee’s initial salary under the Plan based on the employee’s attainment of the knowledge and skills required by the classification and the employee’s performance to-date in carrying out the duties of the classification. If an employee’s salary under the IEA is less than the minimum annual salary in the Plan, upon transitioning, the employee’s salary shall be at least the minimum annual salary reflected in the Plan. The salaries of all employees in classifications covered under this Plan shall adhere to the ranges for the employee’s respective classification as set by the Plan regardless of whether or not the employee is covered by an IEA or the Plan.
SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Plan and any revisions will become effective on the Effective Date stated on the Plan’s cover and will continue to be in effect unless otherwise modified by the City Council. 64 of 153
6 ARTICLE TWO: COMPENSATION
SECTION 7. MANAGEMENT SALARY RANGES
A. Initial Salary
For new employees, the City Manager, or their designee, shall set the salary for individual employees covered by this Plan at the time of their initial appointment, within the established salary range for their classification. New hires may be appointed anywhere within the salary range for their classification.
B. Base Compensation Structure
As provided in Exhibit A, this Plan sets forth the base salary ranges for all classifications covered by this Plan. There shall be no specified or pre-determined “steps” within the salary ranges for employees covered by this Plan. Rather, each classification under this Plan shall be assigned an open salary range containing a 21.6% spread between the minimum and maximum points of the range.
SECTION 8. COST OF LIVING AND PAY RANGE ADJUSTMENTS
At least annually, the City Council will consider a percentage cost of living adjustment to the salary ranges for all classifications covered by this Plan that considers inflationary increases in the cost of living. If the City Council approves a cost-of-living adjustment and an effective date, the minimum and maximum points of each classification’s range shall be increased by the percentage of the adjustment, and the salary of each individual employee covered by the Plan shall be increased by the percentage of the adjustment effective on the first day of the first pay period on or following the effective date set by the City Council.
Until such a time that all management and confidential classifications identified in Section 3 have fully transitioned to this Plan, the following establishes the intended groups and classes of employment pursuant to Government Code Section 20636(e), for the purposes of substantiating CalPERS compensation. The classifications below maintain eligibility to receive cost of living and pay range adjustments described in this Plan or the City’s labor agreement with the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (“AFSCME”) as described. Classifications are only eligible for one cost of living adjustment. • AFSCME: Assistant City Manager and Fire Chief.
Effective the first day of the first full pay period following July 1, 2018, the identified classifications shall receive a 3.0% wage increase.
Effective the first day of the first full pay period following July 1, 2019, the identified classifications shall receive a 3.0% wage increase.
Effective the first day of the first full pay period following July 1, 2020, the identified classifications shall receive a 3.0% wage increase.
65 of 153
7 • This Management Compensation Plan: Finance Director, Community Development Director, Community Services Director, Human Resources Director, Police Chief, Police Lieutenant, Public Works Manager, Public Works Director, Planning Manager, Human Resources Specialist, Fire Battalion Chief, Assistant to the City Manager, Deputy City Clerk, Recreation Manager, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Manager, in addition to all classifications that are fully transitioned to this plan and all employees hired into a management or confidential classification on or after November 17, 2020.
SECTION 9. MERIT INCREASES AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS
A. Basis for Merit Increases
In addition to the cost-of-living adjustment discussed above, an employee covered by this Plan may receive a merit increase, once per year in relation to their anniversary and annual performance appraisal. Merit increases will be based upon the quality of the employee’s performance in the preceding twelve (12) months. Merit increases shall result in an employee advancing within the established salary range for their classification by the amount of the merit increase.
B. Performance Evaluation Process
Performance evaluations for all employees covered under this Plan are the responsibility of the City Manager, who normally will delegate the responsibility of performance reviews to the covered employee’s department head. The process for performance evaluations shall be conducted in accordance with Section 14 in the Personnel Rules, unless expressly provided otherwise below.
A performance evaluation shall be prepared at least annually on each employee’s anniversary date.
The evaluation process shall begin with each employee preparing a self-evaluation of their own performance during the prior year. In addition, the employee shall draft proposed goals and objectives for the coming year.
The employee’s supervisor shall then evaluate the employee’s performance for the prior year.
The evaluations of both the employee and supervisor shall focus on:
(1) the employee’s performance of their regular duties and responsibilities; and (2) the employee’s attainment of specific goals and objectives established for the employee at the beginning of the review period (i.e. one year earlier).
Following completion of the written evaluations, the employee and their supervisor shall meet to discuss both the quality of the employee’s performance of their regular duties and responsibilities and the employee’s degree of success in accomplishing the specific goals and objectives set for them the previous year. They shall also review the employee’s proposed goals and objectives for the coming year.
66 of 153
8 C. Merit Adjustment Guidelines
Employees may be granted a merit adjustment of up to five percent each year (5.0%) for exemplary performance.
D. Cap on Merit Increases
If an employee’s salary is at the top of the salary range for their classification, the employee shall not be eligible for a merit increase.
If an employee's salary is below the top of the salary range for their classification, the employee may receive a merit increase in accordance with the provisions set forth above. If the amount of the merit increase awarded would cause the employee’s salary to exceed the top of his/her salary range, then the employee shall receive as a merit increase only that portion of the merit increase that will bring his/her salary to the top of his/her range.
SECTION 10. EQUITY ADJUSTMENTS
The City Manager may authorize an increase to an individual employee’s salary to address internal or external salary equity issues. Any equity adjustment shall consider relevant internal and external equity data in order to effectuate the intent of this section. Any adjusted salary must adhere to the minimum and maximum amounts of the employee’s classification range.
SECTION 11. SEVERANCE PAY
Except as specifically noted otherwise, this section shall apply to all employees covered under this Plan.
In the event that the City terminates the employment of any employee covered by the Plan without cause after the first twelve (12) months of employment, the City shall pay the employee severance, in a sum equal to one (1) month base salary and the value of continuation of health insurance coverage for a period of one (1) month for every year of service, up to a maximum of six (6) months base salary and the value of continuation of health insurance coverage for a period of six (6) months (collectively "Severance"). Such severance is contingent upon the employee signing and delivering a general release of all claims against the City (including without limitation its former and current elected officials, employees, officers and agents). If the employee retires subsequent to separation and receives coverage under the City’s retiree health plan within six months of separation, the employee shall reimburse the City for the portion of the Severance associated with the value of continuation of health insurance coverage attributable to post-employment months after which the employee had coverage through the City’s retiree health plan. If the employee is terminated for “cause,” the City shall not owe any severance under this Plan. The determination of whether there is “cause” for termination shall include but not be limited to those items listed in the Personnel Rules. The term “cause” only relates to the potential to receive severance, and has no bearing on an employee’s at-will status. 67 of 153
9 ARTICLE THREE: BENEFITS
SECTION 12. SICK LEAVE
A. Rate of Sick Leave Earned
Employees covered under this Plan shall accrue ninety-six (96) hours of sick leave per year, accrued incrementally each pay period. Any employee employed in the Fire Battalion Chief classification shall accrue sick leave at 1.4 times the amount above, as the Fire Battalion Chief’s normal work schedule is 2,912 hours annually, 1.4 times the normal work schedule of all other employees covered by the Plan, which is 2,080 hours annually.
B. Sick Leave Incentive
An employee’s sick leave use shall be reviewed by the City at the end of each calendar year.
Employees who do not use any sick leave for six (6) consecutive months within the calendar year shall receive an additional four (4) hours of accrued vacation time (5.6 hours for the Fire Battalion Chief). Employees who do not use any sick leave for the entire calendar year (12 months) will receive an additional eight (8) hours of vacation time (11.2 hours for the Fire Battalion Chief).
C. Other Use of Sick Leave
All other conditions regulating sick leave accruals, usage, and family leave contained within the City’s duly adopted Personnel Rules shall apply to all employees covered under this Plan.
SECTION 13. HOLIDAYS
A. Holiday Pay
The Fire Battalion Chief covered by this Plan has routine scheduled staffing without regard to holidays, and therefore works on holidays as a part of their normal schedule. The employee shall receive, in lieu of holiday time off, eleven and one- fifth (11.2) hours of Holiday Pay at their straight time basic hourly rate for each holiday set forth in Section 13.B below.
B. Holiday Leave
Employees shall receive the following legal paid holidays:
• January 1 New Year's Day
• Third Monday in January Martin Luther King's Birthday • Third Monday in February Washington's Birthday
• Last Friday in March Caesar Chavez Day
• Last Monday in May Memorial Day
• June 19 Juneteenth Day
• July 4 Independence Day
• First Monday in September Labor Day
• November 11 Veteran's Day
68 of 153
10 • Fourth Thursday in November Thanksgiving
• Fourth Friday in November Day after Thanksgiving
• December 25 Christmas
In the event that any of the aforementioned days falls on a Saturday, the preceding Friday shall be considered a holiday for pay and leave purposes. In the event that any of the aforementioned days falls on a Sunday, the following Monday shall be considered a holiday for pay and leave purposes. Every day proclaimed by the President or the Governor as a public fast, Thanksgiving, day of mourning, or holiday shall be observed as a holiday for pay purposes.
The Fire Battalion Chief shall receive 11.2 hours of straight time pay for each holiday listed above in lieu of receiving paid time off.
In addition, employees covered under this Plan shall receive twelve (12) hours of floating holidays each fiscal year. These hours are not vested and must be taken by June 30th of each year or they will be lost. These hours may not be cashed out. The Fire Battalion Chief shall receive 16.8 hours of floating holiday paid time off.
SECTION 14. ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE
A. Department Heads
The following classifications shall be entitled to receive administrative leave at an accrual rate of ninety-six (96) hours per year, accrued incrementally each pay period, and may cash out no more than sixty-four (64) hours each year. Any balance remaining at the end of each calendar year will automatically be paid out at the employees’ hourly base pay in effect on that date. • Assistant City Manager
• Community Development Director
• Community Services Director
• Development Services Director/City Engineer
• Finance Director
• Fire Chief
• Human Resources Director
• Police Chief
• Public Works Director
B. All Other Classifications
Unless otherwise provided under this section, all other classifications covered by this Plan shall be entitled to receive administrative leave at an accrual rate of sixty (60) hours per year (84 hours for the Fire Battalion Chief), accrued incrementally each pay period, and may cash out no more than forty (40) hours each year (56 hours for the Fire Battalion Chief). Any balance remaining at the end of each calendar year will automatically be paid out at the employees’ hourly base pay in effect on that date. 69 of 153
11 SECTION 15. OTHER LEAVES
Employee covered by this Plan shall receive all other leaves (Bereavement, Family and Medical, Jury Duty, Military, etc.) as provided to other Miscellaneous City employees.
SECTION 16. VACATION
A. Rate of Vacation Earned
Employees shall accrue vacation at the following rates, up to the following maximums, for continuous years of service performed:
Years of Service Hours Accrued Per Year Maximum Accrual (Hours) 0 – 4 96 192
5 – 9 144 288
10 – 15 160 320
16+ 192 384
The Fire Battalion Chief shall accrue vacation and have a maximum accrual cap at 1.4 times the amounts of employees in other classifications covered under the Plan.
The City Manager may grant a new employee a higher annual accrual rate based on years of public service with other agencies or other appropriate factors. If a new employee is granted a higher initial rate of annual accrual, the employee’s rate will stay the same until the employee advances, based on the years of City service, to the higher accrual step.
Employees covered by the Plan may cash out up to 52 hours of vacation annually, provided that he/she has a minimum of 20 days (160 hours) accumulated. The Fire Battalion Chief may cash out 72.8 hours of vacation annually, provided that he/she has a minimum of 224 hours accumulated.
Employees that transition from IEAs to the Plan shall accrue vacation at the rate that the employee receives under their IEA at the time of transition. The employee’s rate will stay the same until the employee advances, based on the years of City service, to the higher accrual step per the table above. Employees that transition from IEAs to the Plan shall not have any cap on maximum accrual.
SECTION 17. MEDICAL BENEFITS
A. Health Insurance
The City shall make the following contributions toward the employee’s health premium:
• Effective January 1, 2020, the City’s contribution toward the employee’s health premium will equal the 2019 Kaiser rate at each level of coverage. • Effective January 1, 2021, and every January 1 thereafter, the City’s contribution toward the employee’s health premium will equal the Kaiser rate for the prior calendar year at each level of coverage.
70 of 153
12 B. Retiree Medical Insurance
The City will contribute toward retiree health premiums, at the retiree’s preferred family status, as follows:
• Employees hired before July 1, 2010 shall be:
eligible to continue in the CalPERS Health Plan and receive a City contribution toward their retiree health premium equal to that provided to current active employees, in accordance with Government Code Section 22892 offered the option to elect to participate in the vesting program as defined below (described by Government Code Section 22893) as soon after the program implementation as allowed per CalPERS regulations
• Employees hired on or after July 1, 2010 shall receive a City contribution toward their retiree health premium in an amount as described by Government Code Section 22893 (the PERS vesting schedule).
The percentage of employer contribution toward retiree health premiums is determined annually by CalPERS and shall be based on the member’s completed years of credited service (excluding any purchased service credits) at retirement as shown in the table below. Employees must have a minimum of five (5) years of service with the City of Pinole and 10 years of total CalPERS service credit to be eligible for this benefit.
Credited Years of
Service
Percentage of Employer
Contribution
10 50
11 55
12 60
13 65
14 70
15 75
16 80
17 85
18 90
19 95
20 or more 100
C. Medical In-Lieu
Eligible full-time employees with alternate medical insurance shall be allowed to receive payment in lieu of medical insurance as follows:
• One-party coverage: $225
71 of 153
13 • Two-party coverage: $450
• Family coverage: $600
An employee must show proof of adequate medical insurance coverage under another health plan before the benefit may be received, and annually thereafter. Employees will be subject to provisions of the City's health plans in the event termination of in-lieu benefits and resumption of medical coverage is desired.
Employees electing the medical in-lieu option shall be entitled to an adjustment in the amount received for this option should their coverage status change. It is the duty of the employee to notify Human Resources of any such changes.
SECTION 18. DENTAL INSURANCE
A. Dental Insurance Provided
The City shall pay for the dental insurance premiums for employees covered by this Plan and their eligible dependents, if desired. Selection of the carrier shall be at the discretion of the City.
The City-provided dental insurance plan provides for a maximum annual dental payout of $1,500 total for each employee and their eligible dependents.
B. Orthodontic Insurance Provided
The City shall pay for the orthodontic insurance premiums for employees covered by this Plan and their eligible dependents, if desired. Selection of the carrier shall be at the discretion of the City.
The City-provided orthodontic insurance plan provides for a lifetime maximum orthodontic payout of $1,500 for each employee and for each employee’s eligible dependents.
SECTION 19. VISION INSURANCE
A. Vision Insurance Provided
The City agrees to pay the premium for full family vision care coverage that provides for one examination, one set of lenses, and one frame per year. Selection of the carrier shall be at the discretion of the City. The City provided plan shall provide for a $20 co- payment for examination and a $20 co-payment for materials.
SECTION 20. SECTION 125 FLEXIBILE BENEEFIT PLAN
A. The City shall establish and pay the costs for administering a flexible benefit plan for this employee group. Selection of the benefit provider shall be at the discretion of the City. 72 of 153
14 SECTION 21. LIFE INSURANCE
A. Life Insurance Provided
The City agrees to provide term life insurance and accidental death and dismemberment insurance in the amount of $40,000 each per year/per employee. Selection of the carrier shall be at the discretion of the City.
SECTION 22. DISABILITY INSURANCE
A. Disability Insurance Provided
The City agrees to provide the State Disability Insurance program to employees covered by this Plan.
B. Disability Insurance Premium Rates
• Short Term Disability Rates
The City shall provide, at its own expense, short-term disability insurance of two- thirds of salary ($463 per week maximum benefit) with a 29-day waiting period. • Long Term Disability Rates
The City shall provide, at its own expense, long term disability insurance of two- thirds of salary up to $3,000 per month ($2,001 maximum benefit) with a 90-day waiting period.
The City shall make coverage available to Police Safety employee interested in participating in Peace Officers’ Research Association of California (PORAC) long-term disability plan lieu of the City’s LTD Plan. The City shall provide, at its own expense, the monthly premium payments for the PORAC’s LTD Plan. Employee is responsible for any monthly premium payment if the PORAC LTS Plan exceeds the cost of the City’s LTD Plan.
C. Disability Insurance Option for Upgrade
Employees have the option to upgrade the plan to provide two-thirds of salary up to $5,000 per month at employee expense provided that all employees covered under this Plan opt for this upgraded coverage with said expense taken as a payroll deduction and provided the selected carrier agrees to this change.
SECTION 23. DOMESTIC PARTNER MEDICAL COVERAGE
A. Domestic Partnership and Coverage Defined
A Domestic Partnership is defined pursuant to the California Family Code. The City, in accordance with CalPERS regulations, will allow coverage for registered domestic partners of employees, as qualified dependents, under the medical, dental, and vision health care plans.
Prior to any coverage being provided, the employee must provide proof of domestic partnership registration with the California Secretary of State.
73 of 153
15 SECTION 24. INCENTIVE BENEFITS
A. Educational Degree
During the term of this Plan, the City will pay those employees who have earned degrees from accredited college institutions, additional pay as follows:
• Associate of Art/Science Degree $ 75.00 per month
• Bachelor of Art/Science Degree $150.00 per month
• Master of Art/Science Degree $225.00 per month
An employee is only eligible to receive Educational Degree Pay under this section for one degree. An employee is not eligible to receive this pay for multiple degrees and/or disciplines.
This Educational Degree Pay shall only be paid to employees holding a degree beyond that which is required for their classification, as outlined in the classification description, and if a higher degree is determined to be beneficial by the City Manager, which shall not unreasonably be withheld.
B. Bilingual Pay
The City Manager may assign designated employee(s) to receive a monthly bilingual pay stipend of $200.00 per month. Such assignment shall be in writing and must be renewed on an annual basis. To be eligible to receive a bilingual pay differential, an employee must:
• Speak the recognized languages spoken in the City service area. • Agree to utilize their bilingual ability on the job.
• Demonstrate bilingual proficiency satisfactorily to an evaluating agency/individual. • Agree to maintain the necessary training and certification standards established by the City to continue to receive the bilingual pay stipend.
SECTION 25. RETIREMENT PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES
A. Retirement Plan Defined
The City shall contract with the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) for the purpose of allowing employees to earn retirement benefits.
B. CalPERS Contract Benefits – Classic Employees
For “Classic” Public Safety (3% @ 55 Plan) and Miscellaneous (2.5% @ 55 Plan) Members, the contract offers the following options:
• Military Buy Back - The choice to participate in the CalPERS Military Buy Back program is solely at the discretion and cost of the employee. • Third Level 1959 Survivors Benefits
• Single Highest Year Compensation Formula
74 of 153
16 • Service Credit for Unused Sick Leave
C. CalPERS Employer Contribution Rate Sharing Formula for Classic Employees The total amount owed by the City to CalPERS related to retirement benefits of City employees and annuitants is composed of the plan total normal cost and the plan total amortized cost, which together are the “Plan Total Cost”. City employees pay an “expected” employee contribution toward the plan total normal cost. Unless otherwise established between the City and employees, the City pays to CalPERS the plan total cost less the expected employee contribution, which is paid to CalPERS by the employee through payroll deduction.
Employees covered under the Plan will pay an amount above the expected employee contribution, calculated as described below.
Public Safety Employees
Employees covered by this Plan that participate in CalPERS as public safety plan Tier 1 (“Classic”) employees will contribute 9% of salary (expected employee contribution) and an additional 12.935% of salary (employee’s share of City rate). In the event the Plan Total Cost for the City’s Tier 1 public safety plan employees, when expressed as a percentage of payroll, increases in excess of 5.0% over the prior year’s contribution rate, the additional amount above the 5.0% increase shall be shared equally between the City and the employee. For example, if the employer contribution rate increases from one year to the next by 7%, then the City will pay 5% of that increase. For the remaining 2%, the City will pay 1% and the employee will pay 1%.
Effective the full pay period that contains July 1, 2022, the employees’ total CalPERS contribution (combined employee’s contribution and employee’s share of the City’s contribution) shall be reduced to fifteen percent (15%).
Miscellaneous Employees
Employees covered by this Plan that participate in CalPERS as Tier 1 (“Classic”) employees will contribute 8% of salary (expected employee contribution) and an additional 8.388% of salary (employee’s share of City rate). In the event the Plan Total Cost for the City’s Tier 1 employees, when expressed as a percentage of payroll, increases in excess of 4.0% over the prior year’s contribution rate, the additional amount above the 4.0% increase shall be shared equally between the City and the employee. For example, if the employer contribution rate increases from one year to the next by 6%, then the City will pay 4% of that increase. For the remaining 2%, the City will pay 1% and the employee will pay 1%.
Effective the full pay period that contains July 1, 2022, the employees’ total CalPERS contribution (combined employee’s contribution and employee’s share of the City’s contribution) shall be reduced to fifteen percent (15%).
D. CalPERS Contract Benefits – PEPRA Employees
Individuals first employed by the City on or after January 1, 2013 who are defined as “new members” by the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) of 2013, shall be enrolled in the CalPERS.
75 of 153
17 Employees classified as PEPRA Public Safety members will be enrolled in a 2.7% @ 57 plan.
Employees designated as Local Miscellaneous PEPRA members will be enrolled in a 2% @ 62 plan. Employees covered by the Plan enrolled in CalPERS as PEPRA Public Safety or Local Miscellaneous members will be responsible to pay a contribution to CalPERS equal to 50% of the total normal cost for their defined Plan as determined by CalPERS.
SECTION 26. DEFERRED COMPENSATION – 457 PLAN
The City shall make a 457 plan available for employees covered by the Plan to contribute to through payroll deduction.
SECTION 27. CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT ALLOWANCE
A. Uniform and Safety Equipment Allowance for Public Safety Employees Fire safety classifications covered by this Plan will receive an annual uniform allowance of $800 per year for items which are not solely for personal health and safety, to align with the International Association of Firefighters, Local 1230’s clothing allowance.
After voluntarily transitioning to this Plan or at the time that an employee’s Individual Employment Agreement expires, Fire safety classifications will be entitled to a clothing allowance of $1,000 per year.
Police safety employees covered by this Plan shall receive an annual uniform allowance of $1,000 for the purchase and maintenance of uniforms and accessories.
The uniform allowance will be paid twice annually, one-half (1/2) in June and one-half (1/2) in December. Newly hired employees shall be eligible for a pro-rated start-up allowance.
Police employees covered by this Plan shall receive an annual safety equipment allowance of $255 for the purchase of equipment such as a weapon, holster, duty belt, handcuffs, baton, flashlight, etc. The safety equipment allowance shall be paid in the same fashion as the uniform allowance described above.
B. Safety Shoe Allowance
The classifications listed under this section shall receive a safety shoe allowance in the amount of $200 per year.
• Public Works Manager
• Wastewater Treatment Plant Manager
The allowance provided under this section will be paid twice annually, one-half (1/2) in June and one-half (1/2) in December.
SECTION 28. AUTO ALLOWANCE
A. Police and Fire
The City shall provide the following classifications with a city-owned automobile for use in 76 of 153
18 discharging their duties, subject to all federal and state tax laws. The City shall also provide all expenses related to gasoline, maintenance and insurance of said vehicle. The classifications covered under this subsection shall have the unrestricted use of said vehicle within the State of California and shall not drive outside the state unless receiving prior approval from the City Manager.
• Police Chief
• Police Lieutenant
• Fire Chief
• Fire Battalion Chief
B. All Other Employees
The City shall provide employees with an automobile allowance in the form of a per mile reimbursement per IRS-approved mileage rates. These payments shall be made in conjunction with the City's normal payroll periods and subject to all federal and state withholding and tax laws. Employees hired on or after November 17, 2020 shall be eligible to receive mileage reimbursement for use of their personal vehicle when conducting City business.
C. Elimination of Auto Allowance
Employees with IEA’s who voluntarily transitioned to the Plan, prior to the expiration of their IEA, and who were receiving a monthly auto allowance will continue to receive their monthly auto allowance in lieu of a per mile reimbursement.
SECTION 29. CELLPHONE ALLOWANCE
An employee covered under this Plan has the option to obtain a City-issued cellphone for business purposes. If the employee does not elect to receive a City-issued cellphone, the City shall provide the employee with a $65 monthly stipend. This stipend shall be payable on one pay period each month and be subject to all federal and state withholding and tax laws.
The employee hereby acknowledges and agrees that receipt of this stipend means that any voicemail, text, or e-mail messagesreceived on his or her device that are related to City business are the property of the City and are subject to disclosure in accordance with the Public Records Act and applicable case law. The employee further hereby confirms that he or she will provide authorization for the City to obtain such records from his or her service provider.
SECTION 30. FIRE BATTALION CHIEF BACKFILL FOR PARTNER AGENCY The Fire Battalion Chief classification is distinct among the classifications covered by the Plan in that it performs shift work. The City of Pinole is a party, with the Rodeo-Hercules Fire District and the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, to the Battalion 7 agreement, through which, among other things, each party provides a Fire Battalion Chief on a rotating shift basis to cover the needs of the entire Battalion 7. From time to time, the Pinole Fire Battalion Chief is required to cover a shift as Battalion Chief for Battalion 7 that is additional to the City’s normal shifts. When the City’s Fire Battalion Chief covers the Battalion Chief duties for another agency, the Fire Battalion Chief shall receive compensation at a rate of one and one-half times his or her basic hourly salary for the hours worked, not to exceed the amount 77 of 153
19 reimbursed by the other agencies.
SECTION 31. LONGEVITY PAY
Consistent with the Pinole Police Employees Association’s Longevity Pay, the Police Lieutenant classification will be eligible for Longevity Pay amounting to 3% of the employee’s base straight-time pay once they have reached 15 years of service.
SECTION 32. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Subject to budgetary constraints, the City will pay for professional memberships, subscriptions, and training subject to the approval of the City Manager. The City will pay the expenses of transportation, food, lodging, and registration for management and confidential employee at meetings and trainings subject to the approval of the City Manager. 78 of 153
20 EXHIBIT “A”
MANAGEMENT GROUP SALARYRANGES
Effective 07/05/2021
Revised 03/01/2022
Classification Minimum
Annual Salary
Minimum
Hourly Rate
Maximum Annual
Salary
Maximum
Hourly Rate
Assistant City
Manager
$198,679.66 $95.5191 $241,496.79 $116.1042
Police Chief $198,679.66 $95.5191 $241,496.79 $116.1042 Development Services
Director/City Engineer
$189,219.24 $90.9708 $229,996.81 $110.5754
Community
Development Director
$172,017.17 $82.7006 $209,089.05 $100.5236
Finance Director $172,017.17 $82.7006 $209,089.05 $100.5236 Fire Chief $172,017.17 $82.7006 $209,089.05 $100.5236
Human Resources
Director
$172,017.15 $82.7006 $209,089.03 $100.5236
Public Works Director $172,017.15 $82.7006 $209,089.03 $100.5236 Community Services
Director
$148,852.45 $71.5637 $180,930.82 $86.9860
Fire Battalion Chief $148,849.87 $51.1160 $180,927.69 $62.1318 Planning Manager $148,852.43 $71.5637 $180,930.80 $86.9860 Police Lieutenant $148.852.43 $71.5637 $180,930.80 $86.9860 Capital Improvement
& Environmental
Program Manager
$123,019.19 $59.1438 $149,529.25 $71.8891
Public Works Manager $123,019.19 $59.1438 $149,529.25 $71.8891 Wastewater Treatment
Plant Manager
$123,019.19 $59.1438 $149,529.25 $71.8891
Recreation Manager $109,350.11 $52.5722 $132,915.46 $63.9017 Assistant to the City
Manager
$109,350.02 $52.5721 $132,915.35 $63.9016
Deputy City Clerk $83,566.66 $40.1763 $101,575.25 $48.8343 Human Resources
Analyst
$83,566.66 $40.1763 $101,575.25 $48.8343
Human Resources
Specialist
$69,298.42 $33.3165 $84,232.21 $40.4963
79 of 153
CITY OF PINOLE
COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS PLAN
FOR
MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL
EMPLOYEES
Effective Date November 17, 2020
Revised January 19, 2021
Revised June 15, 2021
Revised August 17, 2021
Revised March 1, 2022.
ATTACHMENT B
80 of 153
2 CITY OF PINOLE COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS PLAN
MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES
Table of Contents
CITY OF PINOLE COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS PLAN...............................................2 CITY OF PINOLE........................................................................................................................4 ARTICLE ONE: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................4 SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSE....................................................................4 SECTION 2. ADMINISTRATION OF THE PLAN....................................................................4 SECTION 3. CLASSIFICATIONS ..............................................................................................4 SECTION 4. AT-WILL STATUS ................................................................................................5 SECTION 5. TRANSITION TO THE PLAN ..............................................................................5 SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE................................................................................................5 ARTICLE TWO: COMPENSATION ......................................................................................................6 SECTION 7. MANAGEMENT SALARY RANGES ..................................................................6 SECTION 8. COST OF LIVING AND PAY RANGE ADJUSTMENTS ...................................6 SECTION 9. MERIT INCREASES AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS.........................7 SECTION 10. EQUITY ADJUSTMENTS...................................................................................8 SECTION 11. SEVERANCE PAY ..............................................................................................8 ARTICLE THREE: BENEFITS .............................................................................................................98 SECTION 12. SICK LEAVE......................................................................................................98 SECTION 13. HOLIDAYS ..........................................................................................................9 SECTION 14. ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE.............................................................................10 SECTION 15. OTHER LEAVES ...............................................................................................10 SECTION 16. VACATION....................................................................................................1110 SECTION 17. MEDICAL BENEFITS.......................................................................................11 SECTION 18. DENTAL INSURANCE.....................................................................................13 SECTION 19. VISION INSURANCE........................................................................................13 SECTION 20. SECTION 125 FLEXIBILE BENEEFIT PLAN..............................................13 SECTION 21. LIFE INSURANCE........................................................................................1413 SECTION 22. DISABILITY INSURANCE...............................................................................14 SECTION 23. DOMESTIC PARTNER MEDICAL COVERAGE........................................1514 SECTION 24. INCENTIVE BENEFITS....................................................................................15 SECTION 25. RETIREMENT PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES.......................................................15 81 of 153
3 SECTION 26. DEFERRED COMPENSATION – 457 PLAN...................................................17 SECTION 27. CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT ALLOWANCE.............................................17 SECTION 28. AUTO ALLOWANCE ...................................................................................1817 SECTION 29. CELLPHONE ALLOWANCE ...........................................................................18 SECTION 30. FIRE BATTALION CHIEF BACKFILL FOR PARTNER AGENCY ..........1918 SECTION 31. LONGEVITY PAY.............................................................................................19 SECTION 32. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ...............................................................19 EXHIBIT “A” .............................................................................................................................20 82 of 153
4 CITY OF PINOLE
MANAGEMENT AND CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES
COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS PLAN
ARTICLE ONE: INTRODUCTION
SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT AND PURPOSE
The City of Pinole (“City”) wishes to establish and maintain a plan of compensation and benefits for management and confidential personnel of the City. Accordingly, the City sets forth this “Management and Confidential Employees Compensation and Benefits Plan” (also known as the “Plan”).
The purpose of this Plan is to establish the compensation and benefits applicable to the City’s management and confidential employees beyond those already approved in the Personnel Rules or other legislative actions of the City Council. Should there be any conflicting provisions between this Plan and the Personnel Rules, the Plan shall supersede.
SECTION 2. ADMINISTRATION OF THE PLAN
The Plan shall be administered by the City Manager or his/her designee. The City Manager shall have the authority to establish and revise policies and procedures to ensure fair and equitable administration of the Plan.
SECTION 3. CLASSIFICATIONS
The following management and confidential classifications are covered by this Plan. • Assistant City Manager
• Assistant to the City Manager
• Capital Improvement and Environmental Program Manager • Community Development Director
• Community Services Director
• Deputy City Clerk
• Development Services Director / City Engineer
• Finance Director
• Fire Battalion Chief
• Fire Chief
• Human Resources Analyst
• Human Resources Director
• Human Resources Specialist
• Planning Manager
• Police Chief
• Police Lieutenant
• Public Works Director
83 of 153
5 • Public Works Manager
• Recreation Manager
• Wastewater Treatment Plant Manager
SECTION 4. AT-WILL STATUS
All employees covered by this Plan are employed on an “at will” basis. Accordingly, both the City and the employee have the right to terminate the employment relationship at any time, with or without advance notice, and with or without cause.
SECTION 5. TRANSITION TO THE PLAN
The terms and conditions regarding compensation and benefits for the employees in classifications covered under this Plan have been set forth in individual employment agreements (“IEA”). This Plan and the provisions herein shall replace any and all IEAs upon the expiration of the IEAs. Conversely, employees may elect to voluntarily transition to the Plan prior to the expiration of their IEA and may do so in a written document signed by both the employee and the City Manager. The written document will state that the employee has voluntarily terminated their IEA and will be covered under the Plan going forward. When an employee transitions from an IEA to the Plan, the City Manager shall set the employee’s initial salary under the Plan based on the employee’s attainment of the knowledge and skills required by the classification and the employee’s performance to-date in carrying out the duties of the classification. If an employee’s salary under the IEA is less than the minimum annual salary in the Plan, upon transitioning, the employee’s salary shall be at least the minimum annual salary reflected in the Plan. The salaries of all employees in classifications covered under this Plan shall adhere to the ranges for the employee’s respective classification as set by the Plan regardless of whether or not the employee is covered by an IEA or the Plan.
SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Plan and any revisions will become effective on the Effective Date stated on the Plan’s cover and will continue to be in effect unless otherwise modified by the City Council. 84 of 153
6 ARTICLE TWO: COMPENSATION
SECTION 7. MANAGEMENT SALARY RANGES
A. Initial Salary
For new employees, the City Manager, or their designee, shall set the salary for individual employees covered by this Plan at the time of their initial appointment, within the established salary range for their classification. New hires may be appointed anywhere within the salary range for their classification.
B. Base Compensation Structure
As provided in Exhibit A, this Plan sets forth the base salary ranges for all classifications covered by this Plan. There shall be no specified or pre-determined “steps” within the salary ranges for employees covered by this Plan. Rather, each classification under this Plan shall be assigned an open salary range containing a 21.6% spread between the minimum and maximum points of the range.
SECTION 8. COST OF LIVING AND PAY RANGE ADJUSTMENTS
At least annually, the City Council will consider a percentage cost of living adjustment to the salary ranges for all classifications covered by this Plan that considers inflationary increases in the cost of living. If the City Council approves a cost-of-living adjustment and an effective date, the minimum and maximum points of each classification’s range shall be increased by the percentage of the adjustment, and the salary of each individual employee covered by the Plan shall be increased by the percentage of the adjustment effective on the first day of the first pay period on or following the effective date set by the City Council.
Until such a time that all management and confidential classifications identified in Section 3 have fully transitioned to this Plan, the following establishes the intended groups and classes of employment pursuant to Government Code Section 20636(e), for the purposes of substantiating CalPERS compensation. The classifications below maintain eligibility to receive cost of living and pay range adjustments described in this Plan or the City’s labor agreement with the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (“AFSCME”) as described. Classifications are only eligible for one cost of living adjustment. • AFSCME: Assistant City Manager and Fire Chief.
Effective the first day of the first full pay period following July 1, 2018, the identified classifications shall receive a 3.0% wage increase.
Effective the first day of the first full pay period following July 1, 2019, the identified classifications shall receive a 3.0% wage increase.
Effective the first day of the first full pay period following July 1, 2020, the identified classifications shall receive a 3.0% wage increase.
85 of 153
7 • This Management Compensation Plan: Finance Director, Community Development Director, Community Services Director, Human Resources Director, Police Chief, Police Lieutenant, Public Works Manager, Public Works Director, Planning Manager, Human Resources Specialist, Fire Battalion Chief, Assistant to the City Manager, Deputy City Clerk, Recreation Manager, and Wastewater Treatment Plant Manager, in addition to all classifications that are fully transitioned to this plan and all employees hired into a management or confidential classification on or after November 17, 2020.
SECTION 9. MERIT INCREASES AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS
A. Basis for Merit Increases
In addition to the cost-of-living adjustment discussed above, an employee covered by this Plan may receive a merit increase, once per year in relation to their anniversary and annual performance appraisal. Merit increases will be based upon the quality of the employee’s performance in the preceding twelve (12) months. Merit increases shall result in an employee advancing within the established salary range for their classification by the amount of the merit increase.
B. Performance Evaluation Process
Performance evaluations for all employees covered under this Plan are the responsibility of the City Manager, who normally will delegate the responsibility of performance reviews to the covered employee’s department head. The process for performance evaluations shall be conducted in accordance with Section 14 in the Personnel Rules, unless expressly provided otherwise below.
A performance evaluation shall be prepared at least annually on each employee’s anniversary date.
The evaluation process shall begin with each employee preparing a self-evaluation of their own performance during the prior year. In addition, the employee shall draft proposed goals and objectives for the coming year.
The employee’s supervisor shall then evaluate the employee’s performance for the prior year.
The evaluations of both the employee and supervisor shall focus on:
(1) the employee’s performance of their regular duties and responsibilities; and (2) the employee’s attainment of specific goals and objectives established for the employee at the beginning of the review period (i.e. one year earlier).
Following completion of the written evaluations, the employee and their supervisor shall meet to discuss both the quality of the employee’s performance of their regular duties and responsibilities and the employee’s degree of success in accomplishing the specific goals and objectives set for them the previous year. They shall also review the employee’s proposed goals and objectives for the coming year.
C. Merit Adjustment Guidelines
86 of 153
8 Employees may be granted a merit adjustment of up to five percent each year (5.0%) for exemplary performance.
D. Cap on Merit Increases
If an employee’s salary is at the top of the salary range for their classification, the employee shall not be eligible for a merit increase.
If an employee's salary is below the top of the salary range for their classification, the employee may receive a merit increase in accordance with the provisions set forth above. If the amount of the merit increase awarded would cause the employee’s salary to exceed the top of his/her salary range, then the employee shall receive as a merit increase only that portion of the merit increase that will bring his/her salary to the top of his/her range.
SECTION 10. EQUITY ADJUSTMENTS
The City Manager may authorize an increase to an individual employee’s salary to address internal or external salary equity issues. Any equity adjustment shall consider relevant internal and external equity data in order to effectuate the intent of this section. Any adjusted salary must adhere to the minimum and maximum amounts of the employee’s classification range.
SECTION 11. SEVERANCE PAY
Except as specifically noted otherwise, this section shall apply to all employees covered under this Plan.
In the event that the City terminates the employment of any employee covered by the Plan without cause after the first twelve (12) months of employment, the City shall pay the employee severance, in a sum equal to one (1) month base salary and the value of continuation of health insurance coverage for a period of one (1) month for every year of service, up to a maximum of six (6) months base salary and the value of continuation of health insurance coverage for a period of six (6) months (collectively "Severance"). Such severance is contingent upon the employee signing and delivering a general release of all claims against the City (including without limitation its former and current elected officials, employees, officers and agents). If the employee retires subsequent to separation and receives coverage under the City’s retiree health plan within six months of separation, the employee shall reimburse the City for the portion of the Severance associated with the value of continuation of health insurance coverage attributable to post-employment months after which the employee had coverage through the City’s retiree health plan. If the employee is terminated for “cause,” the City shall not owe any severance under this Plan. The determination of whether there is “cause” for termination shall include but not be limited to those items listed in the Personnel Rules. The term “cause” only relates to the potential to receive severance, and has no bearing on an employee’s at-will status. 87 of 153
9 ARTICLE THREE: BENEFITS
SECTION 12. SICK LEAVE
A. Rate of Sick Leave Earned
Employees covered under this Plan shall accrue ninety-six (96) hours of sick leave per year, accrued incrementally each pay period. Any employee employed in the Fire Battalion Chief classification shall accrue sick leave at 1.4 times the amount above, asthe Fire Battalion Chief’s normal work schedule is 2,912 hours annually, 1.4 times the normal work schedule of all other employees covered by the Plan, which is 2,080 hours annually.
B. Sick Leave Incentive
An employee’s sick leave use shall be reviewed by the City at the end of each calendar year.
Employees who do not use any sick leave for six (6) consecutive months within the calendar year shall receive an additional four (4) hours of accrued vacation time (5.6 hours for the Fire Battalion Chief). Employees who do not use any sick leave for the entire calendar year (12 months) will receive an additional eight (8) hours of vacation time (11.2 hours for the Fire Battalion Chief).
C. Other Use of Sick Leave
All other conditions regulating sick leave accruals, usage, and family leave contained within the City’s duly adopted Personnel Rules shall apply to all employees covered under this Plan.
SECTION 13. HOLIDAYS
A. Holiday Pay
The Fire Battalion Chief covered by this Plan has routine scheduled staffing without regard to holidays, and therefore works on holidays as a part of their normal schedule. The employee shall receive, in lieu of holiday time off, eleven and one- fifth (11.2) hours of Holiday Pay at their straight time basic hourly rate for each holiday set forth in Section 13.B below.
B. Holiday Leave
Employees shall receive the following legal paid holidays:
• January 1 New Year's Day
• Third Monday in January Martin Luther King's Birthday • Third Monday in February Washington's Birthday
• Last Friday in March Caesar Chavez Day
• Last Monday in May Memorial Day
• June 19 Juneteenth Day
• July 4 Independence Day
• First Monday in September Labor Day
• November 11 Veteran's Day
88 of 153
10 • Fourth Thursday in November Thanksgiving
• Fourth Friday in November Day after Thanksgiving
• December 25 Christmas
In the event that any of the aforementioned days falls on a Saturday, the preceding Friday shall be considered a holiday for pay and leave purposes. In the event that any of the aforementioned days falls on a Sunday, the following Monday shall be considered a holiday for pay and leave purposes. Every day proclaimed by the President or the Governor as a public fast, Thanksgiving, day of mourning, or holiday shall be observed as a holiday for pay purposes.
The Fire Battalion Chief shall receive 11.2 hours of straight time pay for each holiday listed above in lieu of receiving paid time off.
In addition, employees covered under this Plan shall receive twelve (12) hours of floating holidays each fiscal year. These hours are not vested and must be taken by June 30th of each year or they will be lost. These hours may not be cashed out. The Fire Battalion Chief shall receive 16.8 hours of floating holiday paid time off.
SECTION 14. ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE
A. Department Heads
The following classifications shall be entitled to receive administrative leave at an accrual rate of ninety-six (96) hours per year, accrued incrementally each pay period, and may cash out no more than sixty-four (64) hours each year. Any balance remaining at the end of each calendar year will automatically be paid out at the employees’ hourly base pay in effect on that date. • Assistant City Manager
• Community Development Director
• Community Services Director
• Development Services Director/City Engineer
• Finance Director
• Fire Chief
• Human Resources Director
• Police Chief
• Public Works Director
B. All Other Classifications
Unless otherwise provided under this section, all other classifications covered by this Plan shall be entitled to receive administrative leave at an accrual rate of sixty (60) hours per year (84 hours for the Fire Battalion Chief), accrued incrementally each pay period, and may cash out no more than forty (40) hours each year (56 hours for the Fire Battalion Chief). Any balance remaining at the end of each calendar year will automatically be paid out at the employees’ hourly base pay in effect on that date.
SECTION 15. OTHER LEAVES
89 of 153
11 Employee covered by this Plan shall receive all other leaves (Bereavement, Family and Medical, Jury Duty, Military, etc.) as provided to other Miscellaneous City employees.
SECTION 16. VACATION
A. Rate of Vacation Earned
Employees shall accrue vacation at the following rates, up to the following maximums, for continuous years of service performed:
Years of Service Hours Accrued Per Year Maximum Accrual (Hours) 0 – 4 96 192
5 – 9 144 288
10 – 15 160 320
16+ 192 384
The Fire Battalion Chief shall accrue vacation and have a maximum accrual cap at 1.4 times the amounts of employees in other classifications covered under the Plan.
The City Manager may grant a new employee a higher annual accrual rate based on years of public service with other agencies or other appropriate factors. If a new employee is granted a higher initial rate of annual accrual, the employee’s rate will stay the same until the employee advances, based on the years of City service, to the higher accrual step.
Employees covered by the Plan may cash out up to 52 hours of vacation annually, provided that he/she has a minimum of 20 days (160 hours) accumulated. The Fire Battalion Chief may cash out 72.8 hours of vacation annually, provided that he/she has a minimum of 224 hours accumulated.
Employees that transition from IEAs to the Plan shall accrue vacation at the rate that the employee receives under their IEA at the time of transition. The employee’s rate will stay the same until the employee advances, based on the years of City service, to the higher accrual step per the table above. Employees that transition from IEAs to the Plan shall not have any cap on maximum accrual.
SECTION 17. MEDICAL BENEFITS
A. Health Insurance
The City shall make the following contributions toward the employee’s health premium:
• Effective January 1, 2020, the City’s contribution toward the employee’s health premium will equal the 2019 Kaiser rate at each level of coverage. • Effective January 1, 2021, and every January 1 thereafter, the City’s contribution toward the employee’s health premium will equal the Kaiser rate for the prior calendar year at each level of coverage.
B. Retiree Medical Insurance
90 of 153
12 The City will contribute toward retiree health premiums, at the retiree’s preferred family status, as follows:
• Employees hired before July 1, 2010 shall be:
➢ eligible to continue in the CalPERS Health Plan and receive a City contribution toward their retiree health premium equal to that provided to current active employees, in accordance with Government Code Section 22892 ➢ offered the option to elect to participate in the vesting program as defined below (described by Government Code Section 22893) as soon after the program implementation as allowed per CalPERS regulations
• Employees hired on or after July 1, 2010 shall receive a City contribution toward their retiree health premium in an amount as described by Government Code Section 22893 (the PERS vesting schedule).
The percentage of employer contribution toward retiree health premiums is determined annually by CalPERS and shall be based on the member’s completed years of credited service (excluding any purchased service credits) at retirement as shown in the table below. Employees must have a minimum of five (5) years of service with the City of Pinole and 10 years of total CalPERS service credit to be eligible for this benefit.
Credited Years of
Service
Percentage of Employer
Contribution
10 50
11 55
12 60
13 65
14 70
15 75
16 80
17 85
18 90
19 95
20 or more 100
C. Medical In-Lieu
Eligible full-time employees with alternate medical insurance shall be allowed to receive 91 of 153
13 payment in lieu of medical insurance as follows:
• One-party coverage: $225
• Two-party coverage: $450
• Family coverage: $600
An employee must show proof of adequate medical insurance coverage under another health plan before the benefit may be received, and annually thereafter. Employees will be subject to provisions of the City's health plans in the event termination of in-lieu benefits and resumption of medical coverage is desired.
Employees electing the medical in-lieu option shall be entitled to an adjustment in the amount received for this option should their coverage status change. It is the duty of the employee to notify Human Resources of any such changes.
SECTION 18. DENTAL INSURANCE
A. Dental Insurance Provided
The City shall pay for the dental insurance premiums for employees covered by this Plan and their eligible dependents, if desired. Selection of the carrier shall be at the discretion of the City.
The City-provided dental insurance plan provides for a maximum annual dental payout of $1,500 total for each employee and their eligible dependents.
B. Orthodontic Insurance Provided
The City shall pay for the orthodontic insurance premiums for employees covered by this Plan and their eligible dependents, if desired. Selection of the carrier shall be at the discretion of the City.
The City-provided orthodontic insurance plan provides for a lifetime maximum orthodontic payout of $1,500 for each employee and for each employee’s eligible dependents.
SECTION 19. VISION INSURANCE
A. Vision Insurance Provided
The City agrees to pay the premium for full family vision care coverage that provides for one examination, one set of lenses, and one frame per year. Selection of the carrier shall be at the discretion of the City. The City provided plan shall provide for a $20 co- payment for examination and a $20 co-payment for materials.
SECTION 20. SECTION 125 FLEXIBILE BENEEFIT PLAN
A. The City shall establish and pay the costs for administering a flexible benefit plan for this employee group. Selection of the benefit provider shall be at the discretion of the City. 92 of 153
14 SECTION 21. LIFE INSURANCE
A. Life Insurance Provided
The City agrees to provide term life insurance and accidental death and dismemberment insurance in the amount of $40,000 each per year/per employee. Selection of the carrier shall be at the discretion of the City.
SECTION 221. DISABILITY INSURANCE
A. Disability Insurance Provided
The City agrees to provide the State Disability Insurance program to employees covered by this Plan.
B. Disability Insurance Premium Rates
• Short Term Disability Rates
The City shall provide, at its own expense, short-term disability insurance of two- thirds of salary ($463 per week maximum benefit) with a 29-day waiting period. • Long Term Disability Rates
The City shall provide, at its own expense, long term disability insurance of two- thirds ofsalary up to $3,000 per month ($2,001 maximum benefit) with a 90-day waiting period.
The City shall make coverage available to Police Safety employee interested in participating in Peace Officers’ Research Association of California (PORAC) long-term disability plan lieu of the City’s LTD Plan. The City shall provide, at its own expense, the monthly premium payments for the PORAC’s LTD Plan. Employee is responsible for any monthly premium payment if the PORAC LTS Plan exceeds the cost of the City’s LTD Plan.
C. Disability Insurance Option for Upgrade
Employees have the option to upgrade the plan to provide two-thirds of salary up to $5,000 per month at employee expense provided that all employees covered under this Plan opt for this upgraded coverage with said expense taken as a payroll deduction and provided the selected carrier agrees to this change.
93 of 153
15 SECTION 232. DOMESTIC PARTNER MEDICAL COVERAGE
A. Domestic Partnership and Coverage Defined
A Domestic Partnership is defined pursuant to the California Family Code. The City, in accordance with CalPERS regulations, will allow coverage for registered domestic partners of employees, as qualified dependents, under the medical, dental, and vision health care plans.
Prior to any coverage being provided, the employee must provide proof of domestic partnership registration with the California Secretary of State.
SECTION 243. INCENTIVE BENEFITS
A. Educational Degree
During the term of this Plan, the City will pay those employees who have earned degrees from accredited college institutions, additional pay as follows:
• Associate of Art/Science Degree $ 75.00 per month
• Bachelor of Art/Science Degree $150.00 per month
• Master of Art/Science Degree $225.00 per month
An employee is only eligible to receive Educational Degree Pay under this section for one degree. An employee is not eligible to receive this pay for multiple degrees and/or disciplines.
This Educational Degree Pay shall only be paid to employees holding a degree beyond that which is required for their classification, as outlined in the classification description, and if a higher degree is determined to be beneficial by the City Manager, which shall not unreasonably be withheld.
B. Bilingual Pay
The City Manager may assign designated employee(s) to receive a monthly bilingual pay stipend of $200.00 per month. Such assignment shall be in writing and must be renewed on an annual basis. To be eligible to receive a bilingual pay differential, an employee must:
• Speak the recognized languages spoken in the City service area. • Agree to utilize their bilingual ability on the job.
• Demonstrate bilingual proficiency satisfactorily to an evaluating agency/individual. • Agree to maintain the necessary training and certification standards established by the City to continue to receive the bilingual pay stipend.
SECTION 254. RETIREMENT PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES
A. Retirement Plan Defined
The City shall contract with the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) 94 of 153
16 for the purpose of allowing employees to earn retirement benefits.
B. CalPERS Contract Benefits – Classic Employees
For “Classic” Public Safety (3% @ 55 Plan) and Miscellaneous (2.5% @ 55 Plan) Members, the contract offers the following options:
• Military Buy Back - The choice to participate in the CalPERS Military Buy Back program is solely at the discretion and cost of the employee. • Third Level 1959 Survivors Benefits
• Single Highest Year Compensation Formula
• Service Credit for Unused Sick Leave
C. CalPERS Employer Contribution Rate Sharing Formula for Classic Employees The total amount owed by the City to CalPERS related to retirement benefits of City employees and annuitants is composed of the plan total normal cost and the plan total amortized cost, which together are the “Plan Total Cost”. City employees pay an “expected” employee contribution toward the plan total normal cost. Unless otherwise established between the City and employees, the City pays to CalPERS the plan total cost less the expected employee contribution, which is paid to CalPERS by the employee through payroll deduction.
Employees covered under the Plan will pay an amount above the expected employee contribution, calculated as described below.
Public Safety Employees
Employees covered by this Plan that participate in CalPERS as public safety plan Tier 1 (“Classic”) employees will contribute 9% of salary (expected employee contribution) and an additional 12.935% of salary (employee’s share of City rate). In the event the Plan Total Cost for the City’s Tier 1 public safety plan employees, when expressed as a percentage of payroll, increases in excess of 5.0% over the prior year’s contribution rate, the additional amount above the 5.0% increase shall be shared equally between the City and the employee. For example, if the employer contribution rate increases from one year to the next by 7%, then the City will pay 5% of that increase. For the remaining 2%, the City will pay 1% and the employee will pay 1%.
Effective the full pay period that contains July 1, 2022, the employees’ total CalPERS contribution (combined employee’s contribution and employee’s share of the City’s contribution) shall be reduced to fifteen percent (15%).
Miscellaneous Employees
Employees covered by this Plan that participate in CalPERS as Tier 1 (“Classic”) employees will contribute 8% of salary (expected employee contribution) and an additional 8.388% of salary (employee’s share of City rate). In the event the Plan Total Cost for the City’s Tier 1 employees, when expressed as a percentage of payroll, increases in excess of 4.0% over the prior year’s contribution rate, the additional amount above the 4.0% increase shall be shared equally between the City and the employee. For example, if the employer contribution rate 95 of 153
17 increases from one year to the next by 6%, then the City will pay 4% of that increase. For the remaining 2%, the City will pay 1% and the employee will pay 1%.
Effective the full pay period that contains July 1, 2022, the employees’ total CalPERS contribution (combined employee’s contribution and employee’s share of the City’s contribution) shall be reduced to fifteen percent (15%).
D. CalPERS Contract Benefits – PEPRA Employees
Individuals first employed by the City on or after January 1, 2013 who are defined as “new members” by the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) of 2013, shall be enrolled in the CalPERS.
Employees classified as PEPRA Public Safety members will be enrolled in a 2.7% @ 57 plan.
Employees designated as Local Miscellaneous PEPRA members will be enrolled in a 2% @ 62 plan. Employees covered by the Plan enrolled in CalPERS as PEPRA Public Safety or Local Miscellaneous members will be responsible to pay a contribution to CalPERS equal to 50% of the total normal cost for their defined Plan as determined by CalPERS.
SECTION 265. DEFERRED COMPENSATION – 457 PLAN
The City shall make a 457 plan available for employees covered by the Plan to contribute to through payroll deduction.
SECTION 276. CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT ALLOWANCE
A. Uniform and Safety Equipment Allowance for Public Safety Employees Fire safety classifications covered by this Plan will receive an annual uniform allowance of $800 per year for items which are not solely for personal health and safety, to align with the International Association of Firefighters, Local 1230’s clothing allowance.
After voluntarily transitioning to this Plan or at the time that an employee’s Individual Employment Agreement expires, Fire safety classifications will be entitled to a clothing allowance of $1,000 per year.
Police safety employees covered by this Plan shall receive an annual uniform allowance of $1,000 for the purchase and maintenance of uniforms and accessories.
The uniform allowance will be paid twice annually, one-half (1/2) in June and one-half (1/2) in December. Newly hired employees shall be eligible for a pro-rated start-up allowance.
Police employees covered by this Plan shall receive an annual safety equipment allowance of $255 for the purchase of equipment such as a weapon, holster, duty belt, handcuffs, baton, flashlight, etc. The safety equipment allowance shall be paid in the same fashion as the uniform allowance described above.
B. Safety Shoe Allowance
The classifications listed under this section shall receive a safety shoe allowance in the amount of $200 per year.
96 of 153
18 • Public Works Manager
• Wastewater Treatment Plant Manager
The allowance provided under this section will be paid twice annually, one-half (1/2) in June and one-half (1/2) in December.
SECTION 287. AUTO ALLOWANCE
A. Police and Fire
The City shall provide the following classifications with a city-owned automobile for use in discharging their duties, subject to all federal and state tax laws. The City shall also provide all expenses related to gasoline, maintenance and insurance of said vehicle. The classifications covered under this subsection shall have the unrestricted use of said vehicle within the State of California and shall not drive outside the state unless receiving prior approval from the City Manager.
• Police Chief
• Police Lieutenant
• Fire Chief
• Fire Battalion Chief
B. All Other Employees
The City shall provide employees with an automobile allowance in the form of a per mile reimbursement per IRS-approved mileage rates. These payments shall be made in conjunction with the City's normal payroll periods and subject to all federal and state withholding and tax laws. Employees hired on or after November 17, 2020 shall be eligible to receive mileage reimbursement for use of their personal vehicle when conducting City business.
C. Elimination of Auto Allowance
Employees with IEA’s who voluntarily transitioned to the Plan, prior to the expiration of their IEA, and who were receiving a monthly auto allowance will continue to receive their monthly auto allowance in lieu of a per mile reimbursement.
SECTION 298. CELLPHONE ALLOWANCE
An employee covered under this Plan has the option to obtain a City-issued cellphone for business purposes. If the employee does not elect to receive a City-issued cellphone, the City shall provide the employee with a $65 monthly stipend. This stipend shall be payable on one pay period each month and be subject to all federal and state withholding and tax laws.
The employee hereby acknowledges and agrees that receipt of this stipend means that any voicemail, text, or e-mail messages received on his or her device that are related to City business are the property of the City and are subject to disclosure in accordance with the Public Records Act and applicable case law. The employee further hereby confirms that he or she will provide authorization for the City to obtain such records from his or her service provider. 97 of 153
19 SECTION 3029. FIRE BATTALION CHIEF BACKFILL FOR PARTNER AGENCY The Fire Battalion Chief classification is distinct among the classifications covered by the Plan in that it performs shift work. The City of Pinole is a party, with the Rodeo-Hercules Fire District and the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, to the Battalion 7 agreement, through which, among other things, each party provides a Fire Battalion Chief on a rotating shift basis to cover the needs of the entire Battalion 7. From time to time, the Pinole Fire Battalion Chief is required to cover a shift as Battalion Chief for Battalion 7 that is additional to the City’s normal shifts. When the City’s Fire Battalion Chief covers the Battalion Chief duties for another agency, the Fire Battalion Chief shall receive compensation at a rate of one and one-half times his or her basic hourly salary for the hours worked, not to exceed the amount reimbursed by the other agencies.
SECTION 310. LONGEVITY PAY
Consistent with the Pinole Police Employees Association’s Longevity Pay, the Police Lieutenant classification will be eligible for Longevity Pay amounting to 3% of the employee’s base straight-time pay once they have reached 15 years of service.
SECTION 321. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Subject to budgetary constraints, the City will pay for professional memberships, subscriptions, and training subject to the approval of the City Manager. The City will pay the expenses of transportation, food, lodging, and registration for management and confidential employee at meetings and trainings subject to the approval of the City Manager. 98 of 153
20 EXHIBIT “A”
MANAGEMENT GROUP SALARYRANGES
Effective 07/056/20210
Revised 08/17/202103/01/2022
Classification Minimum Annual
Salary
Minimum
Hourly Rate
Maximum Annual
Salary
Maximum
Hourly Rate
Assistant City
Manager
$198,679.66 $95.5191 $241,496.79 $116.1042
Police Chief $198,679.66 $95.5191 $241,496.79 $116.1042 Development
Services
Director/City
Engineer
$189,219.24 $90.9708 $229,996.81 $110.5754
Community
Development
Director
$172,017.17 $82.7006 $209,089.05 $100.5236
Finance Director $172,017.17 $82.7006 $209,089.05 $100.5236 Fire Chief $172,017.17 $82.7006 $209,089.05 $100.5236
Human
Resources
Director
$172,017.15 $82.7006 $209,089.03 $100.5236
Public Works
Director
$172,017.15 $82.7006 $209,089.03 $100.5236
Community
Services Director
$148,852.45 $71.5637 $180,930.82 $86.9860
Fire Battalion
Chief
$148,849.87 $51.1160 $180,927.69 $62.1318
Planning
Manager
$148,852.43 $71.5637 $180,930.80 $86.9860
Police Lieutenant $148.852.43135,320
.41
$71.563765.05
79 $180,930.80164,482
.76
$86.986079.07
82 Capital
Improvement &
Environmental
Program Manager
$123,019.19 $59.1438 $149,529.25 $71.8891
Public Works
Manager
$123,019.19109,350
.02
$59.143852.57
21 $149,529.25132,915
.35
$71.889163.90
16 Wastewater
Treatment Plant
Manager
$123,019.19 $59.1438 $149,529.25 $71.8891
Recreation
Manager
$109,350.11 $52.5722 $132,915.46 $63.9017
Assistant to the
City Manager
$109,350.02 $52.5721 $132,915.35 $63.9016
Deputy City
Clerk
$83,566.66 $40.1763 $101,575.25 $48.8343
99 of 153
21 Human
Resources
Analyst
$83,566.66 $40.1763 $101,575.25 $48.8343
Human
Resources
Specialist
$69,298.42 $33.3165 $84,232.21 $40.4963
MANAGEMENT* @
07/06/2020
Minimum
Annual Salary
Minimum
Hourly Rate
Maximum
Annual Salary
Maximum
Hourly Rate
Assistant City Manager $192,893 $92.7370 $234,463 $112.7225 Police Chief $192,893 $92.7370 $234,463 $112.7225
Development Services
Director/City Engineer $183,708 $88.3212 $223,298 $107.3547 Community Development
Director $167,007 $80.2918 $202,999 $97.5957
Finance Director $167,007 $80.2918 $202,999 $97.5957
Fire Chief $167,007 $80.2918 $202,999 $97.5957
Human Resources Director $167,007 $80.2918 $202,999 $97.5957 Public Works Director $167,007 $80.2918 $202,999 $97.5957 Community Services
Director
$144,517 $69.4793 $175,661 $84.4524
Fire Battalion Chief $144,517 $69.4793 $175,661 $84.4524 Planning Manager $144,517 $69.4793 $175,661 $84.4524
Police Lieutenant $131,379 $63.1630 $159,692 $76.7750
Wastewater Treatment
Plant Manager $119,436 $57.4212 $145,174 $69.7952
Public Works Manager $106,165 $51.0409 $129,044 $62.0404 Recreation Manager $106,165 $51.0409 $129,044 $62.0404
Assistant to City Manager $106,165 $51.0409 $129,044 $62.0404 Deputy City Clerk $81,132 $39,0057 $98,616 $47.4119
Human Resources
Specialist $67,280 $32.3462 $81,779 $39.3168
100 of 153
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
9G
DATE: MARCH 1, 2022
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JOE BINGAMAN, PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER
SANJAY MISHRA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: DECLARE THE LISTED PROPERTY AS SURPLUS AND DESIGNATE A
PURCHASING OFFICER TO DISPOSE OF THE LISTED PROPERTY IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF PINOLE FINANCIAL POLICIES -
CAPITAL ASSETS POLICY AND PROCEDURES
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt resolution declaring certain property (listed in Attachment A) as surplus and designating the listed staff member to serve as the Purchasing Officer to dispose of the property in accordance with the City of Pinole Financial Policies - Capital Assets Policy and Procedures.
BACKGROUND
As per the City of Pinole Financial Policies - Capital Assets Policy and Procedures, “the Purchasing Officer is responsible for the transfer and disposition of surplus City property. ’Surplus Property’ is used generically to describe any City property that is no longer needed or useable by the holding department. The City Council shall declare item(s) surplus prior to disposal.”
REVIEW & ANALYSIS
The Public Works Department utilizes marked service vehicles and specialized heavy equipment when providing services in the City of Pinole. The Public Works Department has vehicles with high mileage and extensive repair history and several pieces of heavy equipment that no longer meet air quality standards, and these items need to be disposed of by auction and/or through other means authorized by the City of Pinole Financial Policies - Capital Assets Policy and Procedures.
The vehicles and equipment being declared as surplus in Attachment A have been or will be replaced by new vehicles and equipment.
101 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 2
The Public Works Department is in possession of a few signs from a closed business that was located at a property previously owned by the City (600 Tennent Ave/ 2279 Park St).
Two members of public have reached out to the Public Works Department and shown their interest in procuring these signs. One of them had ties to the family who owned the business and the other member of public had good memories of growing up in Pinole and frequented this place. These two members of public would like to procure these signs.
The Purchasing Officer will, as per the City of Pinole Financial Policies - Capital Assets Policy and Procedures, determine the most appropriate method of disposal that best serves the interest of the City. The policy details appropriate methods as follows:
1. Public Auction - Surplus property may be sold at public auction. City staff may conduct public Auctions, or the City may contract with a professional auctioneer including professional auction services.
2. Bids - Bids may be solicited for the sale of surplus property. Surplus property disposed of in this manner shall be sold to the highest responsible bidder.
3. Selling for Scrap - Surplus property may be sold as scrap if the Purchasing Officer deems that the value of the raw material exceeds the value of the property as a whole.
4. Negotiated Sale - Surplus property may be sold outright if the Purchasing Officer determines that only one known buyer is available or interested in acquiring the property.
5. No Value Item – Where the Purchasing Officer determines that specific supplies or equipment are surplus and of minimal value to the City due to spoilage, obsolescence or other cause or where the Purchasing Officer determines that the cost of disposal of such supplies or equipment would exceed the recovery value, the Purchasing Officer shall dispose of the same in such a manner as he or she deems appropriate and in the best interest of the City.
FISCAL IMPACT
It is unknown at this time how much the City will receive for the vehicles and heavy equipment when they are auctioned or the cost if the items must be disposed of. All money received will be deposited in the Public Works vehicle purchasing accounts to offset the cost of the new vehicles. The signs are considered as No Value Item and no proceeds are expected from its disposition.
102 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 3
ATTACHMENT
Attachment A – List of Surplus Properties
Attachment B– Resolution
103 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 ATTACHMENT A
Surplus Vehicles / Equipment:
Unit # Year Make Model Plate # VIN# Reason
32 1991 Ford F250 E266498 2FTHF25H8MCA27201 Reached Useful Service Life 29 2002 Ford F150 1104594 2FTPF17Z12CA57066 Reached Useful Service Life 42 2000 Ford F150 1059066 1FTPF17M7YKA91411 Reached Useful Service Life 28 1989 Ford F350 E266450 1FDKF38M9KNB49119 Reached Useful Service Life 39 2006 Ford F650 Dump
Truck 1195348 3FRNF66N36V329224 No Longer Meets Air Quality Standard 44 2006 Sterling Hydro Flush
Truck 1171136 2FZAASDC66AW81539 No Longer Meets Air Quality Standard 49 2000 Ford F650 Dump
Truck 1047857 3FDNF6520YMA07617 No Longer Meets Air Quality Standard 50 1999 Ford F450/Aerial
Truck 1142388 3FDXF46F2XMA28899 No Longer Meets Air Quality Standard 54 2001 Sterling Vacuum
Truck 1445937 2FZAAJAK82AK14624 No Longer Meets Air Quality Standard 55 2001 Sterling Acterra 1069441 2FZHANAK61AJ04434 No Longer Meets Air Quality Standard
68 2006 Sterling Acterra 1225333 2FZHCHDC86AM43929 No Longer Meets Air Quality Standard
51 1996 Case 580 Super L E036775 JG0196290 No Longer Meets Air Quality Standard
732 2005 Rosenbauer HME 1325637 44KFT42845WZ20708 Reached Useful Service Life 104 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 ATTACHMENT A
Other properties:
1. Business Signs previously owned by a business at 600 Tennent Ave / 2279 Park St. See picture below. 105 of 153
RESOLUTION NO. 2022 – XX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE, COUNTY OF
CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE LIST OF VEHICLES,
HEAVY EQUIPMENT AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS (ATTACHMENT A) AS
SURPLUS
WHEREAS, the City of Pinole Financial Policies - Capital Assets Policy and Procedures outlines the process by which the City can declare property as surplus and dispose of it; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department has several vehicles and heavy equipment that are no longer useable by the Department as they no longer meet air quality standards; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department has is in possession of two signs from a former business at a previously City owned property (at 600 Tennent Ave / 2279 Park St): and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department would like to declare the aforementioned vehicles and equipment and signs as surplus and dispose of them; and WHEREAS, all City identification will be removed from the vehicles and equipment, and they will be sent to an auction company contracted by the City of Pinole or sent to a dismantler; and
WHEREAS, all proceeds from the sale of vehicles and equipment will be deposited in Public Works vehicle and equipment purchasing accounts.
WHEREAS, some members of public have reached out to Public Works Department and have shown interest in procuring the signs for their good memories at the above property; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department have determined that there are no apparent historic and/or intrinsic value to these signs; and WHEREAS, the Public Works Director will be designated as Purchasing Agent for the disposal of authorized surplus;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Pinole City Council does hereby declare the properties (vehicles, heavy equipment, and other miscellaneous items) listed on Attachment A as surplus and authorizes their disposal by means of sale at auction, dismantlement, or other means as outlined in the adopted City of Pinole Financial Policies - Capital Assets Policy and Procedures.
ATTACHMENT B
106 of 153
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 1st day of March 2022 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 1st day of March 2022.
________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
107 of 153
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
DATE: MARCH 1, 2022
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: HEATHER BELL, CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: PINOLE TRUSTEE REAPPOINTMENT TO THE CONTRA COSTA
MOSQUITO AND VECTOR CONTROL BOARD
RECOMMENDATION
Council discretion to reappoint incumbent Trustee, Warren Clayton for a four-year term as Pinole’s representative on the Contra Costa Mosquito and Vector Control Board.
BACKGROUND
The City Council appointed Mr. Clayton to his first term on March 6, 2012 and has since been reappointed twice for four-year terms. Attached is notification from Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District advising that Mr. Clayton’s current term expires February 20, 2022.
The initial term of all trustees is two years. Following that, the Council can appoint for either a two or four year term.
Mr. Clayton was elected as 2018 Board President for the District and since then has also served on the Advanced Planning as well as the Budget Committees. He has expressed his desire to continue serving on the Board as the City of Pinole’s representative.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the reappointment ATTACHMENT:
Attachment A: Letter Requesting Trustee Reappointment
9H
108 of 153
155 Mason Circle
Concord, CA 94520
phone (925) 685-9301
fax (925) 685-0266
www.contracostamosquito.com
Protecting Public Health Since 1927
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
President PEGGIE HOWELL Clayton $ Vice President PETER PAY San Ramon $ Secretary DANIEL PELLEGRINI Martinez Antioch Vacant $ Brentwood JON ELAM $ Concord PERRY CARLSTON $ Contra Costa County JIM PINCKNEY, CHRIS COWEN & DARRYL YOUNG Danville RANDALL DIAMOND $ El Cerrito THOMAS MINTER $ Hercules DUYLINH NGUYEN $ Lafayette JAMES FITZSIMMONS $ Moraga JAMES FRANKENFIELD $ Oakley MICHAEL KRIEG Orinda KEVIN MARKER $ Pinole WARREN CLAYTON $ Pittsburg RICHARD AINSLEY, PhD $ Pleasant Hill JENNIFER HOGAN $ Richmond Vacant $ San Pablo Vacant $ Walnut Creek JAMES MURRAY December 1, 2021
City of Pinole
City Manager’s Department
2131 Pear Street
Pinole, CA 94564
Attn: Heather Iopu, City Clerk
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR TRUSTEE REAPPOINTMENT
This letter is to inform you that the term for Trustee Warren Clayton will expire on February 20, 2022.
Trustees can initially be appointed to a two year, and if reappointed, to either a two or four year term. They serve without compensation, but are allowed limited expenses for actual travel in connection with meetings or business of the Board (see enclosed position description).
The Board meets bi-monthly on the second Monday night of the month, and occasionally, it may be necessary to hold a special board meeting. All meetings are currently conducted via Zoom in accordance with Government Code Section 54953€.
Please notify our office in writing via email [email protected] or via USPS when a new appointment or re-appointment has been made and feel free to contact me directly with any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Natalie Martini
Administrative Analyst II
CC: Warren Clayton, Trustee
ATTACHMENT A
109 of 153
155 Mason Circle
Concord, CA 94520
phone (925) 685-9301
fax (925) 685-0266
www.contracostamosquito.com
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
TERM: First term: Two years
Additional terms: Two or four years
IN LIEU OF EXPENSES: $100.00 per month is paid to each Trustee, only if they attend a meeting, regardless of the number of meetings
attended. Exception: Board President and Secretary receive monthly compensation, regardless of attending meetings.
QUALIFICATIONS: Must be a Contra Costa County resident and at least the voting age of 18 with an interest in any of the following areas: public health, public policy, wetlands, farming, community education, finance, personnel or land
development, and a resident of the city which is in the District (California Health & Safety Code, Section 2242) DUTIES: Board of Trustees meet the second Monday evening of every other month. Committees meet approximately twice a year or as needed.
HOW TO APPLY: Contact your city clerk for an application for openings within your city. For positions with the county at large or those in unincorporated areas, contact the county clerk of the Board of Supervisors.
Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District is a tax funded special district of Contra Costa County responsible for the county wide control of mosquitoes, rats, skunks, and ground nesting yellowjackets.
110 of 153
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
12A
DATE: MARCH 1, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: ERIC S. CASHER, CITY ATTORNEY
MARKISHA GUILLORY, FINANCE DIRECTOR
COPY: ANDREW MURRAY, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: PROVIDE DIRECTION ON POTENTIAL BALLOT MEASURE TO
BECOME A CHARTER CITY AND ENACT A REAL PROPERTY
TRANSFER TAX
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council provide direction on a potential ballot measure to become a charter city and enact a real property transfer tax.
BACKGROUND
Cities in California are organized as either general law cities or charter cities. General law cities derive their powers from general laws enacted by the Legislature, while charter cities derive their powers from the California Constitution and their own charters. Thus, general law cities are bound by the state’s general laws. In contrast, the “home rule provision” of the California Constitution provides that charter cities have full authority over municipal affairs, and are only subject to laws regarding matters of statewide concern. The City of Pinole is currently a general law city.
A significant authority possessed by charter cities is the authority to impose a real property transfer tax (“RPTT”) at an increased rate. Becoming a charter city requires approval by a majority of voters, as does any increase in the RPTT.
The City Council has considered the possibility of becoming a charter city at previous meetings in 2019 and early 2020. At its February 1, 2022 meeting, the City Council directed staff to schedule a future agenda item for a discussion of Pinole potentially becoming a charter city.
DISCUSSION
A. Charter City vs. General Law City
A general law city has the authority to act locally, but its acts must be consistent with all general laws adopted by the Legislature. In contrast, a charter city is only required 111 of 153
2 to act consistent with state laws regarding matters of statewide concern. A charter city may use its “home rule” authority to adopt laws regarding “municipal affairs” that vary from state laws. A city’s charter defines the structure of the city’s government and the scope of a city’s authority over municipal affairs. Some cities have very detailed charters, while other cities have charters that are limited in scope. Some charters specify that the city may exercise all powers a charter city has unless a power is expressly excluded by the charter, while other charters specify that a city may only authorize a power if expressly authorized by the charter. A city’s charter must be approved by the voters, as must any amendment to the charter.
There is no constitutional or statutory “list” of municipal affairs. Courts, not the Legislature, decide on a case-by-case basis what constitutes a municipal affair.
However, what constitutes a municipal affair can change over time with changes in case law. Areas that the courts have said constitute municipal affairs include: the form of city government; local elections, including qualifications for office and public funding of campaigns; some aspects of zoning and land use; the process of contracting for public works; and the scope of authority related to fines, taxes and assessments.
A significant authority possessed by charter cities is the authority to impose a RPTT at an increased rate. A RPTT is a tax imposed on the deed, instrument, or writing by which interests in real property are transferred. Under the California Revenue and Taxation Code, general law cities may impose a RPTT of no more than $.55 per $1,000 of value on the property transferred (the County may also impose a RPTT equal to this rate). Pinole currently has a RPTT of the maximum allowed for general law cities of $0.55 per $1,000 of value.
Charter cities are not subject to state law regarding RPTTs because RPTTs are deemed municipal affairs. As a result, charter cities may impose RPTTs at a rate higher than the maximum statutory rate of $0.55 per $1,000. Many cities have adopted tiered RPTT rates, with higher rates for property valued at over a certain amount.
Below is a chart of the base RPTT rates applied in neighboring charter cities.
City Tax (per thousand dollars)
Alameda $12.00
Albany $15.00
Berkeley $15.00
El Cerrito $12.00
Emeryville $12.00
Oakland $15.00
Piedmont $13.00
Richmond $7.00
San Leandro $11.00
Median $12.00
112 of 153
3 In FY 20-21, the City received $119,253.61 from the existing RPTT. Adjusting the RPTT rate to $10 per $1,000 would have produced $2,168,24 in FY 20-21. The exact amount the City would receive can vary significantly from year-to-year based on changes in the real estate market. Additionally, if the City adopts an increased RPTT, the County will charge a 1-3% administrative fee in order to collect the tax on behalf of the City. Under state law and the California Constitution, cities cannot impose, increase or extend any tax unless the tax is approved by the voters. Accordingly, the increased RPTT would require a vote of the electorate.
B. Process of Becoming Charter City
Becoming a charter city requires approval by a majority of voters. The City Council may, on its own motion, propose a new charter and submit it directly to the voters for approval at the next established statewide general election. Most commonly, staff will prepare a draft charter for review, feedback, and refinement by the city council.
However, some cities have appointed a council subcommittee, or a committee of councilmembers and the public, to recommend a draft charter to the city council for approval.
The City Council must vote to submit the proposed charter to the voters at least 88 days before the election. A proposed RPTT and charter could be submitted to the voters as one ballot measure. If the proposed RPTT is structured as a general tax, the measure would require approval from a simple majority (50%+1) of voters in order to pass. However, in that situation it would require a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council to place the measure on the ballot.
Prior to approving submission of the charter to the voters, the City Council must hold at least two public hearings on the proposal of the charter and the content of the charter. There are special noticing requirements for these hearings. Under state law, August 5, 2022 is the last day to add a measure to the ballot. Based on this requirement, below is a summary of last dates for the Council to take the statutorily required steps:
First Public Hearing on Proposed Charter: June 7, 2022
Second Public Hearing on Proposed Chatter: July 12, 2022 Council action to place Charter Measure on Ballot: August 2, 2022 C. Community Engagement & Feedback
Most local jurisdictions that have become a charter city recently have conducted polling to gauge community interest before placing the measure on the ballot. Polling can also help identify the community’s priorities about service needs and revenues.
The City Council can direct staff to retain a pollster to conduct polling regarding a potential charter city measure. In addition, because becoming a charter city is a complicated issue that can easily cause confusion, many other jurisdictions have retained consultants to assist in public education efforts. In order for polling to be 113 of 153
4 timely conducted based on the schedule described above, a consultant would have to be retained very quickly.
The City Council also has the option of engaging in additional community engagement efforts regarding the possibility of becoming a charter city. Possible options for additional community engagement could include holding a special workshop that will provide information about the charter and RPTT to the community, or mailing information to residents about becoming a charter city and answering FAQs.
D. Fiscal Considerations
The City’s current service levels and program offerings have been established over time. The City’s current revenues are sufficient to cover its normal annual operating expenditures. The City’s long-range forecast indicates that, absent any major change to the economy, the City’s budget will remain balanced over the next five years if the City continues to operate in its current fashion. The balanced budget is in part due to the City’s pension trust fund and employee cost sharing offsetting increasing pension costs. Also, the City has minimal debt.
However, the City’s current revenues are not sufficient to completely address capital needs such as road and facility renewal and replacement, nor other significant unfunded liabilities, particularly other post-employment benefits (OPEB). If the City would like to increase renewal and replacement of capital assets and fund currently unfunded liabilities, the City will need to increase its revenue.
Property tax used to be a substantial and flexible mechanism through which cities could raise revenue. Proposition 13 limited property tax collections. Consequently, cities sought other mechanisms to raise the revenue needed to provide municipal services. These revenue mechanisms include business license taxes, utility users’ taxes, transient occupancy taxes, and local sales taxes. Pinole has these local taxes in place.
A new option for raising additional revenue in Pinole is an RPTT. The RPTT differs from most other municipal taxes in that that it is paid only once, upon the sale of the property. In contrast, parcel taxes, sales taxes, business license taxes, utility user taxes, and other municipal taxes are paid on an ongoing basis.
RPTT revenue would be deposited into the City’s General Fund and do not go to the County or State. Revenues generated by a RPTT would be controlled locally and local and be used to address local needs. As such, in recent years, a number of governments in California communities placed measures on the ballot increasing their RPTT. From 2010 to 2020, 20 RPTT measures appeared on the ballot from communities primarily in Los Angeles County and the San Francisco Bay Area region.
All required majority approval from the voters to become law. Of the 20 placed on the ballot, 15 were passed by the voters.
114 of 153
5 It is important to note that revenues from RPTT are driven by the local real estate market. These revenues are volatile and can vary significantly from year to year, especially during an economic decline. The RPTT is more sensitive to economic cycles than other taxes such as property or sales taxes. While the revenue would be substantial, the City would need to carefully budget expenditures given its volatility. If a RPTT were enacted, the City would likely desire to create a policy to smooth expenditures funded by RPTT revenues.
Staff asks that the City Council provide direction on the following:
• Does the Council want to proceed with considering a measure to become a charter city and enact a real property transfer tax?
• Does the Council want to the City to retain a pollster and consultant to assist in the process?
• Does the Council want staff to prepare a draft charter for review at a future meeting?
FISCAL IMPACT
If the City Council decides to proceed with pursuing a measure to become a charter city, there will be a fiscal impact related to preparing a proposed charter and placing the measure on the ballot. Retaining a pollster and/or consultant for public education efforts will incur additional costs. If an increased RPTT is approved by the voters as part of a charter city measure, the additional revenue from the first year of the increased RPTT will greatly exceed these costs. However, it is uncertain whether voters will approve an increased RPTT.
ATTACHMENTS
None
5058047.1
115 of 153
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
12B
DATE: MARCH 1, 2022
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: MISHA KAUR, SR. PROJECT MANAGER
SUBJECT: REVIEW TWO DESIGN ALTERNATIVES FOR REPLACEMENT OF THE
SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDGE OVER BURLINGTON NORTHERN
SANTA FE RAILROAD (CIP PROJECT # RO1710) AND PROVIDE
DIRECTION
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Review two design alternatives for the replacement of the San Pablo Avenue bridge over Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad (CIP Project # RO1710, the “Project”);
2. Accept Alternative 1 as the preferred design alternative and authorize conducting additional studies to proceed with preparation of environmental documents; and
3. Authorize staff to draft a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Hercules regarding project development and construction coordination, which would need to be approved by the City Council prior to execution.
BACKGROUND
San Pablo Avenue is a four-lane regional arterial throughout Contra Costa County that connects Pinole with the City of San Pablo to the south and City of Hercules to the north.
The San Pablo Avenue bridge crosses over the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad track, approximately 900 feet northeast of the intersection of San Pablo Avenue and Pinole Valley Road. The bridge is a 425-foot-long and 13-span, reinforced concrete, parabolic slab structure that serves as the area’s direct route between the cities of Pinole and Hercules, without using the freeway.
Built in 1938, the bridge no longer meets American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) lane width and/or shoulder width standards for current and projected future average daily traffic (ADT). Bicycle and pedestrian access are not available on the existing bridge; however, bicyclists and pedestrians utilize the bridge to cross the railroad since no other method for crossing the BNSF railroad track is available 116 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 2
in the vicinity of San Pablo Avenue. In addition, the existing bridge does not meet current horizontal or vertical railroad setback requirements. The age and condition assessment of the existing bridge support replacement.
In early 2012, City staff completed a grant application to seek Measure J Transportation for Livable Cities funds from the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) for construction of a new pedestrian/bicycle bridge crossing over the Burlington Northern Santa Fe right-of-way at San Pablo Avenue. The goal of the project was to provide safe pedestrian/bicycle access over the railroad. The City was notified that a grant in the amount of $47,000 was approved for design.
Shortly after, a State inspection revealed that the San Pablo Avenue bridge must be rehabilitated and was eligible for funding through the Highway Bridge Program (HBP).
City staff worked with CCTA and received approval to reprogram grant funds and use them for pedestrian/bicycle improvements on the San Pablo Avenue bridge.
The replacement of the San Pablo Avenue bridge over BNSF Railroad is an approved project in the current adopted Capital Improvement Plan (CIP Project # RO1710, the “Project”). The purpose of the Project is to provide a safe, modern bridge and roadway that enhances and supports multi-modal transportation.
In September 2015, the City submitted an HBP application and Project Study Report (PSR) to Caltrans for the Project. In December 2015, the City was approved for initial funding from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA’s) Highway Bridge Program (HBP) to complete preliminary engineering (PE).The HBP provides federal aid to local agencies to replace and rehabilitate structurally deficient locally owned public highway bridges or complete preventative maintenance on bridges that are not deficient.
The PE phase is defined as all project initiation and development activities undertaken through the completion of the plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E). It includes preliminary right-of-way engineering and investigations necessary to complete environmental documents.
The Project will rely on federal funding through the HBP, therefore, environmental documentation pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is required.
FHWA works with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to implement NEPA on federal-aid projects on the state highway system and local streets and roads.
Caltrans is the lead agency under NEPA. Environmental documentation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is also required for the project. The City of Pinole is the lead agency under CEQA.
117 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 3
The primary steps to complete the Project are the following: 1) completion of project studies and environmental documents (CEQA & NEPA); 2) development and completion of final PS&E; 3) acquisition of right-of-way; 4) acquisition of all regulatory agency permits; and 5) advertise, award, and administer the construction project.
Due to the limited initial funding allocation from the HBP, the PE will be completed in two phases. It was necessary to begin the preliminary design and environmental process to develop a final cost estimate and to pursue funding opportunities to support additional PE and all other phases of the Project. On February 18, 2020, City Council adopted Resolution 2020-07 to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Quincy Engineering, Inc. for preliminary engineering services to advance the Project.
In the first phase of PE, Quincy Engineering, Inc. is tasked with initiating preliminary design and environmental process through the preparation of alternatives analysis and bridge type selection, preliminary coordination with BNSF railroad, preparation of a project report, preliminary utility coordination, and environmental technical studies to support completion of CEQA and NEPA documents. The first phase of PE is expected to be completed by Fall 2022.
Before Fall 2022, the City will prepare and submit a funding request to the HBP to complete the second phase of PE, acquire right-of-way, and advance to the Project thru construction.
The second phase of PE will involve final utility coordination, final coordination with BNSF railroad, completion of final PS&E, and acquisition of regulatory permits. The anticipated timeline for this work is Fall 2022 – Fall 2023 (contingent upon funding from HBP). The acquisition of right-of-way will also occur simultaneously during the second phase of PE.
After completion of both phases of PE and right-of-way acquisition, the Project will be advertised for construction. It is anticipated that the Project award and construction will occur between Spring 2024 – Spring 2026 (contingent upon funding from HBP).
REVIEW & ANALYSIS
Several alignment and bridge type alternatives were investigated, and two alternatives were selected for further study based on minimizing project constraints including right-ofway needs, traffic impacts during construction, utility impacts, and construction duration.
Both alternatives will result in the construction of a new, approximately 490-foot-long and 82-foot-wide pre-cast/pre-stressed concrete girder bridge designed to accommodate two 12-foot lanes in each direction, a 4-foot-wide raised median, 8-foot shoulders with Class 118 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 4
II bicycle lanes, and a 10-foot sidewalk on the west side of San Pablo Avenue. Up to 200 feet of approach roadway in either direction may be slightly realigned from the existing condition between the intersections of Hercules Avenue and John Street.
There are several project considerations and challenges, noted below:
• Staging area – during construction, contractors will need area to stage equipment.
A preliminary area for staging has been identified.
• Pinole Gateway – the gateway sign, landscaping, and irrigation will need to be replaced.
• Coordination with BNSF railroad – the existing bridge does not meet current horizontal and vertical clearance requirements noted in the BNSF – UPRR “Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation Projects”. The existing bridge has 8.5 feet of horizontal clearance. The current guidelines note the absolute minimum horizontal clearance to be 18 feet. The existing bridge has 20.7 feet of vertical clearance, while the guidelines require a minimum of 23.33 feet. • Utility coordination – there are utilities that are present in the area and will need to be protected in place or relocated (temporary or permanent). San Pablo Avenue is a major utility corridor for both overhead and underground utilities. Existing PG&E, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), AT&T, and Comcast facilities occur within the project site. PG&E has underground natural gas service and transmission lines, while EBMUD has an underground water line within the extent of the project site. AT&T and Comcast maintain telecommunication lines in a large duct array suspended on the north side of the existing bridge. • Impact to neighboring properties – depending on bridge location, there may be either a temporary or permanent impact to Hercules residences. There is also a private driveway at the southwest corner of the existing bridge that will need improved access from San Pablo Avenue.
• Traffic – there will be temporary delays due to bridge construction. • Pedestrian access – the Project will be mindful of multimodal users. During construction, the existing trail will be connected to new sidewalk at the northeast corner of the bridge.
Project Outreach
This Project was introduced to the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) in September 2020, and later presented to both the City Councils of Pinole and Hercules. The presentations covered the purpose and need of the Project, an introduction to the Project development process, an overview of Project considerations and challenges, and HBP funding constraints.
119 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 5
City staff routinely coordinates with the City of Hercules staff to share Project information.
In February 2021, City staff attended a meeting hosted by a Hercules homeowner’s association (Hercules by the Bay) to discuss the Project and address community questions and concerns.
In November 2021, a website (www.pinolesparabridge.com) was launched to provide Project information and provide access to recorded meetings. On December 8, 2021, a virtual public workshop was held to present design alternatives and answer questions for members of the public. Postcard invitations were mailed to all Pinole residents and Hercules residents who live near the Project. The City of Hercules also conducted outreach to invite residents to the workshop. The workshop was broadcast on PCTV and a recording is available for viewing on the Project website.
Responses to project questions and concerns received throughout the life of the Project and at the workshop are summarized in Attachment A.
Alignment Alternatives
Attachment B is a visual representation of the alternatives described below.
Alternative 1 – demolition of the existing four-lane San Pablo Avenue Bridge over the BNSF railroad and construction of a new bridge in the same location. A temporary twolane detour route with temporary bridge would be constructed northwest of the existing bridge to detour traffic around the project site during the approximate 18-month construction period. Numerous utilities are mounted on the existing bridge and would be temporarily relocated during construction and then mounted to the new bridge at the end of bridge construction. A sidewalk would be constructed along the edge of the southbound traffic lane and a 5-foot-wide walkway would be constructed on the temporary bridge.
Construction of the temporary detour road and bridge would require securing a temporary construction easement from the City of Hercules and private properties. The estimated cost of construction for this alternative is $29.1 million.
Alternative 2 – constructing the new four-lane San Pablo Avenue Bridge over the BNSF railroad parallel to the existing bridge. Traffic remains on the existing bridge during construction and minimizes traffic delays during construction while the new single stage bridge is constructed. This alternative places traffic closer to the residences at Hercules by the Bay in the City of Hercules and has significant impacts to PG&E and EBMUD underground utilities. Construction is expected to take approximately 18 months. The estimated cost of construction for this alternative is $36.2 million. 120 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 6
Staging and associated challenges for both alternatives are summarized below:
Alternative Description Staging Challenges
1 New bridge at
existing
bridge
location
(2-Lane temporary Bridge
during Detour)
Stage 1: A 2-lane temporary
bridge detour alignment will be
constructed west of the existing
bridge; existing traffic will
remain in its existing condition.
Stage 2: traffic will be diverted
onto the 2-lane temporary
bridge detour (1 lane for NB
traffic and 1 lane for SB traffic);
pedestrians will have a 4' wide
passageway separated from
traffic by k-rail; the existing; the
existing bridge will be removed;
the proposed bridge will be
constructed along the same
alignment as the existing.
• Traffic impacts
from reduced
capacity during the
project
• Detour alignments
will encroach onto
adjacent properties
2 Fully
separated
bridge
Stage 1: traffic will remain in its
existing configuration while the
new bridge is built.
Stage 2: the roadway
approaches to the bridges will
be constructed under traffic
control.
• Largest permanent
footprint of all the
alternatives
(environmental,
utilities)
• Permanent traffic
closer to Hercules
by the Bay
properties
• Bridge will
encroach onto
adjacent properties
A value analysis was completed based on the following criteria:
# Criteria Weighting
1 Right-of-way – minimize permanent right-of-way impacts 40% 2 Traffic impacts – minimize traffic disruption during construction 30% 3 Utility impacts – minimize permanent impacts to utilities 20% 121 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 7
4 Construction duration – minimize construction duration 10% Total 100%
Criteria Weighting Alternatives Score
(1-10)
Criterion
score
Baseline
Right-of-way 40
Alternative 1 10 400 Final bridge within existing
right-of-way
Alternative 2 4 160
Edge of bridge deck moves
closer to existing homes in
Hercules
Traffic
impacts 30
Alternative 1 3 90 2-lane section through
construction
Alternative 2 4 120
4-lane section through
construction (reduced lane
widths)
Utility impacts 20
Alternative 1 4 80
Temporary impacts from
building temporary bridge &
roadway over utilities
Alternative 2 2 40 Impacts to PG&E natural gas
and EMBUD water lines
Construction
duration 10
Alternative 1 7 70
Existing bridge constructed
in 1 stage – temporary
bridge option
Alternative 2 3 30 Staged construction – partial
bridge removal
The total performance score for each alternative based on the criterion is summarized below:
CRITERION
Right-ofwayTraffic Utility
impacts
Construction
duration
Total =
Performance
Score
Weighting 40% 30% 20% 10% 100%
Alternative 1 400 90 80 70 640
Alternative 2 160 120 40 30 350
The value index score is calculated for each alternative by dividing the performance score with the estimated cost.
Alternative Performance
Score
Estimated
Cost
(Millions)
Value Index Score
(Performance score/Cost)
Alternative 1 640 $29.1 21.99
122 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 8
Alternative 2 350 $36.2 9.67
Based on the criterion scoring summary and value index score, staff recommends that City Council accept Alternative 1 as the preferred design alternative and authorize conducting additional studies to proceed with preparation of environmental documents.
Prior to the conclusion of the first phase of PE, the City will submit a project report which includes a Bridge Type Selection document to Caltrans for review and approval. The project report will document the process that was followed to select a preferred alternative. The HBP will review the project report and will approve funding based on a value analysis.
Next Steps
Based on the preferred design alternative, the consultant will continue completion of project studies and environmental documents. The project involves continued coordination with Caltrans, BNSF, utilities, and the City of Hercules.
The Project will be mutually beneficial to Pinole and Hercules. While the City of Pinole is the sponsor of the Project and is responsible for securing funding for all phases of the Project, it is anticipated that certain approvals and actions will be required by the City of Hercules. Approvals will be required for contractors to perform site investigation, project development, and construction activities for the Project within the jurisdictional boundaries of Hercules.
In order to most efficiently collaborate with the City of Hercules, staff requests Council’s authorization to draft a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Hercules regarding project development and construction coordination. The City Councils of Pinole and Hercules would ultimately need to approve the Memorandum of Understanding before it could be executed.
FISCAL IMPACT
In September 2015, the City submitted an HBP application and Project Study Report (PSR) to Caltrans for the Project. The PSR identified a total budget of $16,766,800 for the Project of which $893,000 was for PE, $100,000 for right-of-way, and the remainder $15,773,800 for construction. The HBP contributes 88.53% of the bridge replacement cost and the remaining 11.47% is the local share.
Based on the project costs identified in the PSR, in December 2015, Caltrans programmed the Project in the HBP funding plan and committed to providing $790,573 123 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 9
(88.53% of $893k) for the PE phase. The City also secured $1,600,000 for local share from West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee for all phases of the Project.
In addition, the City secured $387,000 from the CCTA for the design, right-of-way, and environmental clearance for the Project . That is sufficient funding for the local share of the PE phase.
A funding gap still exists for completion of the second phase of PE, right-of-way, and construction. The City will also need to continue to seek additional local share funds for the construction phase. The planning level construction cost estimate for Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 is $29.1 million and $36.2 million, respectively. The HBP allows local agencies to request additional grant allocation when bid proposals come in higher than initially budgeted for construction. Completion of preliminary design is necessary to develop a final cost estimate and facilitate the City in pursuing funding to support all phases of the Project.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Project Questions and Concerns
B. Alignment Alternatives
124 of 153
Project Questions and Concerns
Q: Why doesn’t the Project appear in Pinole’s current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)? A: The Project is beyond the scope of the CIP. The CIP includes preliminary engineering for the Project and will continue to be updated.
Q: What can this project do to mitigate speeding?
A: Lane standards are dictated by Average Daily Traffic (ADT). Traffic calming measures are being considered but may need to be constructed separately from this project.
Q: What is the grade change to private parcels near the bridge approach on San Pablo Avenue?
A: The bridge elevation will go up and will touch down before John Street. BNSF railroad has minimum standards for vertical clearance over the railroad that cannot be avoided. Grade changes will be minimal at the frontages of nearby parcels.
Q: Is the railroad going to require chain link fences at the outer limits of the bridge structure? A: Yes, that will be required, it is a Public Utilities Commission (PUC) requirement to provide fencing. There are several different aesthetic options available. The exact design is to be determined.
Q: Will access to 2711 San Pablo Ave be maintained from San Pablo Avenue, or will it be rerouted through the John Street neighborhood? A: Driveway access to 2711 San Pablo Ave will remain on San Pablo Avenue. There is no plan to re-route access through the John Street neighborhood.
Q: Is there room for a buffer between the vehicular traveled way and bicycle lane? A: Final striping has yet to be determined, but striping can be provided that will clearly delineate the bicycle lane from the vehicular lanes. Bicycle and Pedestrian safety are of top concern.
Q: What other bicycle and pedestrian improvements will be made beyond the bridge? A: The HBP program funds bridge improvements, further bicycle and pedestrian improvements will need to be constructed separately and will be addressed by the CIP.
Q: Will there be accommodations for bicycles and pedestrians during construction? A: Bicycles and Pedestrians will be accommodated during construction of either bridge alternative. For Alternative 1, they will be accommodated on the temporary bridge during construction.
Q: What impact will there be to current state of parking and access between John Street and Pinole Valley Road during construction?
A: There is no plan to modify parking or access to local homes or businesses. The permanent improvements will conform near the John Street intersection. Detours for either Alternative will conform in a similar location. There will be normal construction traffic at isolated times.
Q: What is the plan for construction laydown/staging areas?
ATTACHMENT A
125 of 153
A: The current plan is to utilize the adjacent BNSF railroad parcel and some City property for staging. The City will continue to inform local residents and businesses of any parking or access changes.
Q: Has the City considered rehabilitating the existing bridge instead of replacing the entire bridge?
A: Rehabilitating the bridge does not address the current deficiencies of the bridge. A complete replacement is necessary.
Q: A new residential development is planned at 215 Skelly in the City of Hercules, does the Project propose to construct a new pedestrian bridge to the Skelly neighborhood? A: There used to be a pedestrian bridge to skelly. Pedestrian connectivity will be available via the San Pablo Avenue Bridge. No new connection to Skelly will be constructed with the Project.
Q: Alternative 2 would bring the new bridge closer to nearby Hercules residents. Has the project evaluated the noise and exhaust exposure to nearby residents that would be associated with Alternative 2?
A: Noise and air quality technical studies will be performed. Alternative 1 maintains the existing alignment and would not move the permanent bridge alignment closer to the residents on Skelly.
Q: Will PG&E lines be undergrounded?
A: It is not likely that undergrounding PG&E lines are reimbursable through the HBP. This is an ongoing issue that the City is working through.
Q: What is the anticipated construction duration?
A: For Alternative 1, the anticipated construction duration is 18 to 20 months. For Alternative 2 the construction duration will likely be 24 to 30 months.
Q: With the increased width of the bridge proposed by Alternative 1, will that width be accommodated to the north or the south of the existing bridge? A: With Alternative 1, the proposed centerline of the bridge will remain approximately where it is today, and the width will be accommodated on the north and south side of the bridge. The bridge structure and approaches will remain within the public right of way.
Q: Is this a bridge replacement, or will the vertical supports be maintained, and the bridge deck be improved?
A: The Project is a complete bridge replacement including vertical supports Q: What accommodations will be made for road traffic and rail traffic during construction? A: Vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic will be accommodated by a temporary bridge for Alternative 1. For Alternative 2 they will be accommodated on the existing structure and ultimately on the new structure, as Alternative 2 proposes to construct the new bridge in phases.
The project will not disrupt rail traffic during construction.
Comment: A thorough search of all utilities is essential in the early stage of this project, as well as detailed right of way maps.
126 of 153
Response: Comment is noted, and that work is being performed.
Comment: We are concerned that a new bridge, without significant design elements, will increase speed, making downtown Pinole more dangerous. We have witnessed red light violations at the John Street intersections entering downtown Pinole. This could be a deterrent to retail activity and dangerous to pedestrians. Our suggestion is to install a roundabout at the south end of the bridge that would accommodate the private driveways, bus stop, pedestrian crossing, and intersection of John St. Roundabout are increasingly see as tools to slow traffic, increase safety, and reduce carbon emissions.
Response: Traffic and noise studies are ongoing, and all feasible traffic-calming measure will be considered throughout design.
Comment: East Bay Coffee has continually experienced customer parking shortages. The BNSF railroad lot has been used as overflow, particularly when there are events in the vicinity of downtown. While the railroad lot may serve as an appropriate staging area for construction trailers and contractor parking, it will in no way accommodate the needs of all involved. As we experienced from the construction at Pinole Valley High, the parking needs for construction workers were grossly under anticipated.
City studies referenced as proof of adequate parking available are outdated and do not leave room for future growth in their calculations.
As a business, we have looked for ways to maximize existing parking allocations, creatively inform our customers and complied with all the use permit demands to require our employees to park out-of-the way of surrounding residents. We would like to be a part of the conversation.
Response: Your comments have been noted and the City will continue to engage with the public as the details of this project unfold. Regardless of the Alternative selected, the City recognizes that parking for local businesses should be maintained to the fullest extent possible. 127 of 153
San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement Project
Alternative 1- Existing Alignment ATTACHMENT B
128 of 153
San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement Project
Alternative 1- Detour
129 of 153
San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement Project
Alternative 2- Parallel Alignment
130 of 153
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 12C
DATE: MARCH 1, 2022
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: MARKISHA GUILLORY, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: RECEIVE THE FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2021/22 MID-YEAR FINANCIAL
REPORT AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET
ADJUSTMENTS, AND APPROVE THE MODIFIED FISCAL YEAR
(FY) 2022/23 BUDGET AND LONG-TERM FINANCIAL PLAN
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the City Council receive the Fiscal Year (FY) 2021/22 MidYear Financial Report and adopt a resolution approving related budget adjustments.
Additionally, staff recommends that the City Council approve the modified FY 2022/23 budget development process, which has been revised from the last version presented, at the February 1, 2022 Council meeting.
BACKGROUND
The City operates on an annual budget cycle. Through the budget, the City Council approves revenue estimates and authorizes City staff to expend the City’s limited financial resources. The City Council adopts an original budget prior to the start of each fiscal year, then makes adjustments to the budget throughout the year to reflect changes in expected revenues and to increase or decrease expenditures to address changes in policy or operational priorities.
As one of the many activities that the City undertakes to help ensure its financial soundness, staff provides quarterly financial reports on the City’s budget condition.
Following the conclusion of the second quarter of the fiscal year (October through December), staff conducts a second quarter/mid-year budget review.
The mid-year review provides an in-depth assessment of the City’s revenues and expenditures during the first half of the fiscal year (July through December). It helps determine whether the City is on track to meet the budget for the fiscal year or if adjustments are warranted. It also includes a projection of the fiscal year end results, which serve as the starting point for the development of next year’s budget and the long-term financial forecast.
131 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 2
It is important to note that Pinole, like other communities, has been and continues to be impacted by the fiscal and health effects of COVID-19 and its subsequent variants.
Fiscal impacts have been identified and noted in this mid-year report where applicable.
REVIEW & ANALYSIS
Staff has reviewed the City’s budget results through the end of the second quarter.
City revenues and expenditures are mostly on track to match budgeted amounts. Staff does recommend some budget adjustments, which are discussed within this report and in Attachment A.
General Fund Analysis
General Fund revenues and expenditures are mostly on track to match budgeted amounts.
The originally adopted FY 2021/22 General Fund budget included $17.3 million in revenues, $2.4 million use of unassigned fund balance (residual, unrestricted funds), and $19.7 million in expenditures. The unassigned fund balance was budgeted for several one-time, Council-directed initiatives, as follows:
• Active Transportation Plan ($75,000);
• Brandt Street improvements ($170,000);
• City events other than the car show ($100,000);
• Economic development support ($80,000);
• Emergency power for critical facilities ($200,000);
• Fall 2021 car show ($15,000);
• Improvements to the planting/landscaping at City Hall ($20,000); • Installation of high-capacity trash bins ($425,000);
• Non-capital recommendations of the Beautification Ad Hoc Subcommittee (education and awareness campaign, art program, and community clean up events) ($60,000);
• Recycled water master planning ($200,000);
• Total compensation benchmarking for management and confidential employees ($20,000); and
• Weatherization/energy efficiency program ($250,000).
Note that the City Council also budgeted unassigned Measure S 2014 fund balance to the following purposes:
• Business development/community help reserve ($10,000); • Community Safety Officers (2) from part-time to full-time ($100,000); • Municipal broadband planning ($60,000);
• On-call consultants for capital projects ($150,000); and • Revitalization reserve ($10,000).
132 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 3
Following the original FY 2021/22 budget adoption, the City Council approved the use of unassigned fund balance at its meeting on November 16, 2021 for a number of additional initiatives, as follows:
• Consultant to complete Climate Action Plan (CAP) ($120,000) and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission inventory ($40,000);
• Reclassification of Management Analyst to Assistant to the City Manager ($10,700); and
• Transfer out to the General Reserve Fund to meet policy requirement ($949,715).
Note that the City Council also budgeted unassigned Measure S 2006 and Measure S 2014 fund balance at that time for the purchase of several trucks, backhoe, asphalt grinder, and mower in the amount of $598,000.
The revised FY 2021/22 budget includes $17.3 million in revenues, $3.7 million use of unassigned fund balance, and $21.0 million in expenditures.
As of the mid-year, the City is projecting to end FY 2021/22 with total revenues of $17.5 million, expenditures of $21.6 million (including recommended mid-year adjustments), and use of fund balance of $4.0 million. With mid-year budget adjustments, the General Fund unassigned fund balance is projected to be $1.9 million at FY 2021/22 year-end. The balance does not include unassigned fund balances in the Measure S Funds (presented on page 7 of this report). The table below summarizes the General Fund budget.
General Fund Revenue
General Fund revenue through the second quarter was $7.0 million, or 40% of the revised budget, compared to $6.8 million at FY 2020/21 mid-year. General Fund revenues are not received evenly throughout the year, so revenue received through the second quarter is not expected to be 50% of the total budget. Staff projects that General Fund revenue will total $17.5 million this fiscal year, approximately $260,000 greater than currently budgeted.
General Fund FY 2021/22
Original
Budget
FY 2021/22
Revised
Budget
FY 2021/22
YTD Actuals
FY 2021/22
YTD Actuals w/
Encumb.
% of Budget Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2021/22
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 17,290,542 $ 17,290,542 $ 6,998,574 $ 6,998,574 40% 259,187 $ $ 17,549,729 Expenditures 19,694,153 21,013,979 9,315,267 9,382,111 44% 537,476 21,551,455 Net surplus/deficit (2,403,611) (3,723,437) $ (2,316,692) $ (2,383,536) (278,289) (4,001,726) Beginning Fund Balance 5,937,352 5,937,352 5,937,352
Ending Fund Balance $ 3,533,741 $ 2,213,915 $ 1,935,626 133 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 4
Property Tax
Property tax is received in December, April, and June of each year. The projected revenue for FY 2021/22 is $4.4 million. Property tax revenue includes the City’s
18.75% share of the basic 1% property tax rate, $2.8 million. It also includes the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund (RPTTF) revenue, $1.2 million, which is revenue that has resulted from the dissolution of the former Pinole Redevelopment Agency and represents the shift from the Agency receiving tax increment revenue to the various taxing entities receiving the tax revenue. The RPTTF revenue will convert to “normal” property tax revenue when all of the former Agency’s outstanding debt is paid off and the Successor Agency is formally dissolved. Dissolution is currently expected to occur sometime after the final debt service payment in FY 2023/24.
This category also includes unsecured property tax, supplemental property tax, and real property transfer tax. Total property tax receipts are at 38% of the revised budget, consistent with expectations and in line last year’s actuals at mid-year. Therefore, staff is not recommending any adjustments.
Sales Tax
Sales tax for the General Fund was budgeted at $4.2 million for FY 2021/22. Revenue received through the second quarter equaled $1.9 million, or 44% of the revised budget. That did not include the payment that the City received for December due to timing. Revenue continues to rebound quicker than industry experts predicted. Sales tax revenues in a few of the major categories have returned to or exceeded prepandemic levels, notably casual dining, and the general consumer good categories.
Given the positive results and the continuing upward trend, staff is recommending an increase of $259,187 in the General Fund sales tax budget. This is consistent with the most recent projections provided by the City’s sales tax consultant, HdL.
It is important to note that the sales tax budget is set at 100% of HdL’s projections.
HdL builds in a certain amount of conservatism in their projections, actual receipts in prior years have aligned with HdL’s projections, and the economy is rebounding more quickly than industry experts initially predicted.
Category FY 2021/22
Original
Budget
FY 2021/22
Revised
Budget
FY 2021/22
YTD Actuals
% of Budget Proposed
Adjustments
Projected
Year-End
Property Taxes $ 4,230,122 $ 4,230,122 $ 1,592,452 38% $ 4,230,122 Sales and Use Taxes 4,224,661 4,224,661 1,864,283 44% 259,187 4,483,848 Utility Users Tax 1,915,000 1,915,000 965,729 50% 1,915,000 Franchise Taxes 779,000 779,000 234,361 30% 779,000
Other Taxes: TOT 418,000 418,000 250,755 60% 418,000
Other Taxes: Business License 382,000 382,000 179,867 47% 382,000 Intergovernmental Taxes 2,082,883 2,082,883 1,028,682 49% 2,082,883 Public Safety Charges 1,339,796 1,339,796 743,724 56% 1,339,796 Total Other Revenue 1,065,394 1,065,394 138,723 13% 1,065,394 Revenue Total: 16,436,856 16,436,856 6,998,574 43% 16,696,043 Transfer In from Section 115 Trust 853,686 853,686 - 0% 853,686 Revenue/Sources Total: $ 17,290,542 $ 17,290,542 $ 6,998,574 40% 259,187 $ $ 17,549,729 134 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 5
All Other General Fund Revenue
Utility Users Tax (UUT) and franchise tax revenue, which is derived from utility customers, are at 50% and 30% of the revised budget, respectively, as of the end of the second quarter. Based on the normal timing of receipt of these revenues, staff expects these revenues to meet budget.
Other taxes include Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) and business license tax revenues. TOT is at 60% of the revised budget. Compared to the second quarter of FY 2020/21, TOT is trending higher, which is primarily attributable to the rebound of travel and lodging. Business license revenues are at 47% of the revised budget; they are primarily received in December and January in line with the annual renewal process. Both revenue sources are expected to meet budget.
Intergovernmental taxes include the Property Tax In-Lieu of Motor Vehicle License Fee (VLF) of $2.1 million and homeowner property tax relief of $30,000. These funds are primarily received in January and April of each year. These revenues are trending at 49% of the revised budget.
Public safety charges, including police dispatch services provided to Hercules and San Pablo, are billed on a quarterly basis. Public safety revenue is at 56% of the revised budget due to the fourth quarter payment for FY 2020/21 being received in FY 2021/22. Otherwise, the revenue is on target with budget.
Other General Fund revenues include licenses and permits, fees, fines and forfeitures, charges for services, investment income, rental income, and other miscellaneous revenues. Total other revenue is at 13% of the revised budget due to the timing of receipts in the various categories.
A transfer from the City’s Section 115 Pension Trust to the General Fund was budgeted for FY 2021/22 in the amount of $853,686. The transfer amount will be determined, and possibly adjusted, at the end of the fiscal year based on the actual pension costs incurred for the year.
General Fund Expenditures
The City Council authorized expenditures in the amount $19.7 million in the original FY 2021/22 General Fund budget. The City Council revised the budget in November 2021 to transfer funds to the General Reserve Fund; and to appropriate funds for the climate action plan, greenhouse gas inventory, and replacement of equipment and vehicles, thereby creating a revised expenditure budget of $21.0 million. General Fund actual expenditures through the second quarter of FY 2021/22 totaled $9.3 million, which is 43% of the revised budget before adjustments. At FY 2020/21 mid-year, expenditures were at 51% of the revised budget.
135 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 6
As shown in the expenditures table above, the actual expenditures in most categories are at or below 50% of the revised budget. Items of note are as follows:
• Salaries & Wages - Staff is recommending a $42,599 increase in salaries & wages. The adjustment is for stand-by pay that should have been but was not included in the Police Department’s original budget ($16,000). The remaining $26,599 is to cover the cost of two position reclassifications in the Human Resource and Public Works Departments, resulting from the staff compensation benchmarking study.
• Professional/Admin Services - Staff is recommending an increase totaling $65,746 for the following:
o Finance Department - $11,955 to cover the difference in the cost of the cost allocation plan/user fee study (6,960); and financial forecasting software (4,995).
o Human Resources – $25,000 for the remaining cost of contracts for personnel-related professional services.
o Police Department – $28,791 for GPS software subscription (13,815), and Axon body camera storage subscription ($14,976), both of which were not budgeted.
• Materials and Supplies - Staff is recommending an increase of $4,500 in the Public Works Department to cover increasing fuel costs $4,500. • Interdepartmental Charges - Staff is recommending an increase of $6,000 in the Public Works Department for Trakit software subscription. • Transfers Out - Staff is recommending an increase of $418,631 to transfer funds to the Recreation Department Fund to close the budget gap due to the General Fund’s regular subsidization of the Recreation Department Fund and lower-than-budgeted program revenues due to COVID.
• Other notes:
o The budget for General Fund transfers out increased by $1.2 million from the original budget to the revised budget. The increase was primarily attributable to a $949,715 transfer to the General Reserve Fund to meet the Reserve Policy requirement of maintaining a balance equal to 50% of total General Fund expenditures. The transfer was made in the previous quarter.
Category FY 2021/22
Original
Budget
FY 2021/22
Revised
Budget
FY 2021/22
YTD
Actuals
FY 2021/22
YTD
Actuals w/
Encumb.
% of
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2021/22
Projected
Year-End
Salaries & Wages $ 9,084,353 $ 8,995,053 $ 4,095,608 $ 4,095,608 46% 42,599 $ $ 9,037,652 Benefits 5,829,863 5,829,863 2,598,559 $ 2,598,559 45% 5,829,863 Professional/Admin Services 3,422,541 3,775,671 1,159,846 $ 1,169,609 31% 65,746 3,841,417 Other Operating 286,311 286,311 125,070 $ 125,070 44% 286,311 Materials and Supplies 184,200 184,200 126,568 $ 126,568 69% 4,500 188,700 Interdepartmental Charges (1,313,357) (1,313,357) (320,178) $ (320,178) 24% 6,000 (1,307,357) Asset/Capital Outlay 921,180 782,461 3,989 $ 61,070 1% 782,461 Debt Service 576,107 576,107 576,091 $ 576,091 100% 576,107 Other Financing Uses/Transfers O 702,955 1,897,670 949,715 $ 949,715 50% 418,631 2,316,301 Expenditure Total: $ 19,694,153 $ 21,013,979 $ 9,315,267 $ 9,382,111 44% 537,476 $ $ 21,551,455 136 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 7
o Materials and supplies are at 69% of budget because spending is not on a straight-line basis and fluctuates throughout the year. o Debt service is at 100% of budget because the annual payment is made in full at the beginning of the fiscal year.
Measure S 2006 Fund (Fund 105)
Measure S 2006 is a voter-approved general purpose use tax levied at 0.5% on all retail sales. Revenue from Measure S 2006 has historically been allocated by the City Council to fund public safety programs. Measure S 2006 revenues are budgeted at $2.1 million in FY 2021/22. Tax revenues through the second quarter are at 47% of the revised budget. Staff is recommending an increase of $278,000 in the tax revenue budget consistent with updated projections from the City’s sales tax consultant.
Measure S 2014 Fund (Fund 106)
Measure S 2014 is also a voter-approved general purpose use tax levied at 0.5% on all retail sales. Revenue from Measure S 2014 has historically been allocated by the City Council to address some of the City’s operational and deferred capital improvement needs. Measure S 2014 revenues are budgeted at $2.1 million in FY 2021/22 for tax collections and for interest earnings on fund balance. Tax revenues through the second quarter are at 46% of the revised budget based on the timing of sales payments to the City. Expenditures are trending lower due to the timing of spending for capital projects. Staff is recommending an increase of $278,000 in the tax revenue budget consistent with updated projections from the City’s sales tax consultant. Staff is also recommending an increase of $7,207 in the expenditure budget in Community Services to appropriate funds not used in the prior fiscal year due to COVID. This appropriation will be used to replace appliances at the Senior Center.
The unassigned fund balance of the General Fund, Measure S 2006 and Measure S 2014 combined is projected to be $6.5 million at FY 2021/22 year-end.
Measure S 2006 FY 2021/22
Original
Budget
FY 2021/22
Revised
Budget
FY 2021/22
YTD Actuals
% of Budget Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2021/22
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 2,163,746 $ 2,163,746 $ 1,009,945 47% 278,000 $ $ 2,441,746 Expenditures 2,528,352 2,559,352 1,171,459 46% 2,559,352 Net surplus/deficit (364,606) (395,606) $ (161,514) (117,606) Beginning Fund Balance 2,385,431 2,385,431 2,385,431
Ending Fund Balance $ 2,020,825 $ 1,989,825 $ 2,267,825 Measure S 2014 FY 2021/22
Original
Budget
FY 2021/22
Revised
Budget
FY 2021/22
YTD Actuals
% of Budget Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2021/22
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 2,173,000 $ 2,173,000 $ 1,003,635 46% 278,000 $ $ 2,451,000 Expenditures 3,979,877 4,632,901 483,373 10% 7,207 4,640,108 Net surplus/deficit (1,806,877) (2,459,901) $ 520,262 (2,189,108) Beginning Fund Balance 4,480,908 4,480,908 4,480,908
Ending Fund Balance $ 2,674,031 $ 2,021,007 $ 2,291,800 137 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 8
Other Funds Analysis
Special Revenue Funds
Gas Tax Fund (Fund 200)
The Gas Tax Fund accounts for revenue from State excise taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel sales (referred to as the Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA)) as well as revenue from the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (SB1) (referred to as the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA)). Gas Tax Fund resources are restricted for use in the construction and maintenance of public streets. These funds support both annual operating and capital projects. Revenues are at 45% of the revised budget and trending in line with the timing of receipt of funds from the State.
Expenditures are at 22% of the revised budget and trending as expected due to the timing of road maintenance projects. Staff is not recommending any adjustments.
Public Safety Augmentation Fund (Fund 203)
The Public Safety Augmentation Fund (PSAF) accounts for monies allocated to the City by the County Auditor-Controller under Proposition 172 from the statewide 0.5% sales tax. These funds are used exclusively for public safety. The receipt of these funds is conditioned on Maintenance of Effort using base year FY 1992-93. Revenues in this fund are on trend with the revised budget at 57%. Expenditures are at 47% of the revised budget. Staff is not recommending any adjustments.
Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (Fund 206)
The Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) holds funds received from the County under the AB 3229 which enacted the Citizens Option for Public Safety (COPS) Program. The funds are used to offset the personnel cost of several police officer positions. Revenues are at 85% of the revised budget. Expenditures are at 50% of the revised budget. Staff is not recommending any adjustments NPDES Storm Water Fund (Fund 207)
The NPDES Storm Water Fund accounts for assessments collected by the County via property tax bills pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations, a federally mandated program. Assessments are levied at $35 per Equivalent Runoff Unit (ERU). Revenue estimates are based on the number of ERU's multiplied by the adopted rate. Revenues are at 51% of the revised budget.
Expenditures are at 36% of the revised budget. Staff is recommending an increase of $17,000 in expenditures to cover upcoming NPDES compliance.
Recreation Department Fund (Fund 209)
The recreation programs of the Community Services Department have been and continue to be significantly impacted by the pandemic. These programs have not been 138 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 9
able fully re-open and can only operate on a limited basis to comply with health and safety guidelines. The original budget was based on fully re-opening programs in fall 2021, but due to the ongoing impacts of COVID-19, the programs that are offered have limited capacity. As of the second quarter, revenues are at 26% of the revised budget. Expenditures are 41% of the revised budget. Assuming that programs will continue to be limited through the remainder of FY 2021/22, staff is recommending a net decrease of $224,656 in the revenue budget and a net decrease of $125,658 in the expenditure budget. The Fund receives a transfer from the General Fund and Measure S 2014 to backfill operating shortfalls. Staff is recommending a total transfer to the Fund from the General Fund in the amount of $418,631 to close the budget gap due to lower-than-budgeted program revenues, a net reduction of $98,998, as well as to cover the original deficit of $319,634.
Building & Planning Fund (Fund 212)
The Building & Planning Fund collects fees for building permits and plan checks. Fees collected are used to cover the cost involved in inspections and plan checks performed. The FY 2021/22 adopted budget projected a net deficit of $122,053, which has been revised to $187,053 including adjustments. Revenues through the second quarter are at 21% of the revised budget and expenditures are at 27% of the revised budget. While the Fund currently shows a negative fund balance, it is projected to end the year with a zero balance. Staff is recommending an increase of $305,000 in the expenditures budget for the following: $85,000 for temporary staffing to assist with backlog of permits and building official duties; $220,000 for Trakit software subscription.
Solid Waste Fund (Fund 214)
The Solid Waste Fund accounts for funds received from Republic Services, Inc. from a surcharge it assesses on customer rates for solid waste services. These funds are set aside for future solid waste capital projects and for a rate stabilization fund.
Revenues are at 48% of the revised budget. Expenditures are at 30% of the revised budget. Staff is not recommending any adjustments.
Measure J Fund (Fund 215)
The Measure J Fund accounts for special sales tax revenues collected by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) and reapportioned to the cities for local street projects. The City must submit a checklist each year to confirm compliance with a Growth Management Program in order to receive these funds. Estimates of annual funding are provided by the CCTA, and jurisdiction allocations are based on a formula that considers both population and road mileage. Revenues are received in June of each year. Spending of these funds is dependent on the timing of capital projects.
Revenue is trending higher and is at 119% of the revised budget; therefore, staff is recommending an increase of $73,948 in the revenue budget to align with actual receipts. Expenditures are at 12% of the revised budget. 139 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 10
American Rescue Plan Act Fund (Fund 217)
The American Rescue Plan Act Fund accounts for the $4.6 million allocated to the City from the federal government from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) of 2021.
The City received its first tranche of $2.3 million in July 2021 and will receive the second tranche one year later. The funds are restricted for specific uses and will be appropriated by Council. To address some immediate needs of the community, the City Council approved an appropriation of $300,000 to provide direct financial assistance to small businesses. The program is set to provide $3,000 grants to up to 100 eligible small businesses. Staff is not recommending any adjustments.
Housing and Land Held for Resale Fund (Fund 285)
The Housing and Land Held for Resale Fund accounts for activities associated with administering housing programs of the former Pinole Redevelopment Agency, using Housing Set Aside funds, and providing affordable housing within the community. The Successor Agency to the Pinole Redevelopment Agency has a three-year agreement to repay the loan that the Pinole Redevelopment Agency’s affordable housing fund had made to the Agency’s general fund under the Supplemental Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (SERAF). The payment is programmed in the budget and loan will be paid off in FY 2022/23. Staff is not recommending any adjustments.
Capital Project Funds
City Street Improvements (Fund 325)
The City Street Improvements Fund accounts for an annual $250,000 transfer from Measure S 2014 for street improvement projects. The transfer from Measure S was not processed until the third quarter. Expenditures plus encumbrances are at 58% of the revised budget. Staff is recommending an increase of $289,594 in the revenue budget to account for the following transportation-related grants: Bridge Replacement Grant, Transportation for Livable Communities Project Grant, and the Highway Bridge Program. Staff is also recommending an increase of $247,000 in the expenditure budget for contract amendments approved by the City Council for the San Pablo Avenue Bridge Project, as well as various other construction projects.
Arterial Streets Rehabilitation (Fund 377)
The Arterial Streets Rehabilitation Fund accounts for an annual $250,000 transfer from Measure S 2014 for street rehabilitation projects. Actual revenues are not reflected because the transfer from Measure S was not processed until the third quarter. Expenditures plus encumbrances are at 6% of the revised budget. Staff is not recommending any adjustments.
140 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 11
Enterprise Funds
Sewer Enterprise Fund (Fund 500)
The Sewer Enterprise Fund accounts for fees charged to residents and businesses for sewer utilities. Fees are used to operate the Pinole-Hercules Wastewater Treatment Plant, which serves the Pinole and Hercules areas. Revenues are received with the property tax payments in December, April, and June. The Clean Water State Revolving Fund program provided funding for the City’s 50% share of the upgrades to the treatment plant. For the second quarter, revenues are at 51% of the revised budget. Expenditures are at 37% of the revised budget. Staff is recommending an increase of $70,000 in the expenditures budget for emergency project at Tennent and Pinon Avenue.
Cable Access TV Fund (Fund 505)
The Cable Access TV Fund accounts for revenue received from cable franchise fees (Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) access fees), video production and broadcast charges. PEG access fees are designated for equipment purchases.
Transfers from the General Fund also help support the operating costs. Revenue is at 22% of the revised budget and expenditures are at 42% of the revised budget. Staff is not recommending any budget adjustments.
Information Systems Fund (Fund 525)
The Information Systems Fund is an internal service fund used to account for activities that provide technology goods or services to other City funds and departments on a cost-reimbursement basis. Revenue and expenditures are both at 34% of the revised budget. Staff is recommending an increase of $220,000 in the revenue and expenditures budget for Trakit software for the Community Development Department.
Fiduciary Funds
Recognized Obligation Retirement Fund (Fund 750)
The Recognized Obligation Retirement Fund accounts for the close-out activities of the Successor Agency to the Pinole Redevelopment Agency. Pledged property tax revenues will continue to be provided to the City for timely payment of outstanding redevelopment bond debt obligations, to reimburse the City for administrative staff time up to $250,000 per year, and other enforceable obligations in accordance with the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS). Staff is not recommending any budget adjustments.
Next Steps
Following the City Council’s approval of the mid-year adjustments, staff will amend the FY 2021/22 Operating and Capital Budget. The mid-year budget will serve as the 141 of 153
City Council Report
March 1, 2022 12
baseline, or starting point, for the FY 2022/23 budget and the long-term financial forecast.
The City has started its budget cycle for FY 2022/23. To guide the process, staff presented the recommended development process for the FY 2022/23 Operating and Capital Budget and the long-term financial plan to the City Council at its meeting on February 1, 2022, which the Council approved. Since then, staff has modified the process to clearly define some of the activities and increase involvement of the full City Council throughout the process.
FISCAL IMPACT
In this FY 2021/22 Mid-Year Budget Report, staff recommends budget adjustments as summarized below and described in detail in Attachment A. (The bracketed number related to each change references a corresponding entry in Attachment A.) • Net increase in General Fund revenue of $259,187, offset by a net increase in expenditures of $537,476. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]
• Net increase in Measure S 2006 Fund revenue of $278,000. [7] • Net increase in Measure S 2014 Fund revenue of $278,000, offset by a net increase in expenditures of $7,207. [8] [9]
• Increase in NPDES Storm Water Fund expenditures of $17,000. [10] • Net increase in Recreation Fund revenue of $193,975, offset by a net decrease in expenditures of $125,658. [11] [12] [13]
• Increase in Building and Planning Fund expenditures of $305,000. [14] • Increase in Measure C/J Fund revenue of $73,948. [15] • Net increase in City Street Improvements Fund revenue of $289,594, offset by a net increase in expenditures of $247,000. [16] [17]
• Increase in Sewer Enterprise Fund expenditures of $70,000. [18] • Increase in Information Systems Fund of $220,000, offset by an increase in expenditures of $220,000. [19] [20]
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – FY 2021/22 Mid-Year Budget Review Summary by Fund Attachment B – Resolution Adjusting Fiscal Year 2021/22 Budget Attachment C – Revised Development Process for FY 2022/23 Budget and LongTerm Financial Plan 142 of 153
Projected
Year-End Notes
4,230,122 4,230,122 4,230,122 1,592,452 1,592,452 (2,637,670) 38% 4,230,122 4,224,661 4,224,661 259,187 4,483,848 1,864,283 1,864,283 (2,619,565) 42% 4,483,848 [1] 1,915,000 1,915,000 1,915,000 965,729 965,729 (949,271) 50% 1,915,000 779,000 779,000 779,000 234,361 234,361 (544,639) 30% 779,000 418,000 418,000 418,000 250,755 250,755 (167,245) 60% 418,000 382,000 382,000 382,000 179,867 179,867 (202,133) 47% 382,000 2,082,883 2,082,883 2,082,883 1,028,682 1,028,682 (1,054,202) 49% 2,082,883 1,339,796 1,339,796 1,339,796 743,724 743,724 (596,072) 56% 1,339,796 1,065,394 1,065,394 1,065,394 138,723 138,723 (926,671) 13% 1,065,394 16,436,856 16,436,856 259,187 16,696,043 6,998,574 6,998,574 (9,697,469) 42% 16,696,043 853,686 853,686 853,686 - - (853,686) 0% 853,686
17,290,542 17,290,542 259,187 17,549,729 6,998,574 - 6,998,574 (10,551,155) 40% 17,549,729 176,609 176,609 176,609 93,998 93,998 82,611 53% 176,609 562,708 586,538 586,538 214,754 214,754 371,784 37% 586,538 450,393 450,393 450,393 140,569 140,569 309,824 31% 450,393 8,693 8,693 8,693 4,525 4,525 4,168 52% 8,693
310,200 310,200 310,200 173,771 173,771 136,429 56% 310,200 554,891 554,891 11,955 566,846 268,167 268,167 298,679 47% 566,846 [2] 493,626 493,626 25,000 518,626 144,545 144,545 374,081 28% 518,626 [3] 1,397,087 1,397,087 1,397,087 658,607 658,607 738,480 47% 1,397,087 3,954,207 3,978,037 36,955 4,014,992 1,698,936 - 1,698,936 2,316,056 42% 4,014,992 7,609,879 7,671,160 44,791 7,715,951 3,654,423 57,081 3,711,504 4,004,446 48% 7,715,951 [4] 3,925,759 3,965,759 3,965,759 1,834,422 1,834,422 2,131,337 46% 3,965,759 11,535,638 11,636,919 44,791 11,681,710 5,488,845 57,081 5,545,926 6,135,784 47% 11,681,710 2,128,337 2,128,337 10,500 2,138,837 446,282 9,763 456,045 1,682,793 21% 2,138,837 [5] 369,885 369,885 369,885 87,105 87,105 282,779 24% 369,885 427,025 427,025 427,025 68,294 68,294 358,731 16% 427,025 576,107 576,107 576,107 576,091 576,091 16 100% 576,107 702,955 1,897,670 418,631 2,316,301 949,715 949,715 1,366,586 41% 2,316,301 [6] 19,694,153 21,013,979 510,877 21,524,856 9,315,267 66,844 9,382,111 (12,142,745) 44% 21,524,856 (2,403,611) (3,723,437) (251,690) (3,975,127) (2,316,693) (66,844) (2,383,537) 1,591,591 60% (3,975,127) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 5,937,352 5,937,352 5,937,352 5,937,352 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 3,533,741 2,213,915 1,962,225 3,620,659 NOTES:
[1] Increase budget to align with updated sales tax projections provided by sales tax consultant, HdL. [2] Increase for the difference in cost for cost allocation plan/user fee study ($6,960) and financial forecasting software ($4,995). [3] Increase to cover contractual costs for personnel-related professional services for the rest of the fiscal year. [4] Increase for Police GPS software subscription ($13,815), Axon body camera storage software ($14,976), and standby pay ($16,000) all of which were not budgeted. [5] Increase for fuel costs (4,500) and Trakit software subscription ($6,000). [6] Increase transfer out to Recreation Department Fund to close budget gap due to lower-than-budget program revenues.
Public Safety Charges
Public Works Total:
Community Development Total:
General Fund Total:
Community Services Total:
Debt Service:
Operating Transfer Out:
General Fund Net Results
Fire Department Total:
Total Public Safety:
Police Department Total:
Revenue Total:
Total Administrative:
Penison Trust 115 Transfer
Expenditures
Human Resources Total:
Fund: 100 - General Fund
Revenue
Property Taxes
Proposed
Adjustments
Other Taxes: TOT
Intergovernmental Taxes
Franchise Taxes
Sales and Use Taxes
Utility Users Tax
Other Taxes: Business License
Non-Departmental Total:
Finance Department Total:
City Clerk Total:
City Attorney Total:
City Treasurer Total:
City Council Total:
City Manager Total:
Total Other Revenue
Sources Total
City of Pinole, CA For FY2021/22 Period Ending: 12/31/21 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances
Amended
Budget Total
Percent
Used
ATTACHMENT A
143 of 153
Projected
Year-End Notes
Proposed
Adjustments
City of Pinole, CA For FY2021/22 Period Ending: 12/31/21 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances
Amended
Budget Total
Percent
Used
2,142,000 2,142,000 278,000 2,420,000 1,012,582 1,012,582 (1,407,418) 42% 2,420,000 [7] 20,000 20,000 20,000 (2,637) (2,637) (22,637) -13% 20,000 1,746 1,746 1,746 - - (1,746) 0% 1,746
2,163,746 2,163,746 278,000 2,441,746 1,009,945 1,009,945 (1,431,801) 41% 2,441,746 - - - - - - 0% -
2,163,746 2,163,746 278,000 2,441,746 1,009,945 - 1,009,945 (1,431,801) 41% 2,441,746 2,450 2,450 2,450 - - 2,450 0% 2,450
1,844,668 1,875,668 1,875,668 838,695 838,695 1,036,973 45% 1,875,668 681,234 681,234 681,234 332,765 332,765 348,469 49% 681,234 2,528,352 2,559,352 - 2,559,352 1,171,459 1,171,459 1,387,893 46% 2,559,352 (364,606) (395,606) 278,000 (117,606) (161,515) (161,515) (43,909) 137% (117,606) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 2,385,431 2,385,431 2,385,431 2,385,431 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 2,020,825 1,989,825 2,267,825 2,223,916 2,142,000 2,142,000 278,000 2,420,000 1,011,168 1,011,168 (1,408,832) 42% 2,420,000 [8] 30,000 30,000 30,000 (7,533) (7,533) (37,533) -25% 30,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 - - (1,000) 0% 1,000
2,173,000 2,173,000 278,000 2,451,000 1,003,635 1,003,635 (1,447,365) 41% 2,451,000 - - - - - - 0% -
2,173,000 2,173,000 278,000 2,451,000 1,003,635 - 1,003,635 (1,447,365) 41% 2,451,000 5,900 5,900 5,900 - - 5,900 0% 5,900
2,450 2,450 2,450 - - 2,450 0% 2,450
102,600 102,600 102,600 - - 102,600 0% 102,600
305,807 305,807 305,807 50,606 37,769 88,375 217,432 29% 305,807 445,249 445,249 445,249 222,626 222,626 222,623 50% 445,249 2,318,421 2,971,445 2,971,445 210,141 360,257 570,398 2,401,047 19% 2,971,445 20,000 20,000 20,000 - - 20,000 0% 20,000
63,950 63,950 7,207 71,157 - - 71,157 0% 71,157 [9]
3,264,377 3,917,401 7,207 3,924,608 483,373 398,026 881,399 3,043,209 22% 3,924,608 715,500 715,500 715,500 - - 715,500 0% 715,500
(1,806,877) (2,459,901) 270,793 (2,189,108) 520,262 (398,026) 122,237 2,311,345 -6% (2,189,108) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 4,480,908 4,480,908 4,480,908 4,480,908 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 2,674,031 2,021,007 2,291,800 5,001,171 - - - (46,104) (46,104) (46,104) 0% 149,855
- 949,715 949,715 949,715 949,715 - 100% 949,715
- 949,715 - 949,715 903,611 903,611 (46,104) 95% 1,099,570 Fund Balance July 1, 2021 7,492,770 7,492,770 7,492,770 7,492,770 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 7,492,770 8,442,485 8,442,485 8,396,381 NOTES:
[7] Increase budget to align with updated sales tax projections provided by sales tax consultant, HdL. [8] Increase budget to align with updated sales tax projections provided by sales tax consultant, HdL. [9] Increase to appropriate funds that were not used in the prior fiscal year to replace appliances at the Senior Center.
Expenditures Total:
Fund: 150 - General Reserve
Measure S-2014 Net Results:
General Reserve Net Results:
Revenue Total:
Revenue
Sales and Use Taxes
Finance Department Total:
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Information Systems Total:
Police Department Total:
City Council Department Total:
Operating Transfer Out:
Community Development Total:
Transfer In Total:
Fund: 105 - Measure S -2006
Revenue Total:
Interest and Investment Income
Revenue
Sales and Use Taxes
Total Other Revenue
Penison Trust 115 Transfer
Sources Total
Penison Trust 115 Transfer
Sources Total
Fire Department Total:
Measure S -2006 Net Results:
Fund: 106 - Measure S-2014
Expenditures Total:
Interest and Investment Income
Reimbursements
Expenditures
Police Department Total:
Finance Department Total:
Public Works Total:
Fire Department Total:
Community Services Total:
144 of 153
Projected
Year-End Notes
Proposed
Adjustments
City of Pinole, CA For FY2021/22 Period Ending: 12/31/21 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances
Amended
Budget Total
Percent
Used
- - - - - 0% -
80,000 80,000 80,000 - 103,722 103,722 23,722 130% 103,722 5,000 5,000 5,000 - - (5,000) 0% 5,000
85,000 85,000 - 85,000 - - (85,000) 0% 108,722
274,000 274,000 274,000 36,476 36,476 237,524 13% 274,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 - - 5,000 0% 5,000
279,000 279,000 279,000 36,476 36,476 242,524 13% 279,000 (194,000) (194,000) (194,000) (36,476) (36,476) 157,524 19% (170,278) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 243,408 243,408 243,408 243,408 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 49,408 49,408 49,408 206,932 919,303 919,303 919,303 412,046 412,046 507,257 45% 919,303 1,074,728 1,074,728 1,074,728 232,961 232,961 841,767 22% 1,074,728 (155,425) (155,425) (155,425) 179,085 - 179,085 334,510 -115% (155,425) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 356,517 356,517 356,517 356,517 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 201,092 201,092 201,092 535,602 39,991 39,991 39,991 475 475 39,516 1% 39,991
26,000 26,000 26,000 8,213 8,213 17,787 32% 26,000
13,991 13,991 13,991 (7,738) (7,738) (21,729) -55% 13,991 Fund Balance July 1, 2021 181,183 181,183 181,183 181,183 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 195,175 195,175 195,175 173,445 172,766 172,766 172,766 98,399 98,399 (74,367) 57% 172,766 204,574 204,574 204,574 96,381 96,381 108,193 47% 204,574 (31,808) (31,808) (31,808) 2,018 2,018 33,826 -6% (31,808) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 410,914 410,914 410,914 410,914 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 379,106 379,106 379,106 412,932 46,500 46,500 46,500 15,312 15,312 (31,188) 33% 46,500
20,261 20,261 20,261 4,422 4,422 15,839 22% 20,261
26,239 26,239 26,239 10,890 10,890 (15,349) 42% 26,239
Fund Balance July 1, 2021 234,979 234,979 234,979 234,979 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 261,218 261,218 261,218 245,869 158,327 158,327 158,327 133,827 133,827 (24,500) 85% 158,327 104,188 104,188 104,188 51,635 51,635 52,553 50% 104,188 54,139 54,139 54,139 82,193 82,193 28,054 152% 54,139
Fund Balance July 1, 2021 328,953 328,953 328,953 328,953 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 383,092 383,092 383,092 411,145 Fire Department Total:
Restricted Real Estate Maint Fund Net Results:
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Expenditures Total:
Traffic Safety Fund Net Results:
Fund: 206 - Supplemental Law Enforcement Svc Fund
Fund: 205 - Traffic Safety Fund
Revenue Total:
Sup Law Enforce Svc Fund Net Results:
Public Safety Augmentation Fund Net Results:
Fund: 203 - Public Safety Augmentation Fund
Expenditures Total:
Revenue Total:
Gas Tax Fund Net Results:
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Community Development Total:
Expenditures Total:
Fund: 200 - Gas Tax Fund
Community Development Total:
Public Works Total:
Equipment Reserve Net Results:
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Fund: 201 - Restricted Real Estate Maintenance Fund
Public Works Total:
Fund: 160 - Equipment Reserve
Revenue
145 of 153
Projected
Year-End Notes
Proposed
Adjustments
City of Pinole, CA For FY2021/22 Period Ending: 12/31/21 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances
Amended
Budget Total
Percent
Used
324,128 324,128 324,128 164,164 164,164 (159,964) 51% 324,128 420,685 420,685 17,000 437,685 150,183 150,183 287,502 34% 437,685 [10] (96,557) (96,557) (96,557) 13,982 13,982 127,539 -14% (96,557) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 1,853 1,853 1,853 1,853
Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 (94,704) (94,704) (94,704) 15,835 519,922 519,922 (224,656) 295,266 135,107 135,107 (160,159) 46% 295,266 [11] 673,331 673,331 418,631 1,091,962 - (1,091,962) 0% 1,091,962 [12] 1,193,253 1,193,253 193,975 1,387,228 135,107 - 135,107 (1,252,121) 10% 1,387,228 1,542,048 1,542,048 (125,658) 1,416,390 630,402 630,402 785,988 45% 1,416,390 [13] (348,795) (348,795) (29,162) (495,295) (495,295) (466,133) 1698% (29,162) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 29,162 29,162 29,162 29,162
Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 (319,634) (319,634) (0) (466,133) 1,605,700 1,605,700 1,605,700 397,029 397,029 (1,208,671) 25% 1,605,700 - 245,000 245,000 - - (245,000) 0% 245,000
1,605,700 1,850,700 - 1,850,700 397,029 - 397,029 (1,453,671) 21% 1,850,700 1,727,753 1,972,753 305,000 2,277,753 556,975 556,975 1,720,778 24% 2,277,753 [14] (122,053) (122,053) (305,000) (427,053) (159,946) (159,946) 267,107 37% (427,053) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 (134,313) (134,313) (134,313) (134,313) Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 (256,366) (256,366) (561,366) (294,259) 66,060 66,060 66,060 30,517 30,517 (35,543) 46% 66,060
140,858 140,858 140,858 59,154 59,154 81,704 42% 140,858 (74,798) (74,798) (74,798) (28,637) (28,637) 46,161 38% (74,798) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 192,376 192,376 192,376 192,376 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 117,578 117,578 117,578 163,739 368,000 368,000 368,000 176,699 176,699 (191,301) 48% 368,000 761,445 761,445 761,445 140,407 88,417 228,824 532,621 30% 761,445 (393,445) (393,445) (393,445) 36,292 (52,125) 341,320 13% (393,445) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 1,863,362 1,863,362 1,863,362 1,863,362 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 1,469,917 1,469,917 1,469,917 1,899,654 398,147 398,147 73,948 472,095 472,095 472,095 (0) 100% 472,095 [15] 937,189 937,189 937,189 110,146 110,146 827,043 12% 937,189 (539,042) (539,042) (539,042) 361,948 361,948 827,042 -67% (465,094) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 2,057,182 2,057,182 2,057,182 2,057,182 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 1,518,140 1,518,140 1,518,140 2,419,130 NOTES:
[10] Increase for upcoming NPDES compliance.
[11] Decrease revenue due to lower-than-projected program revenues. [12] Increase transfer in from General Fund to close budget gap. Amount will be trued up based on the actual shortfall at year-end. [13] Decrease expenditures due to lower-than-projected program costs. [14] Increase expenditures for 4Leaf contract for temporary permit technician and building official ($65,000), M-Group contract for temporary staffing ($20,000), and Trakit subscription ($220,000). [15] Increase budget to align with actual revenue received.
Measure C and J Fund Net Results:
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Expenditures Total:
Fund: 215 - Measure C and J Fund
Revenue Total:
Building & Planning Net Results:
Fund: 213 - Refuse Management Fund
Refuse Management Fund Net Results:
Fund: 214 - Solid Waste Fund
Fund: 207 - NPDES Storm Water Fund
Expenditures Total:
Revenue Total:
Recreation Fund Net Results:
Expenditures Total:
Fund: 212 - Building & Planning
NPDES Storm Water Fund Net Results:
Revenue Total:
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Fund: 209 - Recreation Fund
Sources Total
Solid Waste Fund Net Results:
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Operating Transfers in:
Sources Total
Operating Transfers In:
146 of 153
Projected
Year-End Notes
Proposed
Adjustments
City of Pinole, CA For FY2021/22 Period Ending: 12/31/21 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances
Amended
Budget Total
Percent
Used
- - - 17,203 17,203 17,203 0% 34,406
- - - - - - 0% -
- - - 17,203 17,203 17,203 0% 34,406
Fund Balance July 1, 2021 184,676 184,676 184,676 184,676 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 184,676 184,676 184,676 201,879 - 2,302,505 2,302,505 2,302,505 2,302,505 - 100% 2,302,505 - 300,000 300,000 58,415 58,415 241,585 19% 416,829
- 2,002,505 2,002,505 2,244,090 2,244,090 241,585 112% 1,885,676 Fund Balance July 1, 2021 - - - -
Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 - 2,002,505 2,002,505 2,244,090 - - - (111) (111) (111) 0% (222)
86,562 86,562 86,562 15,000 15,000 71,562 0% 86,562
(86,562) (86,562) (86,562) (15,111) (15,111) 71,451 0% (86,784) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 87,341 87,341 87,341 87,341
Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 779 779 779 72,231 - - 4,166 4,166 4,166 0% 8,331
- - - - - 0% -
- - 4,166 4,166 4,166 0% 8,331
Fund Balance July 1, 2021 27,417 27,417 27,417 27,417
Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 27,417 27,417 27,417 31,583 - - - (160) (160) (160) 0% (320)
- - - - - - 0% -
- - - (160) (160) (160) 0% (320)
Fund Balance July 1, 2021 104,448 104,448 104,448 104,448 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 104,448 104,448 104,448 104,288 229,834 229,834 229,834 (198) (198) (230,032) 0% 229,834 258,000 258,000 258,000 11,225 11,225 246,775 4% 258,000 (28,166) (28,166) (28,166) (11,423) (11,423) 16,743 41% (28,166) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 141,492 141,492 141,492 141,492 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 113,326 113,326 113,326 130,069 American Rescue Plan Act Fund Net Results:
Revenue Total:
Growth Impact Fund Net Results:
Expenditures Total:
Expenditures Total:
Expenditures Total:
CASp Certification and Training Fund Net Results:
Revenue Total:
Parkland Dedication Fund Net Results:
Fund: 276 - Growth Impact Fund
Fund: 225 - Asset Seizure-Adjudicated Fund
Asset Seizure-Adjudicated Fund Net Results:
Fund: 226 - CASp Certification and Training Fund
Expenditures Total:
Revenue Total:
Revenue Total:
Fund: 275 - Parkland Dedication Fund
Fund: 216 - Rate Stabilization Fund
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Rate Stabilization Fund Net Results:
Fund: 217 - American Rescue Plan Act Fund
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
147 of 153
Projected
Year-End Notes
Proposed
Adjustments
City of Pinole, CA For FY2021/22 Period Ending: 12/31/21 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances
Amended
Budget Total
Percent
Used
1,733,692 1,733,692 1,733,692 (6,191) (6,191) (1,739,883) 0% 1,733,692 228,798 228,798 228,798 40,655 40,655 188,143 18% 228,798 1,504,894 1,504,894 1,504,894 (46,846) (46,846) (1,551,740) -3% 1,504,894 Fund Balance July 1, 2021 7,835,513 7,835,513 7,835,513 7,835,513 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 9,340,407 9,340,407 9,340,407 7,788,667 62,268 62,268 62,268 27,372 27,372 (34,896) 44% 62,268
62,125 62,125 62,125 12,503 12,503 49,622 20% 62,125
143 143 143 14,869 14,869 14,726 10405% 143
Fund Balance July 1, 2021 35,953 35,953 35,953 35,953
Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 36,095 36,095 36,095 50,822 15,000 15,000 15,000 - - (15,000) 0% 15,000
14,755 14,755 14,755 1,830 1,830 12,925 12% 14,755
245 245 245 (1,830) (1,830) (2,075) -747% 245
Fund Balance July 1, 2021 (327) (327) (327) (327)
Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 (82) (82) (82) (2,156) 70,000 70,000 70,000 - - 70,000 0% 70,000
(70,000) (70,000) (70,000) - - 70,000 0% (70,000)
Fund Balance July 1, 2021 541,649 541,649 541,649 541,649 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 471,649 471,649 471,649 541,649 - - 289,594 289,594 289,594 289,594 (0) 100% 289,594 [16] 250,000 250,000 250,000 - - (250,000) 0% 250,000
250,000 250,000 289,594 539,594 289,594 289,594 (250,000) 54% 829,188 1,281,102 1,281,102 247,000 1,528,102 236,213 501,116 737,328 790,774 48% 1,528,102 (1,031,102) (1,031,102) 42,594 (988,508) 53,381 501,116 (447,735) 540,773 45% (698,914) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 1,246,864 1,246,864 1,246,864 1,246,864 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 215,762 215,762 258,356 1,300,245 - - - (39) (39) (39) 0% (78)
189,758 189,758 189,758 - - 189,758 0% 189,758
(189,758) (189,758) (189,758) (39) (39) 189,719 0% (189,836) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 25,521 25,521 25,521 25,521
Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 (164,237) (164,237) (164,237) 25,482 250,000 250,000 250,000 - - (250,000) 0% 250,000
775,297 775,297 775,297 7,566 40,318 47,884 727,413 6% 775,297 (525,297) (525,297) (525,297) (7,566) 40,318 (47,884) 477,413 9% (525,297) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 788,574 788,574 788,574 788,574 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 263,277 263,277 263,277 781,009 NOTES:
[16] Increase revenue for transportation-related grants received: Bridge Replacement Grant ($156,960), Transportation for Livable Communities ($131,183), Highway Bridge Program ($1,451).
Revenue Total:
Sources Total:
Fund: 325 - City Street Improvements
Expenditures Total:
Revenue Total:
Fund: 377 - Arterial Streets Rehabilitation Fund
Fund: 327 - Park Grants (Measure WW)
City Street Improvements Net Results:
Pinole Valley Caretaker Fund Net Results:
Expenditures Total:
Arterial Streets Rehabilitation Fund Net Results:
Park Grants (Measure WW) Net Results:
Expenditures Total:
Operating transfers in Total:
Expenditures Total:
Operating transfers in Total:
Fund: 324 - Public Facilities Fund
Public Facilities Fund Net Results:
Revenue Total:
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Fund: 310 - Lighting & Landscape Districts
Housing Land Held for Resale Net Results:
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Lighting & Landscape Districts Net Results:
Expenditures Total:
Fund: 317 - Pinole Valley Caretaker Fund
Fund: 285 - Housing Land Held for Resale
148 of 153
Projected
Year-End Notes
Proposed
Adjustments
City of Pinole, CA For FY2021/22 Period Ending: 12/31/21 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances
Amended
Budget Total
Percent
Used
7,897,500 7,897,500 7,897,500 4,033,524 4,033,524 (3,863,976) 51% 7,897,500 - - - - - - 0% -
7,897,500 7,897,500 7,897,500 4,033,524 - 4,033,524 (3,863,976) 51% 7,897,500 9,265,093 9,265,093 70,000 9,335,093 2,978,887 473,432 3,452,318 5,882,774 37% 9,335,093 [17] (1,367,593) (1,367,593) (70,000) (1,437,593) 1,054,637 (473,432) 581,206 2,018,798 -40% (1,437,593) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 21,399,210 21,399,210 21,399,210 21,399,210 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 20,031,618 20,031,618 19,961,618 22,453,848 - - - 505 505 505 0% 1,010
- - 283,925 283,925 (283,925) 0% 567,851
- - - (283,420) (283,420) (283,420) 0% (566,841)
Fund Balance July 1, 2021 2,365,557 2,365,557 2,365,557 2,365,557 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 2,365,557 2,365,557 2,365,557 2,082,137 374,928 374,928 374,928 83,541 83,541 (291,387) 22% 374,928 160,124 160,124 160,124 - - (160,124) 0% 160,124
535,052 535,052 535,052 83,541 - 83,541 (451,511) 16% 535,052 570,765 570,765 570,765 211,750 27,974 239,724 331,041 42% 570,765 (35,713) (35,713) (35,713) (128,209) (128,209) (120,470) 359% (35,713) Fund Balance July 1, 2021 (3,132) (3,132) (3,132) (3,132) Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 (38,845) (38,845) (38,845) (131,341) 1,011,526 1,011,526 226,000 1,237,526 343,846 343,846 (893,680) 34% 1,237,526 [18] (1,011,526) (1,011,526) (226,000) (1,237,526) (342,843) (342,843) 894,683 28% (1,237,526) [19] 0 0 - 1,003 1,003 0 0% -
Fund Balance July 1, 2021 (196,169) (196,169) (196,169) (196,169) Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 (196,169) (196,169) (196,169) (195,166) - - - 329,302 329,302 329,302 0% 771,572
- - 44,539 44,539 (44,539) 0% 89,079
- - - 284,762 284,762 284,762 0% 682,493
Fund Balance July 1, 2021 19,442,495 19,442,495 19,442,495 19,442,495 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 19,442,495 19,442,495 19,442,495 19,727,258 250,000 250,000 250,000 - (250,000) 0% 250,000
194,899 194,899 194,899 106,752 106,752 88,147 55% 194,899 55,101 55,101 55,101 (106,752) (106,752) (161,853) -194% 55,101 Fund Balance July 1, 2021 5,245,258 5,245,258 5,245,258 5,245,258 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2022 5,300,359 5,300,359 5,300,359 5,138,507 NOTES:
[17] Increase expenditures for emergency project at Tennent and Pinon Avenue. [18] Increase for Trakit software subscription for the Community Development Department and Public Works Department. [19] Increase in reimbursement credit for costs that will be charged to the Community Development Department and Public Works for the procurement of the Trakit software subscriptions.
Pension Fund Net Results:
Cable Access TV Net Results:
Expenditures Total:
Fund: 525 - Information Systems
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Recognized Obligation Retirement Fund Net Results:
Fund: 750 - Recognized Obligation Retirement Fund
Indirect cost allocations Total:
Information Systems Net Results:
Fund: 700 - Pension Fund
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Plant Expansion Fund Net Results:
Fund: 505 - Cable Access TV
Revenue Total:
Fund: 503 - Plant Expansion Fund
Sewer Enterprise Fund Net Results:
Expenditures Total:
Fund: 500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Penison Trust 115 Transfer
Sources Total
Operating transfers in Total:
Sources Total
149 of 153
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-xx
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING THE CITY BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021/22
WHEREAS, the City Council did adopt a Budget for City Operations by Resolution number 2021-51 on June 29, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did adopt adjustments to the City Operations Budget by Resolution number 2021-104 on November 16, 2021; and WHEREAS, the Finance Director has presented proposed
recommendations for amendment of the adopted budget for the City Operations for Fiscal Year 2021/22 as part of a Mid-Year Budget Review at the regular City Council Meeting held on March 1, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered these recommended changes, as to the matter of the City budget; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has solicited public input on the proposed amendments to the fiscal year 2021/22 City Operations Budget.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pinole as follows:
Amendments to the budget and program of services for the City of Pinole for Fiscal Year 2021/22 commencing July 1, 2021 and ending June 30, 2022 are hereby approved and adopted, as set forth in Exhibit #1 (herein incorporated).
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of March 2022, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced, passed and adopted on this 1st day of March, 2022.
______________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT B
150 of 153
FY 2021/22 Mid-Year Adjustments
EXHIBIT 1
Measure C/J Fund (215)
Revenue $73,948
City Street Improvements (325)
Revenue $289,594
Expenditures $247,000
Sewer Enterprise Fund (500)
Expenditures $70,000
Information Systems Fund (525)
Expenditure Credit
Expenditures
-$226,000
$226,000
General Fund (100)
Revenue
Expenditures
$259,187
$537,476
Measure S 2006 Fund (105)
Revenue $278,000
Measure S 2014 Fund (106)
Revenue $278,000
Expenditures $7,207
NPDES Storm Water Fund (207)
Expenditures $17,000
Recreation Fund (209)
Revenue $193,975
Expenditures -$125,658
Building & Planning Fund (212)
Expenditures $305,000
151 of 153
Development Process for FY 2022/23 Budget Development and Long-Term Financial Plan