Pinole City Council
April 30, 2024

CITY COUNCIL
Maureen Toms, Mayor
Cameron Sasai, Mayor Pro Tem
Anthony Tave, Council Member
Norma Martínez-Rubin, Council Member
Devin T. Murphy, Council Member

PINOLE CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL MEETING BUDGET WORKSHOP AGENDA
April 30, 2024
5:00 PM
Attend in Person: PINOLE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 2131 PEAR STREET OR
2200 K Street Sacramento, CA 95816 (TELECONFERENCE, MAYOR PRO TEM SASAI) OR
Attend VIA ZOOM TELECONFERENCE – Details provided below How to Submit Public Comments:

In Person:

Attend meeting at the Pinole City Council Chambers, fill out a yellow public comment card and submit it to the City Clerk.

Via Zoom:

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 (subject to modification by the Mayor) • 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.

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.

City Council
Agenda - April 30, 2024

City Council
Agenda - April 30, 2024

OTHER WAYS TO WATCH THE MEETING
LIVE ON CHANNEL 26. They are retelecast the following week. 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.

City Council
Agenda - April 30, 2024

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. 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

5. WORKSHOP ITEMS
A. Strategic Financial Planning Report Action: Receive a Report (Markisha Guillory) B. Fiscal Year (FY) 2024/25 Preliminary Operating Funds Baseline Budget and City Council Requests for FY 2024/25 Budget Changes Action: Receive a Report and Provide Direction (Markisha Guillory)
C. Draft Fiscal Year (FY) 2024/25 - FY 2028/29 Capital Improvement Plan Budget Action:

Receive Report and Provide Direction (Sanjay Mishra)

6. ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting of May 7, 2024 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, and on the City’s website, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date set forth on this agenda. _______________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
POSTED: April 25, 2024 at 4:00 pm

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 5.A.

DATE: APRIL 30, 2024
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: MARKISHA GUILLORY, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: STRATEGIC FINANCIAL PLANNING REPORT

RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the City Council receive the Strategic Financial Planning Report which will be used as the basis of the Long-Term Financial Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024/25 - FY 2044/45 and direct staff to make any changes.

BACKGROUND
In February 2020, the City Council adopted the City of Pinole Strategic Plan 2020 – 2025. The Strategic Plan identified four goals for the City (safe and resilient, financially stable, vibrant and beautiful, and high performance), and 22 individual strategies (special projects) to complete over a five-year timeframe.

One of the strategies under the goal of a financially stable Pinole is to “develop a long-term financial plan (LTFP) and use it to guide budget and financial decisions (including policies regarding reserves and management of liabilities).” The City developed its first Long-Term Financial Plan, in spring 2021 to address this Strategic Plan strategy. As an ongoing practice, staff updates the LTFP periodically, usually during the budget development process.

A long-term financial forecast estimates an entity’s future revenues and expenditures based on assumptions about the entity’s future activities and operating environment. The purpose of a long-term financial forecast is to identify future financial opportunities and challenges.

For a number of years, the City has created long-term financial forecasts as part of the LongTerm Financial Plan (LTFP) and annual operating and capital budget. The City has particularly focused on long-term “status quo” forecasts for the General Fund. A status quo financial forecast estimates the City’s future revenues and expenditures if the City maintains status quo (current) service and staffing levels. Such a forecast answers the question of whether the City is expected to have a balanced budget (revenues equal or exceed expenditures) in the future if the City does not change anything about its service, staffing levels, and revenue mechanisms.

The forecast focuses on the General Fund because it is the largest and most flexible pool of City resources.

The City engaged the consulting firm, Baker Tilly, to assist the City with strategic financial planning, including:
• Developing an understanding of current fiscal conditions and service levels.

• Reviewing the City’s financial forecast and extending it to twenty years. • Identifying gaps between current conditions and desired conditions as well as funding gaps.
• Developing strategies in conjunction with City staff to close any identified gaps. • Working with staff to gather feedback from elected officials and the public on potential budget strategies.
• Developing a draft and final long-term financial plan.

The goal of this effort is for the City to identify economic opportunities and challenges beyond the annual budget year, and to proactively address them by instituting various revenue enhancement and expenditure reduction strategies to achieve long-term fiscal sustainability.

Baker Tilly has developed the attached Strategic Financial Planning Report (Attachment A) which serves as the basis for the Long-Term Financial Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024/25 - FY 2044/45. One important element of this report is a twenty-year baseline financial forecast which projects budget deficits over the twenty-year horizon, and identifies an array of options that might be used to balance the budget over the long term.

This report was presented to the Finance Subcommittee at its meeting on April 18, 2024. The Subcommittee did not direct staff to make any changes but recommended that the report be presented to the City Council during the special meeting (budget workshop) on April 30, 2024.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The Strategic Financial Planning Report identifies major economic trends that might impact future requests for City services or City revenues. As noted above, it includes a twenty-year forecast of the City’s General Fund (including the Measure S Funds) and is based on the City’s current services and revenue sources and assumptions about the future. The forecast anticipates that the General Fund will be essentially unbalanced throughout the twenty-year timeframe if actions are not taken to close the gap between ongoing revenues and ongoing expenditures. The report provides an array of potential revenue enhancement and expenditure reduction measures for the City Council to consider to continue providing essential services to the community as well as to address deferred capital needs and unfunded liabilities.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Strategic Financial Planning Report will serve as the basis of the Long-Term Financial Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024/25 - FY 2044/45 and will be a valuable resource for City leaders when they make future financial and operational decisions. The report does not itself require or authorize any expenditure of City funds, and therefore does not itself have any fiscal impact to the City.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Pinole Strategic Financial Planning Report 4.18.24

BAKER TILLY • 1730 MADISON ROAD • CINCINNATI, OH 45206 • 513 861 5400 • FAX 513 861 3480 To: Mayor and Council Members
City of Pinole
From: Andy Belknap, Managing Director
Steve Montano, Special Advisor
Jessica Oliphant, Senior Consultant
Subject: Strategic Financial Planning Report
Date: April 18, 2024
Executive Summary
The City of Pinole is a general law, full service, city with a population of approximately 19,000. It was incorporated in 1903, and for much of its history was associated with waterfront activity on the nearby San Pablo Bay, and as a service center for the California Powder Works (the largest dynamite manufacturer in the world, located adjacent to Pinole in Hercules and operational 1881-1976). Since the 1970s Pinole has evolved into a very desirable suburban residential location in the Bay Area.

Baker Tilly was engaged to complete a fiscal sustainability study for the City. In this type of analysis, a long-range fiscal forecast is developed and tested against various types of fiscal stress. This results in the development of a forecast fiscal condition and leads to the creation of different strategies to deal with the forecast conditions and maintain the solvency of the city into the future.

In this case our model projects the City will experience years of fiscal deficits that will progressively grow larger over the next twenty years. Basically, this is a result of expenditure levels consistently growing faster than general fund revenue sources.

Using this as a baseline, Baker Tilly was engaged to assist staff with developing a comprehensive long-term fiscal forecast that models the impact of various fiscal sustainability strategies and scenarios.

A workshop was conducted with the City Council on November 7, 2023, to allow the City Council to provide input into various budget strategies that were identified based on our experience in working with cities in fiscal sustainability/stabilization projects throughout the State. The City Council provided direction on strategies that it felt would be worthwhile to analyze further.

Additionally, Baker Tilly worked with staff to develop other strategies along a continuum that included:
• Revenue development,
• Expenditure control/cost shifts, and
• Policy changes.

Arraying ideas along such a continuum reflects the priority any organization would have for preserving service delivery to the maximum extent possible, consistent with maintaining solvency.

The strategies were developed based on a combination of factors, including Baker Tilly’s experience with approaches other cities and counties throughout the state are taking as they consider options to address structural deficits. We also identified ideas based on Pinole’s unique opportunities and organizational climate. Several potential strategies were developed in the categories described above.

An important element in developing an appropriate package of strategies for a city is the size and timing of the forecasted deficit. Pinole leaders must take action in the very near term to bring deficit reduction strategies online. Because revenue strategies often require voter approval, timing is a critical issue.

This memo consists of the following:

1. Current 20-year fiscal projection (baseline forecast) – This section discusses key assumptions used in estimating the baseline forecast model and projections of General Fund revenues, expenditures and fund balance over the next 20 years.

2. Strategy and Feasibility Assessment – This section discusses the various strategies the City can consider for addressing its structural deficit. While all the strategies are technically feasible and have been implemented in other California settings, they are distinguished by differing levels of potential community support and complexity of implementation.

3. Budget Scenarios – This section discusses three scenarios for the City Council’s consideration. Each scenario contains examples of the types of strategies that the City Council could consider to address the long-term fiscal gap.

Baseline Forecast
The baseline forecast assumes that the City continues current (status quo) staffing levels, service levels, and programs in the future and that the City does not establish

any new revenue-generating or expenditure reduction mechanisms. For the status quo forecast, staff assumed that future City service levels would remain at the levels of FY 2023-24. Staff and Baker Tilly then forecasted revenues and expenditures for twenty succeeding years by applying assumptions about future changes in economic conditions that impact revenues and expenditures.

The baseline forecast indicates that the General Fund annual deficit will increase from $974,000 in FY 2024-25 to $10.6 million by FY 2044-45. This is largely due to the cost of the addressing increasing employer contributions to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS); postemployment benefits (OPEB) for retired City employees’ medical insurance coverage; recent organizational changes in the past few years that have resulted in additional costs relating to increased staffing and MOU increases; and the exhaustion of the City’s Section 115 pension liability trust fund.

The baseline forecast trend is shown in Figure 1 and the General Fund balance forecast appears in Figure 2.

Figure 1. Baseline (Status Quo) Scenario

Figure 2. Baseline Scenario: Fund Balance Forecast
Given the size and timing of the forecasted deficit, City leaders need to implement revenue and expenditure adjustments relatively quickly. Absent such actions, there would almost certainly be the need to implement even more significant service level reductions in the future, which represent the least desirable outcome. Such an approach might require positions to be left vacant, or even to consider layoffs, to preserve solvency. In addition, such actions are always disruptive to an organization and often affect operations for a long time.

Pinole leaders must take action in the near term to bring deficit reduction strategies online. Because revenue strategies are less disruptive to service levels and organizational stability than other approaches they are often preferred, however, they, often require voter approval, making timing is a critical issue.

Strategy and Feasibility Assessment
Detailed budget strategies are organized according to the following four strategy types:
• Revenue Enhancements. Maintaining service levels by increasing the resources available to pay for those services through new or increased revenues. • Expenditure Controls/Cost Shifts. Maintaining service levels through reductions in expenditures or shifting the cost burden away from the General Fund. • Service Delivery and Governance Changes. Maintaining service levels by changing the way that services are delivered, either through fiscal governance practices, contracting for services or insourcing services from other agencies. • Service Level Reductions. If the above strategy types do not yield sufficient fiscal savings to the General Fund, the City would need to explore service level reduction strategies in order to achieve fiscal sustainability. This is considered a

strategy of least desirability due to negative impacts on residents, and municipal infrastructure.

Determining Feasibility
While all the strategies are technically feasible and have been implemented in other California settings, they are distinguished by differing levels of potential community support, complexity of implementation, implementation timing, and disruption to the organization relative to the financial return. Strategies deemed most feasible are solutions that can be implemented more readily and would be least disruptive to the organization. Certain revenue changes such as tax measures, require voter approval to implement and vary in terms of complexity and community support. Some have a greater impact on voters (e.g., local sales tax measures) while others have more of an impact on those from outside the city (e.g., transient occupancy taxes). While the community’s receptivity to changes in the City’s utility users’ tax (UUT) and business license tax is unknown, sales taxes have received support in the past.

Voters are more likely to support measures when they know their tax dollars are being spent efficiently, requiring the City to review cost efficiencies prior to taking those measures to voters. These factors require careful consideration in determining the feasibility of revenue enhancements. Proposed changes that impact the organization will take time because they may be the subject of mandatory bargaining with the City’s labor groups. Substantial changes in service delivery methodologies or employee benefit programs should also be weighed against the reality that they might result in ongoing employee relations issues, resulting in less incremental change. Again, because the City has time, but not a lot of it, choices need to be made accordingly.

The strategies identified herein have been quantified to the extent possible, based on current information available to Baker Tilly and City staff. In many cases, they have been programmed into the financial forecast so City leaders can explore the cumulative impact of implementing any package of actions. Based on these considerations, budget strategies were qualitatively evaluated considering the set of criteria indicated in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Criteria Used in Evaluating Budget Strategies
Factors Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
Potential for community support High Medium Low
Technical and operational ease of
implementation
High Medium Low
Timing necessary for
implementation
Timely
implementation is
Timely
implementation is
Timely
implementation is

Factors Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3
moderately to highly
probable to meet
timing required to
resolve the structural
deficit
possible, but less
than moderately
probable
unlikely to meet
the timing
required to
resolve the
structural deficit
Disruptive impact on service
delivery
Low Medium High
Disruptive impact within City
organization
Low Medium High
Overall fiscal impact High, or combined
with other
recommendation(s),
sufficiently capable of
resolving the
structural deficit
Moderate to high
fiscal impact
Low to moderate
fiscal impact
An individual strategy may not necessarily meet all the criteria for each tier, but based on the overall evaluation of the strategy, it was then grouped into one of the three tiers, with Tier 1 strategies judged to be most feasible and Tier 3 strategies least feasible. A summary of strategies by type and tier is shown in Tables 2, 3 and 4. More detail on the strategies discussed in the scenarios that follow can be found in Attachment A of this memorandum.

Tier 1 strategies shown in Table 2 are the most feasible actions City leaders can take with significant impact in the near term and with low disruption. Strategies to generate additional revenue dominate Tier 1 because Pinole has lower revenues in some areas relative to the region and/or the immediate area, and because they are overall less disruptive to the organization. One of the revenue enhancement strategies – introducing another local transactions and use tax – would require an election, so implementation timing would be important to consider. Additional revenues are not as disruptive to the City organization or service delivery relative to other approaches that directly impact employees and/or would impact services to residents.

Table 2. Tier 1 Strategies
Tier 1 Strategies
Revenue Enhancement Strategy 2: Sales Tax Add-On Measure Strategy 4: Business License Tax (BLT) –
Increase Tax Rate
Strategy 6: Real Property Transfer Tax
Strategy 7: Increase Franchise Fee Rates on
Gross Receipts

Tier 1 Strategies
Service Delivery and Governance
Changes
Strategy 12: Adoption of an OPEB Funding Policy
Strategy 13: Adoption of a Surplus Utilization Policy
Strategy 14: General Fund Reserve Balance
Strategy 15: Develop an Internal Service Fund Cost
Allocation and Reserve System
Strategy 16: Public Engagement in the Budget Process
Tier 2 strategies shown in Table 3 are considered moderately feasible to implement.

Generally, these strategies will take more time to successfully implement and/or be more disruptive to the City organization or community residents via service delivery impacts. City leaders will probably have to consider some Tier 2 strategies, but the extent to which these will need to be fully implemented will depend on the level of success with Tier 1 strategies. The City will need to begin work on some of these strategies for two reasons: 1) Tier 1 strategies in total may not resolve the fiscal gap, and 2) they are needed as a fallback in case revenue strategies dependent on an election outcome are unsuccessful.

Table 3. Tier 2 Strategies
Tier 2 Strategies
Revenue Enhancement Strategy 1: Utilities Users Tax – Expand Covered Utilities and/or Increase the Tax Rate
Strategy 3: Parcel Tax
Strategy 5: Financing Capital Assets – Streets and Roads The Tier 3 strategies shown in Table 4 are considered the least feasible to implement in the City’s current environment. Generally, these strategies have either proven difficult to implement in other similar settings or would have a negative impact in the long term on the organization and community. To the extent the City is unable to generate enough revenue increases or expenditure reductions from other strategies, these more difficult options for maintaining solvency might need to be explored.

Table 4. Tier 3 Strategies
Tier 3 Strategies
Expenditure Controls and Cost Shifts Strategy 8: Targeted Expenditure Reductions Strategy 9: Retiree Health Care Benefit
Strategy 10: Shift Medical Contribution Cost to
Employees
Strategy 11: Increase Employee Pension Contributions
Service Reductions and Eliminations Strategy 17: Take No Action – leads to unplanned, uncontrolled expenditure reductions to
avoid insolvency.

Budget Strategy Scenarios
Baker Tilly has prepared a series of three scenarios for the City Council’s consideration that address the fiscal gap. The three budget scenarios developed within this report are provided as examples of the types of strategies that the City Council could consider to address the long-term fiscal gap. The strategies are detailed in Attachment A. The three scenarios included herein employ different strategies and make assumptions with respect to the timing of implementing each strategy. Table 5 summarizes these three scenarios.

Table 5. Budget Strategy Scenarios
Scenario Description
Baseline Scenario Before Budget
Corrections
• Annual deficits through 20-year forecast period
• Assumes pension trust funding ends in 2030
• Current staffing levels
• CalPERS maintains current discount rate
Scenario 1 – Strong Revenue
Strategies
• Introduce a parcel tax
• Increase business license tax rate or revise structure • Finance street and road rehabilitation
• Introduce additional ½ cent sales tax measure
• Increase franchise fees
• Increase UUT for existing services and expand tax to others • Pursue change from General Law to Charter city and
successfully introduce real property tax revenue stream Scenario 2 – Mixed Approach
(Moderate Revenues and
Implement Expenditure Cost
Shift Strategies)
• Increase franchise fees
• Increase UUT for existing services and expand tax to other services
• Pursue change from General Law to Charter city and
successfully introduce real property tax revenue stream • Increase employee pension contributions
• Shift medical contribution cost to employees
• Reduce or eliminate retiree medical benefit for new hires • Implement General Fund expenditure reductions (as
necessary) totaling $500,000 annually through FY 2029-30 Scenario 3 – Strong Operating
Expenditure Reduction
Strategies
• Increase employee pension contributions
• Shift medical contribution cost to employees
• Reduce or eliminate retiree medical benefit for new hires • Implement General Fund expenditure reductions (as
necessary) totaling $1 million annually through 2029-30

Budget Scenario 1: Strong Revenue Strategies
Scenario 1 includes the following budget strategies to resolve the fiscal gap. They are centered primarily around revenue enhancements. Generally, in California, new tax revenues must be approved by voters at a scheduled election. Other scheduling issues may also be triggered, depending on the tax and the situation surrounding it (such as a fiscal emergency).

It should be noted that there is an initiative eligible for the November 2024 statewide ballot #1935 (filed as 21-0042A1) that would limit the ability of local governments to raise revenues for government services by:
• Adopting new and severely stricter rules for raising taxes, fees, assessments, and other charges.
• Revising the State Constitution, as amended by Propositions 13, 218, and 26 among other provisions, to the advantage of the initiative’s proponents and plaintiffs; creating new grounds to challenge these funding sources and disrupting fiscal certainty.
• Restricting the ability of local governments to issue fines and penalties to corporations and property owners that violate local environmental, water quality, public health, public safety, fair housing, nuisance and other laws and ordinances.

The initiative includes provisions that would retroactively void all state and local taxes or fees adopted after January 1, 2022 if they did not align with the provisions of this initiative. This may also affect indexed fees that adjust over time for inflation or other factors. If this initiative were to pass, it would constrain the City’s ability to not only pass new revenue measures to retain them through an imposition of a sunset date.

Parcel Tax. A parcel tax is a property tax levied on owners of parcels and, unlike ordinary property taxes, are explicitly not based on the value of a property or its use.

Parcel taxes may be levied for general purposes or restricted to a particular purpose.

However, regardless of use, parcel taxes require a simple majority voter approval. This measure could be taken to voters in either November 2024 or November 2025 and would require additional analysis.

Business License Tax (BLT). Pinole has a BLT model that is based on a flat fixed fee dependent upon business type. The tax structure has not been modified over the past 39 years. The City can increase its existing flat tax rates, or change to a gross receipts based model. A general tax, that is one not earmarked for any specific purpose,

requires a majority vote of the electorate in an election that coincides with City Council election(s). A special purpose tax, for example one earmarked for public safety or for parks, etc., requires a two-thirds vote, but can be folded into any election, including non-Council elections. This measure could be taken to voters in either November 2024 or November 2025.

Finance street and road rehabilitation. The replacement and rehabilitation of streets and roads has been identified as one of the City’s top priorities. Due to the current cost of operations and the current level of available revenue sources, there are insufficient funds being allocated to maintain the City’s streets and roads at an acceptable level.

Local governments may finance acquisition or construction of various projects and capital assets through the issuance and sale of municipal securities. A general obligation bond requires the City Council to pass by a two-thirds vote an ordinance placing the general obligation bond measure on the ballot and a resolution determining that the public interest or necessity demands the construction of any municipal improvement. It also requires approval of two-thirds of the voters. The issuance of a general obligation bond will provide the City with legal authority to levy ad valorem taxes on real and personal property located with the City’s boundaries. This measure could be taken to voters in either November 2024 or November 2025.

Local Transactions and Use Tax (TUT). Introduce a third 0.5% local TUT, bringing the City’s total TUT rate to 10.25%. The overall sales tax rate on purchases made in Pinole currently stands at mid-range among its benchmark cities (See Table 7 in Attachment A). A general tax, that is one not earmarked for any specific purpose, requires a majority vote of the electorate in an election that coincides with City Council election(s).

A special purpose tax, for example one earmarked for public safety or for parks, etc., requires a two-thirds vote, but can be folded into any election, including non-Council elections. Assuring fiscal sustainability requires this measure to be taken to voters and receive majority voter approval not later than the November 2024 election.

Franchise fees. Increase Gas, Electric, Solid Waste, and Cable franchise fees. Franchise fees can be higher than what is required for full cost recovery. Increasing the franchise fees is within the discretion of the City Council negotiating those fees with the service providers with the understanding that customers ultimately pay the franchise fees, which are delineated as such on their service bills.

Utility User Tax (UUT). Expand the current tax to additional utility services and increase rates for existing services. A UUT would be considered a general tax measure that would require a 2/3 majority of Councilmembers to place a measure on a ballot.

The measure must then be approved by a simple majority (50% + 1) of voters at a

regular election in which Councilmember positions are on the ballot. This measure could be taken to voters in either November 2024 or November 2025.

Real property transfer tax. A real property transfer tax imposes a tax on the purchaser of real property based upon the value of the property. Ideally, this measure requiring majority voter approval would be brought to voters by no later than November 2025.

Because of State law, property transfer taxes are fixed at a relatively low level for General Law cities such as Pinole. Therefore, this strategy will first require the City to change its legal basis from that of a general law to a charter city. The charter would have to be ratified by a majority of the City’s voters.

Figures three and four below compare the future fiscal impact that all strategies, except the bond financing of streets and roads rehabilitation, in scenario one would have over the next 20 years compared to baseline revenues.1 Under this scenario, balanced budgets are achieved for most of the forecast period. Although it is not likely that the City would simultaneously implement all strategies at once, this example demonstrates the significant revenue increases that would be necessary to balance the budget. For example, the City would need an additional $6 million to align projected baseline revenues with projected baseline expenditures in Fiscal Year 2030-31. This assumes that no cost reduction strategies are implemented.

Figure 3. Budget Scenario 1: Strong Revenue Strategies Forecast Compared with Baseline 1 Appendix A, Strategy 5 details the fiscal impact of a $25 million general obligation bond for streets and roads rehabilitation. The projected income and associated principal and interest payments provided are excluded from this scenario. The public interest or necessity demands for the debt financing of any municipal improvement has not been firmly established.

Figure four below compares the fiscal impact to General Fund balance if the strategies indicated in Scenario 1 were implemented compared to the future baseline fund balance projection. Under Scenario 1, the General Fund would maintain a growing and somewhat stable fund balance for most of the forecast years. Without the implementation of Scenario 1, or any cost reduction strategies, the General Fund balance would be exhausted by FY 2027-28 and the City would experience sustained and growing deficits through the remainder of the forecast period.

Figure 4. Budget Scenario 1: Strong Revenue Strategies Fund Balance Forecast Compared with Baseline Budget Scenario 2: Mixed Approach (Moderate Revenues and Implement Expenditure Cost Shift Strategies)
Scenario 2 includes the following budget strategies to resolve the fiscal gap. These strategies take a balanced approach between revenue enhancements and expenditure cost shifts.

Franchise fees. Increase Gas, Electric, Solid Waste, and Cable franchise fees. Franchise fees can be higher than what is required for full cost recovery. Increasing the franchise fees is within the discretion of the City Council negotiating those fees with the service providers with the understanding that customers ultimately pay the franchise fees, which are delineated as such on their service bills.

Utility User Tax (UUT). Expand the current tax to additional utility services and increase rates for existing services. A UUT would be considered a general tax measure that would require a 2/3 majority of Councilmembers to place a measure on a ballot.

The measure must then be approved by a simple majority (50% + 1) of voters at a

regular election in which Councilmember positions are on the ballot. This measure could be taken to voters in either November 2024 or November 2026.

Real property transfer tax. A real property transfer tax imposes a tax on the purchaser of real property based upon the value of the property. Ideally, this measure requiring majority voter approval would be brought to voters by no later than November 2025.

Because of State law, property transfer taxes are fixed at a relatively low level for General Law cities such as Pinole. Therefore, this strategy will first require the City to change its legal basis from that of a general law to a charter city. The charter would have to be ratified by a majority of the City’s voters.

Increase employee pension contributions. Implementing a higher pension cost sharing arrangement with employees as allowed under the provisions of the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2012 (PEPRA) would result in expenditure savings for the City but would likely place a hardship in recruiting and retaining employees based on competitive compensation packages provided by other jurisdictions within the area.

Shift medical contribution cost to employees. Requiring employees to pay a greater share of their medical benefits would reduce this escalating cost for the City. Medical benefits are a mandatory subject of bargaining. Changing the benefit amounts would require a meet and confer process. Asking employees to contribute towards medical costs may impact the ability for the City to compete for labor in the marketplace; however, other cities are also addressing the issue of continued rising medical costs.

Reduce or eliminate retiree medical benefit for new hires. Most employers seek to mitigate rising post-employment benefit costs by reducing or eliminating the benefit for future employees hired after a certain date. State law currently prohibits employers from eliminating such vested benefits from current employees. However, there are court cases moving forward that will decide the extent to which employers are able to modify vested benefits unilaterally after the completion of a meet and confer process.

The impact of closing the retiree medical benefit plan to future employees would require actuarial analysis. However, in our experience, the annual required contribution would fall as eligible employees retire or separate from service with the City and are replaced with employees that are no longer eligible for such a benefit.

Implement General Fund expenditure reductions (as necessary) totaling $500,000 annually through FY 2029/30. A tiered approach will prevent the City from having to make unnecessarily deep City service cuts in the near-term that severely impact the community and the organization. To balance a projected deficit, a short to mediumterm “bridge” solution can be developed that relies on a combination of targeted

reductions in operating accounts with underutilization trends, deferred capital project spending, and reduced transfers to other funds. The City could identify capital projects with funds that can be released back to fund balance either because the project is completed, or the project can be reduced without significant impacts. Planned expenditures for a second category of projects have been deemed non-critical in the near term and can be deferred for at least one year.

Figures five and six below compare the future fiscal impact that all strategies, except the retiree health benefit strategy, that scenario two would have over the next 20 years compared to baseline revenues.2 Although it is not likely that the City would simultaneously implement all strategies at once, this example provides an order of magnitude estimate for the implementation of a specific set of revenue and expenditure initiatives. Forecasted expenditures for scenario two closely align with baseline expenditures with no marked impact on the growth trajectory. Forecasted revenues under this scenario, while higher than the baseline, are not sufficient to maintain a balanced budget through the forecast period. A $2.5 million deficit in FY 2030-31 grows to $6.1 million by 2044-45.

Figure 5. Budget Scenario 2: Mixed Approach Strategies Forecast Compared with Baseline Figure six below compares the fiscal impact to General Fund balance if the strategies indicated in Scenario 2 were implemented compared to the future baseline fund balance projection.

Under Scenario 2, the General Fund would barely maintain a positive fund balance through FY 2031-32, after which time an increasingly negative fund balance would ensue through the end of the forecast period. Therefore, the City would have to consider other strategies outlined in this report or developed independently to eliminate the post 2031 deficit situation. 2 Further analysis is necessary to accurately project the reduction or elimination of retiree medical benefit for new hires.

Figure 6. Budget Scenario 2: Mixed Approach Strategies Fund Balance Forecast Compared with Baseline
Budget Scenario 3: Strong Operating Expenditure Reduction Strategies Increase employee pension contributions. Implementing a higher pension cost sharing arrangement with employees as allowed under the provisions of the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2012 (PEPRA) would result in expenditure savings for the City but would likely place a hardship in recruiting and retaining employees based on competitive compensation packages provided by other jurisdictions within the area.

The annual fiscal impact of this strategy is approximately $100,000 per year.

Shift medical contribution cost to employees. Requiring employees to pay a greater share of their medical benefits would reduce this escalating cost for the City. Medical benefits are a mandatory subject of bargaining. Changing the benefit amounts would require a meet and confer process. Asking employees to contribute towards medical costs may impact the ability for the City to compete for labor in the marketplace; however other cities are also addressing the issue of continued rising medical costs.

Reduce or eliminate retiree medical benefit for new hires. Most employers seek to mitigate rising post-employment benefit costs by reducing or eliminating the benefit for future employees hired after a certain date. State law currently prohibits employers from eliminating such vested benefits from current employees. However, there are court cases moving forward that will decide the extent to which employers are able to modify vested benefits unilaterally after the completion of a meet and confer process.

The impact of closing the retiree medical benefit plan to future employees would require actuarial analysis. However, in our experience, the annual required contribution would fall as eligible employees retire or separate from service with the City and are

replaced with employees that are no longer eligible for such a benefit. The annual fiscal impact of this strategy is approximately $6,500 per new hire ineligible for this benefit.

The savings would be realized upon retirement.

Implement General Fund expenditure reductions (as necessary). Service level reductions represent strategies that would be necessary if cost controls/shifts, service delivery changes, and/or revenue enhancement strategies do not generate sufficient savings to close the structural deficit that currently exists and will grow to $6 million beginning in FY 2030-31. A short-term targeted expenditure reduction strategy has been utilized by other agencies in recognition of a budget chasm and the need to develop a phased approach to reducing expenditures over the short-term (see Appendix A, Strategy 8 for a short-term phased approach and reducing expenditures). The lowest risk near-term treatments are the proverbial “low-hanging fruit” that government leaders often seek to close budget gaps in good times and bad.

But the reality is that the City will have to go beyond the short-term techniques to address its economic and fiscal challenges. Governments facing a drop in revenues, increases in expenditures, spikes in demand for services, and loss of capacity are unlikely to overcome those problems by doing the basics well. Leaders will likely have to consider some of the riskier techniques and evaluate them carefully, including:

Control Personnel Costs
• Wage freeze
• Hiring freeze
• Increase part-time labor
• Reduce hours worked and pay
• Close facilities
• Layoffs or reduction in force
• Increase employee contributions to pensions or OPEB
Reduce Near-Term Capital Spending, Equipment Costs, and Annual Debt Costs • Defer and/or cancel capital projects, maintenance, and/or replacement • Defer noncapital special projects
• Use short term debt to pay for vehicles
• Reduce general fund support to other funds (reduce interfund transfers out) Organizational Strategies
• Small and/or temporary across the board budget cuts
• Reorganization

• Contract or implement shared services model for select city programs (examples:
vehicle/fleet maintenance, parks maintenance, recreation or senior programs, street and storm drain maintenance Increase cost allocation to utility operations to fullest extent allowed
Sourcing Strategies
• Outsource
• Insource
• Divest (eliminate programs)
To address a structural deficit over the long-term, reducing service levels would require departments to review all expenditures, identify prioritized service levels, and develop a list of recommended reductions for City Manager and, ultimately, City Council approval, to achieve the necessary fiscal target. The analysis would require a thorough and common understanding of the City’s core levels of service, legally or contractually required services, and clarity regarding its mission and values. In some cases, services may need to be viewed from a programmatic perspective so those that require cooperation from multiple departments receive special consideration.

We calculated the fiscal impact of reducing General Fund expenditures to the level needed to cover the annual baseline deficits. Assuming the City relies solely on expenditure strategies, the expenditure reductions needed to balance the budget range between $1 million and $7.6 million through the forecast period. These reductions average approximately 12 percent of the annual budget. For purposes of our analysis, we assume that on average, a 12% annual General Fund expenditure reduction target would be sustained, and departments would then need to identify reductions in personnel, services and supplies, and ongoing capital needs to achieve the necessary reduction.

Figures seven and eight below compare the future fiscal impact that all strategies, except the retiree health benefit strategy, in scenario three would have over the next 20 years compared to baseline revenues.3 Although it is not likely that the City would simultaneously implement all strategies at once nor rely solely on expenditure reductions to balance its budget, this example provides an order of magnitude estimate for the implementation of a specific set of expenditure changes. In scenario three, baseline revenues are identical to forecasted revenues and only one solid black line appears for both.
3 Further analysis is necessary to accurately project the reduction or elimination of retiree medical benefit for new hires.

Forecasted expenditures for scenario three closely align with forecasted revenues through FY 2033-34. However, a deficit begins the following year and grows to $4.5 million by FY 2044-45. By far the most impactful strategy is the annual average budget reduction of 12 percent.

Figure 7. Budget Scenario 3: Strong Operating Expenditure Reduction Strategies Compared with Baseline
Figure 8. Budget Scenario 3: Strong Operating Expenditure Reduction Strategies Fund Balance Forecast Compared with Baseline

Budget Scenario 4: Combined Revenue Enhancement (TUT) and Expenditure Reduction Strategies
Local Transactions and Use Tax (TUT). Introduce a third 0.5% local TUT, bringing the City’s total TUT rate to 10.25%. This increase would result in additional TUT revenue of $2.6 annually. The overall sales tax rate on purchases made in Pinole currently stands at mid-range among its benchmark cities (See Table 7 in Attachment A). A general tax, that is one not earmarked for any specific purpose, requires a majority vote of the electorate in an election that coincides with City Council election(s). A special purpose tax, for example one earmarked for public safety or for parks, etc., requires a two-thirds vote, but can be folded into any election, including non-Council elections. Assuring fiscal sustainability requires this measure to be taken to voters and receive majority voter approval not later than the November 2024 election.

Implement General Fund expenditure reductions (as necessary) to balance the budget (same expenditure reduction strategy as described in Scenario 3). Implement across the board reductions to balance total expenditures to total revenues, starting with total reductions of $3.2 million, or 9% in FY 2030-31.

Figures nine and ten below compare the future fiscal impact that increasing the TUT and implementing expenditure reductions in scenario four would have over the next 20 years compared to baseline revenues. In scenario four, baseline expenditures and forecast expenditures are identical through FY 2029-30 and are represented by a solid red line. Beginning in FY 2030-31, expenditure reductions are introduced and continue through the end of the forecast period to balance the budget. Forecast revenues and expenditures are identical and are represented by an intermittent red line in Figure 9 below. The expenditure reductions needed to balance the budget range between $3.1 million and $7.4 million through the forecast period. These reductions average approximately 10% of the annual budget. For purposes of our analysis, we assume that on average, a 10% annual General Fund expenditure reduction target would be sustained, and departments would then need to identify reductions in personnel, services and supplies, and ongoing capital needs to achieve the necessary reduction.

Figure 9. Budget Scenario 4: TUT Enhancement and Strong Operating Expenditure Reduction Strategies Compared with Baseline
Figure 10. Budget Scenario 4: TUT Enhancement and Strong Operating Expenditure Reduction Strategies Fund Balance Forecast Compared with Baseline Other Recommendations (see Attachment A for more details) Financial policies are a key element of sound fiscal administration. Policies provide the guidance or “rules of the game” that shape the decisions of public managers. Baker Tilly recommends the following policies to advance the City’s fiscal sustainability efforts:

Adoption of an OPEB Funding Policy. The development of an OPEB funding policy would document the method the City will use to determine its actuarially determined contributions to fund the long-term cost of benefits to City employees and retirees. The policy would demonstrate prudent financial management practices and promote longterm strategic thinking.

Adoption of a Surplus Utilization Policy. Due to a variety of factors, such as economic expansion, frugal operations, or changes to various projects and programs, the City may end a fiscal year with a surplus of revenues over expenditures, encumbrances and reserve commitments. Budget surplus funds are those funds that result after closing the City’s accounting records for a fiscal year. On an annual basis, the City Manager will recommend allocations to the City Council on the use of budget surplus funds consistent with the uses identified in the Fund Balance Policy Reduce General Fund Reserve Balance from 50% to 25% of Operating Expenditures.

The City can use the availability of funds that result from lowering the reserve level to address one or more priorities such as the City’s OPEB liability, the establishment of an infrastructure replacement program, and the establishment of internal service funds.

Develop an Internal Service Fund (ISF) Cost Allocation and Reserve System.

Utilizing ISFs is considered a best practice by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) because it allows for an optimal cost allocation across all fund sources based on an equitable and pre-determined methodology; control and consistency in service, accurate accounting and reporting; and allows for a long-term outlook when planning and budgeting capital acquisitions.

Public Engagement in the Budget Process.

GFOA recommends that governments encourage effective and well implemented public engagement budget processes. This will enable the public to work with their government to help make beneficial budget decisions. While not a focus of this engagement, we have upon request of the City Council summarized some good public participation practices that can help the City be more accountable and responsive to the community (see Attachment A).

Attachment A – Detailed Strategies
Revenue Enhancements
Strategy 1: Utilities Users Tax (UUT) – Expand Covered Utilities and/or Increase the Tax Rate
Cities have the authority to impose UUTs on the consumption of utility services that may also include water, sewer, telephone (including cell phone and long distance), sanitation and cable television. The rate of tax is determined by the local agency.

In November 1998, voters approved the City of Pinole's Utility Users Tax (UUT) at a rate of 8% on electricity, gas, and telephone services. Voters extended this tax in 2004, 2012 and in 2018. Revenue generated from the UUT enables the City of Pinole to maintain its existing service delivery and City-provided programs to the community as approved in the adopted budget.

Expanding the UUT to include enhanced taxation of telecommunications services (i.e., wired and wireless telephone services, video services) could generate additional revenues each year. An impact analysis would need to be completed before introducing a revised utility users tax measure. An enhanced definition of telephone communication services could include "communications services" as defined in Sections 4251 and 4252 of the Internal Revenue Code that includes the use of analog, digital, electronic, radio or similar means through "interconnected service" with the "public switched network" or over digital networks by which communications with a substantial portion of the public is available (e.g., voice over internet protocol or VoIP).

The application of UUT on telephone services has been a topic of legal and legislative turmoil in the past 15 years due to changes in technology and federal law. Cities still retain the authority to impose a telephone UUT but must exercise care in defining the services subject to the tax to address future technologies without triggering additional measures to be brought to voters.

Among Pinole’s six peer cities, the cities of Albany, El Cerrito and Emeryville have UUT ordinances that cover telecommunication services. Per capita estimates of annual revenues generated from telephone UUT services range from $78 to $240.

Table 6. Utility User Tax (UUT) Revenue of Peer Cities
City Utility User Tax FY 2021 UUT Revenues FY 2021 UUT Revenues per Capita
Albany Communication 6.5%,
Electricity 9.5%, Gas 9.5%
$1,606,874 $78
American Canyon None N/A N/A

City Utility User Tax FY 2021 UUT Revenues FY 2021 UUT Revenues per Capita
Dixon None N/A N/A
El Cerrito Services subject to 8% UUT
tax rate include electricity,
gas, water, video, and
telephone including
wireless.
$3,760,333 $143
Emeryville Services subject to 5.5%
UUT tax rate include gas,
electricity, prepaid
wireless, and
telecommunications.
$3,030,308 $240
Martinez None N/A N/A
Pinole Services subject to 8% UUT
tax rate include electricity,
gas, and telephone
services.
$1,939,726 $103
Increasing the City’s existing UUT rate is another possible solution. The typical UUT rate by other cities in California is within the 5% to 7% range. If the City were to increase the UUT rate from 8% to 10% for electric, gas, and telephone services currently being levied, annual revenues would increase by approximately $521,000.

Increasing or expanding the existing UUT (expansion to include the water utility for example) would require additional analysis, Council approval, and an affirmative vote by the electorate. Polling the electorate to determine viability would be prudent.

Expansion of the 8% UUT to include the water utility would roughly increase revenue by $620,000 annually.

A compelling argument can be made for increasing or expanding the UUT based on revenues compared to similar cities. A UUT would be considered a general tax measure that would require a 2/3 majority of Councilmembers to place a measure on a ballot.

The measure must then be approved by a simple majority (50% + 1) of voters at a regular election in which Councilmember positions are on the ballot.

Strategy 2: Sales Tax Add-On Measure
The overall sales tax rate on purchases made in Pinole is 9.75%, which stands at midrange among its benchmark cities (See Table 7 below). Of that amount, the City receives the statewide standard 1% (referred to as the Bradley Burns sales tax) plus 0.5% due to Measure S 2006 and 0.5% due to Measure S 2014. The maximum levy permitted by the State Legislature for combined direct and overlapping sales tax is 10.25%. The City can

seek approval from the electorate for a third add-on sales tax measure. An additional one-half cent sales tax measure would result in approximately $2.6 million in additional tax revenue per year. A general purpose measure would require a simple majority approval and a specific purpose measure would require 2/3 majority voter approval.

Table 7. Benchmark City Comparison of Sales and Use Tax Rates City Sales and
Use Tax Rate
Albany 10.75%
American Canyon 7.75%
Dixon 7.375%
El Cerrito 10.25%
Emeryville 10.5%
Martinez 9.75%
Pinole 9.75%
Strategy 3: Parcel Tax
A parcel tax is a property tax levied on owners of parcels and unlike ordinary property taxes, are explicitly not based on the value of a property or its use. Parcel taxes are largely used in California, because they were developed as a way for school districts and municipalities to work around the rules of Proposition 13, which prohibits ad valorem taxes (taxes based on the value of property), except for General Obligation bonds used for facilities.

Among city revenue sources, parcel taxes are not as common as other locally imposed taxes. But for schools and special districts, who have much more limited taxing authority and do not have the ability to seek general taxes, parcel taxes are the primary method of collecting additional operating revenues.

The revenue cities raise from parcel tax rates depends on the number of parcels taxed and the rate. On average, a California city has 0.29 parcels per capita. For the average city, a tax of $100 per parcel raises about $29 per capita. Eighty-seven percent of parcels are residential, so a flat parcel tax is borne mainly by owners of homes and apartments. 4 4 California’s Parcel Tax, Jon Sonstelie, 2014 Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Lincoln Institute of Land Policy Working Paper, https://www.lincolninst.edu/sites/default/files/pubfiles/sonstelie-wp14js1.pdf.

The specific terms of a parcel tax depend on the details of the measure passed by voters, including how long it will be in effect and how much will be paid per parcel. An example parcel tax fiscal impact estimate appears in Table 7 below. If the City assessed a uniform parcel tax rate of $100 for its 5,949 parcels and included an exemption for its low-income population, the City could realize approximately $560,000 in annual tax revenue.

Implementing a parcel tax would require additional analysis, polling, Council approval, and a two-thirds affirmative vote (66.67%) vote of the electorate.

Table 8. Parcel Tax Fiscal Impact Estimate
Parcel Type Size of Parcel Number of Parcels Tax Rate Projected Annual Tax
Revenue
Single family residential Not applicable 5,080 $100 per unit $508,000 Condominium/Townhouse Not applicable 535 $100 per unit $53,500 Multi-family residential Not applicable 70 $100 per unit $7,000 Non-residential <0.25 acre 132 $100 per
parcel
$13,200
Non-residential > or equal 0.25
acre
132 $100 per
parcel
$13,200
Total 5,949 $594,900
Less persons in poverty (5.5%) -$29,719
Net Total $565,181
Strategy 4: Business License Tax (BLT) – Increase Tax Rate Pinole has a BLT model that is based on a flat fixed fee dependent upon business type.

The tax structure has not been modified over the past 39 years. BLT revenue projections for FY 2023-24 totaled $450,014.

Table 9 shows that Pinole has BLT revenues of $24 per capita. This is close to the average per capita business license tax revenue of $23 among its benchmark cities.5If Pinole wanted to generate additional BLT revenue to a level that is more comparable to the similar sized city of Albany, the City would need to increase its existing flat tax rates by approximately 55%, which is estimated to generate additional revenue of 5 The City of Emeryville is excluded from the per capita average due its very large business license tax revenue that would tend to distort the average.

approximately $248,000 per year and would change its BLT revenue per capita rate from $24 to $37.

Another approach to increase BLT revenues would be to assess the change in inflation, as measured by the consumer price index, since the BLT was last modified. It has been at least since 1975 that the BLT per employee rate was modified. Over the course of the last 39 years, CPI for the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Region has increased at an average annual rate of 4%. If the City were to use CPI as a basis for increasing its BLT rates, that would generate additional annual revenues on an ongoing basis.

Shifting from a flat-fee based BLT model to a gross receipts model is another option.

Many cities use a gross receipts (or revenue) based approach, either exclusively or combined with an employee-based model and establish a tax rate that is levied on the annual gross receipts of the business. Those tax rates vary widely by agency, but a typical range is between 0.5% and 2.0% per $1,000 of gross receipts. Transitioning to a gross receipts model would require significant research and analysis and could result in the need for increased staffing. The structure of the tax and the revenue that could be generated from such a shift is not estimable at this time as the City does not collect gross receipts information from its business license applicants.

Implementing adjustments to the business license tax would require additional analysis, Council approval, and an affirmative vote by the electorate. A general tax, that is one not earmarked for any specific purpose, requires a majority vote of the electorate in an election that coincides with City Council election(s). A special purpose tax, for example one earmarked for public safety or for parks, etc., requires a two-thirds vote, but can be folded into any election, including non-Council elections.

Table 9. Benchmark City Comparison of Business License Tax Structure and Revenue City FY 2023-24
Business License
Tax Revenues
Business License Tax BLT Revenues
Per Capita
Population
Albany $700,000 Employee - Variable tax
rate schedule dependent
upon business type. Not
based on gross receipts
unless utility service
($1.00 for every $1k of
gross receipts).
$34 20,542

City FY 2023-24
Business License
Tax Revenues
Business License Tax BLT Revenues
Per Capita
Population
American
Canyon
$221,000 Gross Receipts - Persons
with fixed place of
business pay tax according
to sliding gross receipts
scale. Others pay flat tax
$10 21,566
Dixon $123,000 Flat Tax - Variable tax rate
schedule dependent upon
business type. Not based
on gross receipts.
$6 19,094
El Cerrito $942,358 Employee - Variable tax
rate schedule dependent
upon number of
employees and specific tax
rates assigned to specific
business types. Not based
on gross receipts.
$37 25,671
Emeryville $8,979,500 Gross Receipts - The
greater of $25 or onetenth of one percent
(0.10%) of the annual
gross receipts. Specific
businesses have assigned
flat tax rates.
$712 12,617
Martinez $950,000 Gross Receipts/Flat Tax -
Taxed according to a gross
receipts schedule,
minimum tax is $25.

Specific businesses have
assigned flat tax rates.
$26 37,195
Pinole $450,014 Flat Tax - Flat fixed fee
dependent upon business
type.
$24 18,819
Strategy 5: Financing Capital Assets – Streets and Roads The replacement and rehabilitation of streets and roads has been identified as one of the City’s top priorities. Due to the current cost of operations and the current level of available revenue sources, there are insufficient funds being allocated to maintain the City’s streets and roads at an acceptable level. The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is a numerical rating of the pavement condition that ranges from 0 to 100, with 0 being the worst possible condition and 100 being the best possible condition (see Table 10 below).

PCI is used to quantify existing pavement conditions that can be later used to estimate

how long the pavements will last and how much funding will be needed to keep them in satisfactory condition. The City of Pinole’s PCI is currently rated “Poor”.

Table 10. PCI Range Classification
PCI Range Class
85-100 Good
70-85 Satisfactory
55-70 Fair
40-55 Poor (Pinole 53)
25-40 Very Poor
10-25 Serious
0-10 Failed
Source: American Society for Testing and Materials D6433 - 20: Standard Practice for Roads and Parking Lots Pavement Condition Index Surveys
Committing an adequate level of funding for annual street maintenance avoids the costly necessity to reconstruct pavement that has deteriorated beyond the point of performing less costly overlays and slurry seals.

Table 11. PCI Rating by Time of Improvement
Time of
Improvement
Arterial Collector Local
Adequate >85 >80 >80
6 to 10 years 76 to 85 71 to 80 66 to 80
1 to 5 years 56 to 75 51 to 70 46 to 65
NOW rehabilitate 50 to 55 45 to 50 40 to 45
Now reconstruct <50 <45 <40
Source: Pavement Condition 101 OGRA’s Milestones, V9#4, December 2009 Local governments may finance acquisition or construction of various projects and capital assets through the issuance and sale of municipal securities. Securities are sold and the proceeds are used for the cost of acquisition or construction. Debt financing is needed when the cost of a capital improvement project exceeds tax and fee revenues available during the construction period. It also allows the public entity to spread the cost of the project over time and manage cash flows.

Table 12 below identifies the PCI impact to the City’s streets and roads if it utilized $25 million in bond proceeds over a three-year period beginning in 2025. Under this scenario, the City would apply bond proceeds of $8.5 million in 2025, another $8.5 million in 2026, and $8 million in 2027 above its current annual street maintenance

allocation of $1 million per year. Approximately 30% of bond proceeds would be allocated to arterials, 20% to collectors, and 50% to residential roads. It is evident that bond financing of this magnitude alone only raises the PCI from poor to fair until the rating again plummets after only a few years. This funding option would more effectively work in concert with additional funding that would supplement the bond funding.

Table 12. City of Pinole Streets and Roads Spending Plan ($25M Financing) Year PCI (without
proposed
spending)
Proposed
Spending
PCI (with
proposed
spending)
2025 53 $9,500,000 62
2026 51 $9,500,000 65
2027 48 $9,000,000 67
2028 46 $1,000,000 65
2029 43 $1,000,000 64
2030 41 $1,000,000 62
2031 39 $1,000,000 61
2032 37 $1,000,000 60
2033 35 $1,000,000 59
2034 33 $1,000,000 59
2035 31 $1,000,000 58
2036 29 $1,000,000 56
2037 27 $1,000,000 56
2038 25 $1,000,000 55
2039 23 $1,000,000 54
2040 22 $1,000,000 53
2041 20 $1,000,000 52
2042 19 $1,000,000 51
2043 17 $1,000,000 51
2044 16 $1,000,000 50
A $25 million general obligation bond combined with an estimated cost of issuance of approximately $430,000 at an assumed interest rate of 5.5% would result in annual principal and interest payments of $2.1 million over 20 years. The total principal and interest payments would be approximately $43 million. These estimates assume a credit rating of S&P A+ and are meant only to provide an order of magnitude estimate of financing costs in the current interest rate environment. The City would need to hire

a municipal financial advisor to plan, formulate and properly execute a debt issuance that is aligned with the City’s goals and policy objectives.

A general obligation bond requires the City Council to pass by a two-thirds vote an ordinance placing the general obligation bond measure on the ballot and a resolution determining that the public interest or necessity demands the construction of any municipal improvement. It also requires approval of two-thirds of the voters.

Strategy 6: Real Property Transfer Tax
A real property transfer tax (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, like Pinole, may impose a RPTT of no more than $0.55 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 may impose RPTTs at a rate higher than the maximum statutory rate of $0.55 per $1,000 of value if approved by voters. The median RPTT rate for charter cities in Contra Costa and Alameda Counties is $12 per $1,000 of value.

In 2019 and 2020, the City Council considered the desirability of placing two different local tax measures on the ballot, a special parcel tax and a real property transfer tax. In 2019, the City Council directed City staff to take the steps necessary to place a tax measure to fund fire service on the March 2020 ballot. Subsequently, in August 2019, the City Council directed staff to specifically take steps necessary to place a special parcel tax to fund fire service on the November 2020 ballot rather than March 2020. The City hired a public opinion research firm to assess voter support for a potential special parcel tax for fire service. The firm presented its findings to the City Council in November 2019. In 2019, the City Council also directed City staff to analyze the steps necessary to place a measure on the ballot that would increase the RPTT.

In February 2020, the Council directed staff to retain a polling consultant to gather information on public opinion regarding a charter city ballot measure limited to an increase in the RPTT and directed staff to retain a communications consultant. Due to the onset of COVID-19, in April 2020, the Council directed staff to suspend its activities in pursuit of a November 2020 charter city and RPTT ballot measure. In July 2020, the Council also directed staff not to move forward in preparing a November 2020 ballot measure for a special parcel tax for fire service. In early 2022, the City Council revisited placing a charter city/RPTT measure on the November 2022 ballot. It directed staff to engage a polling and community engagement consultant to gauge community interest.

Staff calculated that were the City to implement a RPTT of $8 per $1,000 of value or $12 per $1,000 of value, it might create new City revenue averaging approximately $1.5 million and $2.2 million annually, respectively.

Strategy 7: Increase Franchise Fee Rates on Gross Receipts Franchise fees represent charges to private parties for the use of City right of way. The most significant franchise fee that the City charges is to the City’s solid waste collection company, Republic Services, which includes a 10% franchise fee requirement that entitles Republic Services to use the City’s streets and right of way to perform solid waste management activities, such as refuse, recycling, and organic material pick up.

The City of Richmond, CA negotiated a 17.5% franchise fee requirement with Republic Services. Most agencies assess solid waste collection franchise fees in the 10-12% range.

The City also has a franchise agreement with Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) for its use of City poles, wires, conduits, and appurtenances, to transmit electricity and gas to the public, and with Comcast to provide video services to the City.

An increase in the franchise fee rates for gas, electric, and cable by 1% and refuse by 5% would equate to approximately $340,000 in additional annual revenue.

Table 13. Annual Fiscal Impact of Increasing Franchise Rates Fee Proposed Change Annual Fiscal Impact
Gas Franchise Increase from 1 to 2% $51,000
Electric Franchise Increase from 2 to 3% $59,000
Cable Franchise Increase from 5 to 6% $50,000
Refuse Franchise Increase from 10 to 15% $180,000
Total $340,000
Franchise fees can be higher than what is required for full cost recovery. Increasing the franchise fees is within the discretion of the City Council negotiating those fees with the service providers with the understanding that customers ultimately pay the franchise fees, which are delineated as such on their service bills. On August 11, 2022, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Zolly v. City of Oakland, holding that a group of property owners had pleaded sufficient facts to maintain a challenge to the City’s solid-waste franchise fee, under Article XIII C of the California Constitution, commonly called “Proposition 26”. The significance of the ruling is that a franchise fee may be considered "imposed by local government,” and therefore may be limited by

Proposition 26, if it is "established" by the agency, even if by contract. The City should consult with its City Attorney to discuss how this decision might impact the City’s ability to increase its franchise fees.

Expenditure Controls/Cost Shifts
Strategy 8: Targeted Expenditure Reductions
An approach has been utilized by other agencies in recognition of a budget chasm and the need to develop a phased and targeted approach to reducing expenditures. This can allow the city to balance budgets as it considers, or awaits the full implementation of, various revenue enhancement measures. These expenditure reduction solutions also allow the City time to determine longer-term impacts and develop service level adjustments, including changes to personnel and service delivery models, if necessary.

A tiered approach will prevent the City from having to make unnecessarily deep service cuts in the near-term that severely impact the community and the organization (See the example in Table 14 below). To balance a projected deficit, a short to mediumterm “bridge” solution can be developed that relies on a combination of targeted reductions in operating accounts with underutilization trends, deferred capital project spending, and reduced transfers to other funds. The City could identify capital projects with funds that can be released back to fund balance either because the project is completed, or the project can be reduced without significant impacts. Planned expenditures for a second category of projects have been deemed non-critical in the near term and can be deferred for at least one year.

Table 14. Tiered Expenditure Reduction (Example)
While some budgetary challenges can be absorbed by temporary cost cutting, opportunities to cut such things as salaries and benefits, and professional contact services expenditures, take time to evaluate, prioritize and implement, especially in order to understand the full service level impacts of these actions.

Strategy 9: Retiree Health Care Benefit
Employees hired before July 1, 2010, receive a City contribution toward their retiree health premium equal to that provided to current active employees. The cost of healthcare has increased nationally as has the cost of consumption. Health consumption expenditures have increased annually by an average of 5% between 2011 and 2021 (see Figure 11 below).

Financial First Aid - Bridging Options
Operating Cuts
No Service
Level Change
Tier 1
Hiring Freeze
Tier 2
Deferred
Capital Funding
& Spend
Tier 3
ISF Charge
Reductions
Tier 4
Contingency
Reserve
Tier 5
Service Level
Cuts
Tier 6

TOTAL GAP

FUNDING

SOLUTIONS
Salaries and Benefits
Salaries, Benefits and Other Pays ($75,000) ($75,000)
Total Salaries and Benefits $0 ($75,000) $0 $0 $0 $0 ($75,000) Maintenance and Operations
Professional & Contract Services ($570,455) ($570,455)
Internal Service Premiums ($24,510) ($24,510)
Workers' Compensation $0
General Liability $0
Uninishured Claims $0
OPEB $0
Equipment Replacement/Maint ($13,456) ($13,456)
Information Technology $0
Maintenance & Repair ($48,975) ($48,975)
Supplies & Materials ($157,423) ($157,423)
Utilities ($87,941) ($87,941)
General Expenses ($53,477) ($53,477)
Travel & Training ($29,447) ($29,447)
Grant Operating Expenses $0
Total Maintenance and Operations ($985,684) ($985,684)
Total Transfers Out ($770,000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($1,971,368) Capital ($2,451,600) ($2,451,600)
General Fund Discretionary Reserves $0
Total by Tier ($1,755,684) ($75,000) ($2,451,600) $0 $0 $0 ($4,282,284) Cumulative by Tier ($1,755,684) ($1,830,684) ($4,282,284) ($4,282,284) ($4,282,284) ($4,282,284) ($4,282,284) Page 39 of 156

Figure 11. Health Consumption Expenditures
Source: United States Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services CMS.gov The increase in health care costs in recent years occurred at a time in which overall City revenues have stagnated (see Figure 12 below).

Figure 12. Pinole General Fund Revenues
In addition to health premiums increasing, municipalities have also seen growth in their pension and retiree health costs. The costs in all three of these areas are expected to continue to grow. Retiree health care payments are projected to more than double for the City of Pinole over the next 20 years (see Figure 13 below).

Figure 13. City of Pinole Projected Retiree Health Care Payments Source: City of Pinole GASB 75 Disclosures for Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2022 Such a trend combined with the overall costs of these benefits makes it necessary to consider options to contain costs and to operate more efficiently. The provision of health care payments to retirees has become increasingly less common among municipalities over the past decade (see comparison of benchmark cities in Table 15 below). Given the rise in health and pension costs, it is imperative that the City considers cost containment strategies.

Table 15. Summary Comparison of Medical Care Coverage for Retirees Jurisdiction
Name
Total OPEB
Liability
Medical Health Coverage for Retirees
Albany $4,394,300 Yes.

American
Canyon
$12,529,860 Yes, lower coverage for those hired after 2016.

Dixon $4,244,808 Yes. One month’s premium for employee and dependent for every year worked prior to
retirement up to a maximum of 24 months.

El Cerrito $4,887,434 No.

Emeryville $9,889,028 Yes, up to maximum of $363 for retiree and two or more dependents.

Martinez $21,042,287 Yes, no coverage for new employees.

Pinole $36,286,025 Yes.

It is not common for a city to levy a charge on employees for retiree medical benefits, as current employees do not feel it is their obligation to pay for benefits for retired employees. As such, most employers seek to mitigate these rising post-employment benefit costs by reducing or eliminating the benefit for future employees hired after a certain date. State law currently prohibits employers from eliminating such vested benefits from current employees, however there are court cases moving forward that will decide the extent to which employers are able to modify vested benefits unilaterally after the completion of a meet and confer process. The impact of closing the retiree medical benefit plan to future employees would require actuarial analysis, however in our experience, the annual required contribution would fall as eligible employees retire or separate from service with the City and are replaced with employees that are no longer eligible for such a benefit. So long as the City continues to participate in the CalPERS medical benefits program, the City would be required to contribute a certain amount for retirees as they do for current employees. The fiscal savings from such an action would take about 10 to 15 years to be noticeable. This remains a viable option for the City to consider for the future, however the fiscal impact of such a decision is presently unknown without further actuarial analysis.

Strategy 10: Shift Medical Contribution Cost to Employees City employees receive medical benefits in accordance with the provisions of memoranda of understanding between the City and their respective bargaining units.

For all bargaining units, full-time employees receive medical benefits that are paid by the City and equal to the Kaiser rate for the prior calendar year at each level of coverage. The City’s total contribution toward health benefits for FY 2024-25 is projected to be $2.0 million, of which $1.5 million is attributable to General Fund operations. If employees were required to pay a greater share of their medical benefits, this cost would be reduced. Based on 63 full-time employees attributable to General Fund departments, a contribution of $100 per month by each employee would yield savings to the City of $75,600 to the General Fund.

Medical benefits are a mandatory subject of bargaining. Changing the benefit amounts would require a meet and confer process. All the City’s contracts with bargaining groups expire 6/30/2025. Asking employees to contribute towards medical costs may impact the ability for the City to compete for labor in the marketplace; however other cities are also addressing the issue of continued rising medical costs. Furthermore, the impacts associated with health care reform at the federal level are currently unknown, which could have significant impacts on healthcare costs in the future that would require revisiting the proper allocation of healthcare costs between employer and employee.

Strategy 11: Increase Employee Pension Contributions
Pinole’s full-time employees receive pension benefits through CalPERS. The employees’ required contributions for Classic Members (those that were CalPERS members prior to January 1, 2013) and PEPRA Members (those that joined CalPERS after January 1, 2013 or had a gap in CalPERS service greater than 6 months) are shown in Table 15.

Table 16. Pinole Employee Pension Plan Formulae and Contribution Rates for Classic and PEPRA Members
Retirement
Benefit
Dept Managers/
Unrepresented
Police Emp
Assoc
International
Assoc of
FireFighters
AFSCME Local 1
Classic Safety 15% (3%@55) 15% (3%@55) 15% (3%@55)
PEPRA Safety 13% (2.7%@57) 13% (2.7%@57) 13% (2.7%@57)
Classic Misc 15% (2.5%@55) 15% (2.5%@55) 15% (2.5%@55)
PEPRA Misc 6.75% (2%@62) 13% (2.7%@57) 6.75% (2%@62) 6.75% (2%@62) Our analysis using data from FY 2024-25 payroll records indicates that a 1% increase in the employee contribution for CalPERS classic members’ pension costs in the General Fund would start at approximately $34,000 and increase in future years based on any changes in compensation subject to CalPERS contribution (“PERSable compensation”).

Implementing a cost sharing arrangement of 1% with employees as allowed under the provisions of the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2012 (PEPRA) would result in expenditure savings of approximately $64,562 but would likely place a hardship in recruiting and retaining employees based on competitive compensation packages provided by other jurisdictions within the area.

Negotiating a net 3% cost sharing arrangement with all classic employees would yield cost savings to the General Fund of approximately $103,000.

Service Delivery and Governance Changes
Strategy 12: Adoption of an OPEB Funding Policy
The City of Pinole sponsors a single-employer defined benefit OPEB plan that provides medical and prescription drug coverage at retirement. Employees may continue health coverage with the City at retirement for themselves, their spouses, and dependents for life once they meet certain eligibility requirements and as long as required contributions are made. As of the latest actuarial report, the City has a substantial liability of $44,238,462.

Table 17. City of Pinole OPEB Liability
Total OPEB Liability As of June
30, 2021
Active employees $12,090,912
Retired employees $32,147,550
Total $44,238,462
The City’s budgetary practice has been to pay all retiree expenses incurred in the current year on a pay-as-you-go basis. To address the long-term costs of this expense, it is standard best practice to pre-fund this benefit. The Government Finance Officers Association recommends that governments prefund their obligations for postemployment benefits other than pensions (OPEB) once they have determined that the employer has incurred a substantial long-term liability. In most cases, employers can make long-term investments to cover these obligations through a separate trust fund that should, over time, result in a lower total cost for providing postemployment benefits.

The development of an OPEB funding policy would document the method the City will use to determine its actuarially determined contributions to fund the long-term cost of benefits to City employees and retirees. The recommended policy will also:
• Demonstrate prudent financial management practices;
• Promote long-term and strategic thinking;
• Provide guidance in making annual budget decisions;
• Reassure bond rating agencies; and
• Demonstrate to employees and the public how OPEB will be funded to ensure adequate funding for negotiated benefits.

The OPEB funding policy objective would be to accumulate sufficient assets to fully fund the retiree healthcare benefits that the City’s retired employees receive throughout retirement. In meeting this objective, the City will strive to meet the following funding goals:
• The City will strive to maintain assets in the OPEB trust equal to 100% of the Actuarial Liability for OPEB through regular contributions to the OPEB Trust. • The City will strive to make regular contributions to the OPEB trust to achieve this goal.

• The funds in the OPEB trust will be used to pay the City’s OPEB payments each year.
• The City will strive to contribute its Actuarially Determined Contribution (ADC) into the OPEB trust each year.

This Policy will be consistent with the City’s financial goals and policy objectives and is intended to work in conjunction with the City’s other adopted financial policies (see proposed Surplus Utilization Policy below). To the extent the City has undesignated or unobligated funds in excess of its reserve policies, it is recommended that the City consider applying a portion of such funds toward its unfunded OPEB liabilities.

Strategy 13: Adoption of a Surplus Utilization Policy
Due to a variety of factors, such as economic expansion, frugal operations, or changes to various projects and programs, the City may end a fiscal year with a surplus of revenues over expenditures, encumbrances and reserve commitments. Budget surplus funds are those funds that result after closing the City’s accounting records for a fiscal year. On an annual basis, the City Manager will recommend allocations to the City Council on the use of budget surplus funds consistent with the uses identified in the Fund Balance Policy.

Surplus Utilization Policy Example:

After deficits, reserve deficiencies and other matters of fiscal concern, the City Manager or his/her designee may recommend that any remaining budget surplus funds be allocated on a one-time basis as follows:
• 50% allocated to one-time payments that reduce long-term obligations such as unfunded pension or OPEB liability, bonded indebtedness, or lease obligations; and
• 50% allocated to facility or infrastructure improvements, equipment purchases, or other long-term capital needs that improve the community’s safety, aesthetics, transportation, or quality of life.

To the extent that the City has excess reserves, unspent budget monies at year-end, unspent proceeds from capital projects, and/or one-time revenues or any additional resources as described in the section above, the City can consider establishing and allocating such available resources to a Section 115 Trust.

The Section 115 Trust allows the City to build its pension reserve while maintaining oversight of investment management and control over the risk tolerance of the portfolio. Money placed into the trust is irrevocable, meaning it cannot be withdrawn and used for another expenditure of the City. The benefits of the Section 115 Trust include:

1. Assets in the trust will offset unfunded pension liabilities.

2. The City will control the risk tolerance of the portfolio.

3. Assets held in trust will allow for greater investment flexibility and risk diversification compared to the City’s investment portfolio.

4. Assets can be used to stabilize rates – to offset unexpected contribution rate increases or be used as a rainy-day fund when revenues are impaired based on economic or other conditions.

5. A higher rate of return on investments may, under certain circumstances, be achieved than can be earned on the pooled investment portfolio or LAIF

6. City will have the flexibility to access trust assets any time, as long as it’s used to pay employer pension and OPEB obligations.

Once the City transfers funds into such a trust, they can only be utilized for payment of employee pension or OPEB costs that can be used to offset an otherwise General Fund contribution.

Strategy 14: General Fund Reserve Balance
Per the City’s Reserve Policy, the City shall budget to contain an amount equivalent to 50% of the City’s annual General Fund ongoing operating expenditures. The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) recommends, at a minimum, that general-purpose governments, regardless of size, maintain unrestricted fund balance in their General Fund of no less than two months regular General Fund operating revenues or expenditures which, based on FY 2021-22 actuals, is equivalent to a $3.6 million or a 17% contingency reserve in the City of Pinole. At the end of FY 2021-22, the City of Pinole had an unassigned General Fund balance of $9.4 million which is equivalent to a 43% reserve. In the years prior to FY 2021-22, the City had a sizable unassigned General Fund Reserve well in excess of 50% of operating expenditures (see Figure 14 below).

Figure 14. City of Pinole General Fund Unassigned Fund Balance According to the GFOA, the adequacy of the General Fund unreserved fund balance should be assessed based upon a government’s own specific circumstances. Credit rating agency Standard and Poor’s (S&P) considers an adequate level of “fund balance” to be a credit strength because the level of fund balance measures the flexibility of an issuer to meet essential services during transitionary periods.

Baker Tilly conducted a survey of benchmark cities and found contingency reserve requirements mostly in the range of 25% of operating budget (see Table 16 below).

Table 18. Total General Fund Balance and General Fund Reserve Policy Jurisdiction
Name
Total General
Fund Balance
General Fund Reserve Policy
Albany $11,588,267 25% of annual operating expenses
American
Canyon
$12,586,555 25% of annual operating expenses
Dixon $19,909,086 25% of annual operating expenses
El Cerrito $16,624,174 A minimum of 10% of annual operating expenses
Emeryville $58,883,427 50% of annual operating expenses Martinez $20,677,967 A minimum of $5,000,000 (16.2% of annual operating expense in FY 2021-22)
Pinole $35,256,850 50% of the City’s annual General Fund ongoing operating expenditures

The basic purpose of a General Fund reserve (a.k.a. rainy-day reserve) is to protect the City from unexpected or unforeseen fiscal disruptions such as catastrophic loss of critical infrastructure, unanticipated revenue shortfalls, and actions by another government that eliminates or shifts revenues from the City. The current projected General Fund reserve level for Fiscal Year ending 2022-23 is $8.9 million, which is in excess of the reserve level suggested by the GFOA. However, there are several factors that are worth considering when determining the appropriate reserve level. Market volatility can exacerbate pension funding requirements, naturally occurring events such as earthquakes are a risk, and other unforeseeable events could have a major financial impact. The GFOA prescribed lower reserve level would likely prove sufficient to cover any extraordinary costs, but it should be acknowledged that all future risks cannot be foreseen. It is prudent to use the availability of funds that result from lowering the reserve level to address one or more priorities such as the City’s OPEB liability, the establishment of an infrastructure replacement program, and the establishment of internal service funds (see section that follows).

Strategy 15: Develop an Internal Service Fund Cost Allocation and Reserve System Cities typically provide for the financing of certain operations using Internal Service Funds (ISF). An ISF is a fund used in governmental accounting to allocate centralized expenditures and services to departments on a cost reimbursement basis. All costs incurred for actual expenditures or services rendered in the ISF are charged to each department/fund at a predetermined rate based on their share of these expenditures.

Funds are budgeted in, and collected from, each department/fund at a predetermined rate. Typical examples of ISFs include:
• Insurance Reserve Fund: used to account for the City’s self-insured general liability, uninsured claims, and workers’ compensation programs. • Equipment Maintenance and Replacement Fund (examples): used to account for the cost of maintaining and replacing the City’s rolling stock fleet, 800 MHz radio system, parking equipment/infrastructure, and recreation and fire medical equipment.
• Compensated Absences Fund: used to account for the City’s accumulated liability for compensated absences.
• Retiree Medical Insurance Fund: used to account for the cost of providing postemployment health care benefits.

• Information Technology Fund: used to account for the cost of maintaining and replacing the City’s information technology (computer) systems.

Utilizing ISFs is considered a best practice by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) because it allows for an optimal cost allocation across all fund sources based on an equitable and pre-determined methodology; control and consistency in service, accurate accounting and reporting; and allows for a long-term outlook when planning and budgeting capital acquisitions.

GFOA recommends that governments follow these steps when considering an internal service pricing system:
• Identify goals of internal service pricing,
• Develop allocation strategy,
• Define level of costing detail,
• Determine cost of service, and
• Decide basis of allocation.

Strategy 16: Public Engagement in the Budget Process6
While not a focus of this engagement, we have upon request of the City Council summarized some good public participation practices that can help the City be more accountable and responsive to the community.

Good public participation practices can help governments be more accountable and responsive to their communities and can also improve the public's perception of governmental performance and the value the public receives from their government.

Transparency is a core value of governmental budgeting. Developing a transparent budget process will improve the government's credibility and trust within the community.

Traditionally, public participation meant voting, running for office, being involved in political campaigns, attending public hearings, and keeping informed on important issues of the day by reading government reports or the local newspaper. At an increased level of involvement, the public, acting as individuals and in groups, 6 Source: Government Finance Officers Association, Best Practices: Public Engagement in the Budget Process, September 28, 2018, https://www.gfoa.org/materials/public-engagement-in-the-budget-process

advocated specific government policies by attending or sponsoring public meetings, lobbying government officials, or bringing media attention to policy issues.

Governments have used new forms of public involvement - surveys, focus groups, neighborhood councils, social media, and Citizen Relationship Management systems, among others - as inputs to decisions about service levels and preferences, community priorities, and organizational performance. While public participation efforts can be extremely valuable, superficial or poorly designed efforts may simply waste valuable staff time and financial resources, and at worst can increase public cynicism if the public perceives that its input has not been taken seriously.

GFOA recommends that governments encourage effective and well implemented public engagement budget processes. This will enable the public to work with their government to help make beneficial budget decisions.

Decide Purpose of Public Engagement
Articulating the purpose for conducting a public participation process is critical because the purpose becomes the foundation for deciding who to involve, how to select them, what activities they will be involved in, what information will be collected, and how the government will use the information. Consequently, determining the purpose should be the first step in designing a participation effort. Governments should not initiate public participation processes without first establishing a tangible purpose or objectives. Purposes may include one or more of the following, and, in addition, individual governments may identify other purposes for involving the public:
• Performance. Improve performance by better understanding what the public wants and expects from its government. Establish performance measures that incorporate the public's perspective. See GFOA's best practice on Performance measures.
• Service Levels. Adjust service levels more closely to citizens' preferences in the context of limited resources.
• Differentiate. Differentiate among the expectations of a jurisdiction's various demographic groups in policy and service design.
• Priorities. Understand public priorities in planning, budgeting, and managing services. This is especially true when revenues are not sufficient, new services are required, or in disaster recovery situations.

Encourage People to Engage
The best way to assure a broad perspective is to collect information in a variety of ways and from a variety of sources. Consider the following items to get the public involved in the process.
• Schedule. Start early enough so that public input meaningfully influences decisions.
• Transparency. Provide information to the public in a format that they can understand. This approach is appropriate at all stages and may include:
▪ Newsletters
▪ Public notices in community media
▪ Public hearings
▪ Public reports, such as Budgets-in-Brief, Popular Annual Financial Reports, or performance reports
▪ Web sites and Dashboards - GFOA has a best practice on Website Posting of Financial Documents
▪ Individual or group emails, phone calls, and in-person contact • Education. Educate the public about different budget options. This can make for more informed decision making. Reach a shared set of facts. Recruit volunteers to attend meetings and educate the public. Use formats that encourage discussion about trade- offs, (such as a "game" format). • Fairness. Make sure that typically underrepresented groups are included. Recruit a diverse mix of participants.
• Groups. Create public or neighborhood advisory groups, committees, and informal task forces. These can be ongoing and can be used both to seek information during planning and information gathering, as well as with subsequent phases, including consideration of alternatives, decision making, implementation, evaluation, and reporting. It is important to identify specific groups that will be affected the most by the decisions made. • Technology. Use technology, such as a Constituent Relationship Management (CRM) systems to manage service relationships as well as to identify public preferences and priorities. It can also be a resource as to certain services that the public may have an interest in.

• Preferences. Identify citizen preferences and satisfaction levels. Common methods for soliciting information include the following:
▪ Surveys, either in person or via mail, phone, or Internet ▪ Focus groups
▪ Interviews
▪ Comment (or point of service) cards
▪ Public meetings, such as public hearings, "Town Hall meetings, and community vision sessions
▪ Interactive priority setting tools
Provide the Engagement Medium
Conversations will be more productive if the fallowing concepts are kept in mind. • Facts. Participants should have a common set of facts to work from. For instance, consider allocating budget dollars by discretionary and non-discretionary funds.

Focus on the public process with the discretionary dollars (money not set aside for mandatory or fixed costs). Make your information readily accessible, such as through a dedicated web page.
• Conversations. The environment needs to be designed to facilitate conversation.

For instance, a school setting may be less formidable than city hall. Smaller group settings may be more amenable than larger groups.
• Enjoyable. Make public participation an enjoyable experience. • Trade-Offs. Financial sustainability requires making hard decisions between competing uses of the community's resources. To truly engage the public in decision-making, they too must make hard choices.

Show Opportunities for Future Engagement
Governments should systematically collect, maintain, monitor, and analyze information gained from public involvement activities, maintain contact information on individuals and groups that wish to be kept informed. Governments should use multiple communication mechanisms to ensure that those involved or interested in the process are notified of opportunities for additional feedback and of decisions made based on the public involvement process. Most importantly, governments should explain how public involvement has made a difference in plans, budgets, and performance, and gather

public feedback on how successful the process has been through the public1s eyes.

Information derived from public involvement processes provides a critical perspective for making decisions in planning, budgeting, and management. However, such information should be considered along with expert knowledge and judgment (such as the engineering expertise necessary to build a bridge) and objective data (such as economic and demographic information, both of which are also critical to good decision making).

Service Reductions and Eliminations
Strategy 17: Take no action
The fiscal impact of taking no action would leave the City’s General Fund fully depleted of reserves by FY 2028-29, at which point the City would be forced to implement hiring freezes or layoffs to avoid bankruptcy. The option of “doing nothing” is not feasible without forcing the City into bankruptcy proceedings. Cities that have done so have incurred millions of dollars to get their debt obligations lifted. However, since the General Fund has very little debt obligations, even bankruptcy does not provide much relief. Moreover, the City would face litigation from creditors, employee groups, residents, and agencies such as CalPERS, risk insurance pools, and others. Ultimately, the City would be placed into a form of receivership by the state and would then be overseen by an appointed court to implement the necessary actions to allow the City to operate.

The status quo fiscal model indicates that the City faces a structural deficit that would increase from an annual shortfall of $7.8 million by FY 2034-35 to a deficit of $10.5 million by FY 2044-45. Reserves would be fully depleted by FY 2028-29. Without taking any action, the City would face severe fiscal consequences, such as bankruptcy, which could mean significant reductions or full outsourcing of services, including police, parks, recreation, and public works. It would have negative impacts on economic development and quite possibly home prices. The City would face difficulties in recruiting and retaining its workforce as it would have a negative reputation in the labor market.

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 5.B.

DATE: APRIL 30, 2024
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: MARKISHA GUILLORY, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2024/25 PRELIMINARY OPERATING FUNDS BASELINE BUDGET AND CITY COUNCIL REQUESTS FOR FY 2024/25 BUDGET

CHANGES

RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommend that the City Council:
• Receive a report on the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024/25 preliminary operating funds baseline budget and direct staff to make adjustments, if any; and • Inform staff of preliminary Council Member requests for potential FY 2024/25 budget additions or deletions.

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 financial resources. City staff is responsible for preparing a proposed budget for City Council’s consideration, modification, and adoption.

The first step in the annual budget development process is for City staff to create a “baseline” budget for the upcoming fiscal year. The baseline budget for the upcoming fiscal year (FY 2024/25, in this case) contains all of the ongoing revenue and expenditure items from the current budget (FY 2023/24) adjusted for known or anticipated changes in economic conditions, costs of goods and services, contractual agreements, etc. Staff uses the baseline budget to then develop the proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year and the status quo long-term financial forecast.

The City’s revenues and expenditures are partitioned into different “funds” to ensure that revenues that are intended for specific purposes are expended accordingly. Operating funds are those that are used to appropriate funds for day-to-day operations. The City’s main fund, the General Fund, accounts for all of the City’s general revenues and supports most of the City’s core services, such as police, fire, community services and recreation, and street and facility maintenance. The General Fund includes revenue from Measure S 2006 and Measure S 2014. General Fund resources can be spent on many different City activities. Because the General Fund is the largest fund and most flexible pool of City resources, it is the focus of the City’s budget. The City has other funds that account for revenues that are restricted for specific services and associated expenditures. In addition to the General Fund, the other operating

funds are the Recreation Fund, Building and Planning Fund, Pinole Cable Access Television (PCTV) Fund, and Sewer Enterprise Fund, which are included in this report.

City staff prepared the FY 2024/25 General Fund baseline budget and presented it to the Finance Subcommittee at its meeting on April 18, 2024, both to seek the Subcommittee’s feedback on the assumptions it contains and to inform the Subcommittee of the City’s underlying General Fund budget condition at that point in the development process. The Subcommittee did not direct staff to make any changes but recommended that the report be presented to the City Council during the special meeting (budget workshop) on April 30, 2024.

It is important to note that the baseline budget is not the same as the proposed budget. Once the baseline budget is set, it is built upon to produce the proposed budget, which will include non-recurring items, such as special initiatives and projects, and capital improvement projects.

The City can adopt a balanced budget even if the baseline budget has a small shortfall. That would require that the City Council remove some activities and expenses from the baseline budget.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
Budget Development Process
As noted above, the City goes through an annual process of developing a budget for the upcoming fiscal year. The City’s budget development process is considered an “incremental” budget process, meaning that the budget for the upcoming year is developed based on the current year’s budget and includes incremental changes. City staff takes the following steps to create the Preliminary Proposed budget:
• Finance Department will use the current FY 2023/24 budget, which incorporates any mid-year changes approved by the City Council, as the starting point; • Finance Department creates a “baseline budget” for FY 2024/25 by taking the ongoing revenues and expenditures included in the current FY 2023/24 budget and factoring in known or assumed changes, which department confirm, to ongoing revenues and expenditures for FY 2024/25 (i.e., forecasted changes to different revenue streams, general inflation, known changes to debt service, etc.); • Departments submit requests for changes from the baseline budget to address proposed special projects or increased service levels; and • Finance Department and City Manager consider department requests for changes to the baseline budget and prepare a Preliminary Proposed budget for the City Council’s consideration.

General Fund Baseline Budget
The FY 2024/25 General Fund baseline budget includes recurring General Fund revenues, such as the tax revenues, public safety charges, other revenues, and transfers in. Revenues have been adjusted to reflect growth rate assumptions. Recurring General Fund expenditures have also been adjusted. This includes increases in the salaries/wages to account for salary increases, increases in benefits consistent with updated rates, and inflationary increases in operations and maintenance. The baseline budget assumes no change in the staff levels or

programs. The baseline budget illustrates whether, if the City maintains its current revenue mechanisms and staffing and service levels, the budget would be balanced or not. It is a public finance best practice, and a goal of the City’s Financial Policy on a Structurally Balanced Budget, to create a proposed General Fund operating budget that is structurally balanced, meaning that ongoing revenues equal or exceed ongoing expenditures.

The FY 2024/25 preliminary baseline budget projection indicates a structural imbalance of approximately $1.3 million at this point as estimated ongoing expenditures exceed estimated ongoing revenues. This means that the City does not currently have the financial capacity to add new activities or expenditures to the General Fund budget unless it removes a commensurate amount of activities or expenditures. As we go through the budget development process, the City will work to identify and implement measures to balance the baseline budget. This effort has started with staff reviewing their department budgets to identify expenditure reductions to close the $1.3 million budget gap. Staff is also exploring other potential budget balancing measures.

One-time revenues and one-time expenditures for operating and capital improvements are not included in the baseline budget projection.

The table below compares the FY 2023/24 baseline budget to the FY 2024/25 baseline budget. The following section includes descriptions of the revenue and expenditure assumptions that were used to develop the FY 2024/25 baseline budget.

General Fund Revenues
Property Tax
Property tax is an ad valorem tax imposed on real property (land and permanently attached improvements such as buildings) and tangible personal property (movable property). The fixed statutory rate is 1% of assessed valuation of which the City of Pinole receives approximately 19%. Assessed value is based on the 1975 property values with subsequent increases limited to 2% or CPI growth, whichever is less. Property tax is made up of four components—secured (basic and Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund (RPTTF); unsecured; supplemental; and property transfer tax. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a 9% growth rate from FY

2023/24 due to an increase in the residual RPTTF revenue as a result of retirement of former Redevelopment debt and dissolution of the Successor Agency.

Sales Tax
Sales tax is imposed on taxable goods and services purchased from the following industry groups: autos and transportation, building and construction, business and industry, food and drugs, fuel and service stations, general consumer goods, restaurants and hotels, and online.

The overall sales tax rate on purchases made in Pinole is 9.75%. Of that amount, the City receives the statewide standard 1% (referred to as the Bradley Burns sales tax) plus 0.5% due to Measure S 2006 and 0.5% due to Measure S 2014. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a 3% growth rate in the City’s sales tax revenue, consistent with projections provided by HdL, the City’s sales tax consultant.

Utility Users Tax
Utility Users’ Tax (UUT) is levied in accordance with Chapter 3.26 of the Municipal Code, amended in 2018, which levies an 8% tax on the value of public utilities services consumed within the City limits for electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications. Low-income households are eligible for exemption from payment. The Electorate ratified renewal of the taxing authority in November 2018 with no sunset date. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a 2% growth rate based on historical trends. The electricity and gas segments in particular continue to increase substantially year over year in line with rate increases set by service providers.

Franchise tax
Franchise tax is levied on public utilities and other corporations that use the public right of way to furnish gas (PG&E) (1%), electric (PG&E) (2%), refuse (Republic Services) (10%), and cable television (Comcast and AT&T) (5%) to citizens living within city boundaries. The various fees are delineated in franchise agreements and are paid directly to the city by these franchisees. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes an 8% growth rate based on historical trends.

Intergovernmental Taxes
Motor vehicle in-lieu fee (VLF) is the City’s share of motor vehicle license fees levied, collected and apportioned by the State. VLF is a tax on the ownership of registered motor vehicles which takes the place of taxation of this personal property. The VLF is paid annually at the time vehicle licenses are renewed based on current value adjusted for depreciation. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a 4% growth rate, consistent with projections provided by HdL, the City’s property tax consultant.

Transient Occupancy Tax
Transient occupancy tax (TOT) is a 10% tax levied by the City for the privilege of occupying quarters on a transient basis in accordance with Chapter 3.24 of the Municipal Code. This tax is imposed upon persons staying 30 days or less in a motel or lodging facility. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a 2% growth rate based on historical trends.

Business License Tax
Business license tax is assessed on all businesses doing business within City limits in accordance with Municipal Code Title 5. The City charges business license tax in accordance with the provisions of Government Code 37101. Pinole’s tax is computed based on a flat tax (currently $160) per year combined with a variable tax component based on the number of employees. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a 2% growth rate based on historical trends.

Charges for Services
Charges for services is comprised of public safety charges which are received for dispatch services provided to the cities of Hercules and San Pablo under an Intergovernmental Service Sharing agreement. A portion of the costs of this activity are reimbursed by the City of Hercules and the City of San Pablo. Under the current agreement, the City recovers approximately 67% of its budget. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a 5% growth rate based on projections provided in the five-year agreement that went into effect on July 1, 2023.

Other Revenue
Other revenue is made up of all other revenue sources, such as fees, permits, interest income, grants, reimbursements, and other miscellaneous revenue. These revenues are projected primarily using historical trend analysis. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a 34% growth rate. The substantial growth is mostly due to increased revenue resulting from the imposition of updated fees following the comprehensive user fee study that was conducted in 2022.

Transfers In
The transfer in comes from the Pension Section 115 Trust to offset the increase in pension costs in the General Fund. The amount transferred is based on the difference between the City’s base year (FY 2018/19) contribution towards employee pensions and the forecasted required City contribution in the budget year.

General Fund Expenditures
Salaries & Wages
Salaries and wages expenditures in the baseline budget are computed based on the City’s current staffing level of 115 full-time equivalents (FTEs). It does not assume any new positions. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a net 6% increase and includes a 4% cost of living adjustment for all employee bargaining groups and the management group, and market equity adjustments for several position classifications as approved in current labor agreements.

Also, the baseline budget includes a vacancy savings factor to account for estimated cost savings resulting from unfilled positions. The vacancy savings factor is $510,000, or 3% of

total personnel expenditures.

Benefits
Retirement benefits are the City’s annual required contribution as determined by the most recent actuarial valuation reports as of July 2023 provided by the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS). The FY 2024/25 baseline budget reflects the estimated cost net of the required employer contribution minus employee contributions. Based on labor contracts between the City and its employees, employees contribute the 8% required employee contribution plus an additional 7% toward the required employer contribution, for a total of 15% for classic members. It should be noted that the pension unfunded liability increased significantly from FY 2023/24 to FY 2024/25 due to CalPERS’ investment losses in the previous year. In turn, the required employer contribution increased by 16%, approximately $700,000.

Other benefits include employee medical/dental/vision care, workers’ compensation, and others. The benefits cost in the FY 2024/25 baseline budget is based primarily on historical trends and rates established by benefit providers. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a net 21% increase mostly due to significant increases in pension and healthcare costs.

Professional Services
Professional services include consulting and administrative services, building and equipment maintenance, office expenses, travel & training, and various other professional services.

Contracted services provided by other government agencies, including the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) for fire services and County animal and library services, are budgeted in this category. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a net 6% growth rate primarily based on anticipated contractual escalators.

Other Operating
Other operating expenditures include water, electricity & power, and cable utility costs. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a 10% growth rate based on rate increases, primarily electricity.

Materials and Supplies
Materials and supplies include fuel, maintenance supplies, and safety equipment. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a 1% increase based on historical trends.

Interdepartmental Charges
Interdepartmental charges include administrative charges and reimbursements for services provided by one City department to another, such as finance, human resources, information technology, and legal services. This category also includes general liability insurance premiums. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a net 2% decrease based on lower reimbursements to the General Fund from other funds.

Asset/Capital Outlay

Capital outlay includes non-major asset acquisition and improvements, such as computer equipment and furniture. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a 1% growth rate based on the cost estimates of specific items to be purchased.

Major capital improvements funded by the General Fund and Measure S are not reflected in the FY 2024/25 baseline budget. Though they may span multiple fiscal years, capital projects are non-recurring in nature and are not accounted for in the baseline budget.

Debt Service
Debt service includes the payment of principal and interest on the 2006 pension obligation bonds (POBs) that were issued to finance the City’s unfunded accrued actuarial liability with CalPERS. The required annual payment is based on the long-term debt obligation schedule.

Transfers Out
Transfers out includes the transfer of funds from the General Fund and Measure S to other funds to support Recreation and Pinole Community Television (PCTV) operations. The transfer helps to stabilize the budgets in those areas as the operating costs are not fully recoverable. The FY 2024/25 baseline budget assumes a flat dollar amount consistent with past practice. However, increases may be necessary to keep up with the increase in Recreation and PCTV operating expenditures.

Non-Recurring Budget Items
The City Council allocated funds to one-time budget items and capital improvement projects using available (“unassigned”) fund balance in the General Fund and Measure S 2014 Fund.

Most of the items are carried forward from prior fiscal years as they either have not started or have started but will not be completed in the current fiscal year. Staff recommends that the City Council review the following list of non-recurring budget items and propose any changes during the budget workshop on April 30th.

Other Operating Funds
Recreation Fund

The Recreation Fund accounts for funds received from fees for participation in recreational programs. The Recreation Fund preliminary budget is a status quo budget as there are no substantial changes from the prior fiscal year. It includes an operating subsidy (transfers in) from the General Fund and Measure S 106 Fund, which is budgeted at a flat rate set by the City Council in the past. Due to the year-over-year growth in expenditures, an increase in the subsidy may be necessary.

Building and Planning Fund
The Building & Planning Fund accounts for funds received from fees and permits for building and planning services. Fees are collected to recover the cost primarily related to inspections and plan checks performed. The Building and Planning Fund preliminary budget is a status quo budget as there are no substantial changes from the prior fiscal year.

Pinole Community Television Fund
The Pinole Cable Access Television (PCTV) Fund accounts for revenue received from cable franchise fees, video production and broadcast charges, and Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) access fees. The PCTV preliminary budget is a status quo budget as there are no substantial changes from the prior fiscal year. The large increase in asset/capital outlay is due to several one-time items, mainly for equipment upgrades. PEG access fees are designated for equipment purchases. The budget includes an operating subsidy (transfers in) from the General Fund and Measure S 106 Fund, which is budgeted at a flat rate set by the City Council in the past. Due to the year-over-year growth in expenditures, an increase in the subsidy may be necessary.

Sewer Enterprise Fund
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. The Sewer Enterprise Fund preliminary budget is a status quo budget as there are no substantial changes from the prior year. The large increase in asset/capital outlay is due to several major capital improvement projects.

Next Steps
The City Council will hold a special meeting (workshop) on April 30, 2024. At that time, staff will present an overview of the FY 2024/25 preliminary operating baseline budget and get direction on Council Members’ requests for potential additions/deletions to the baseline budget for incorporation into the Preliminary Proposed budget.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact as a result of this report.

ATTACHMENTS
None

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 5.C.

DATE: APRIL 30, 2024
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: SANJAY MISHRA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: DRAFT FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2024/25 - FY 2028/29 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT

PLAN BUDGET

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council receive an overview of the draft fiscal Year (FY) 2024- 25 through 2028-29 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and provide recommendations.

BACKGROUND
The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a multi-year plan/forecast of the City’s capital improvement projects. The City creates an updated CIP each year based on the condition of the City’s current capital assets, the desire for new capital assets, and available funding. The CIP serves as a tool for staff to plan, implement, and manage improvements and ongoing upgrades to the City’s infrastructure.

A variety of funding sources support projects in the CIP. The first year’s program is adopted by the City Council as the Capital Budget, as a counterpart to the annual Operating Budget. The fiscal resources are appropriated only in the first year, and the subsequent four years of the CIP are important for long term planning and subject to further review and modification.

The draft FY 2024-25 through 2028-29 CIP consists of projects that fall into the following broad categories:
• Facilities
• Parks
• Sanitary Sewer
• Stormwater
• Streets and Roads
• Infrastructure Assessments
On April 18, 2024, staff presented an overview of the draft FY 2024-25 through 2028-29 CIP to the Finance Subcommittee. Clarification was provided for various projects and the project sheets have been updated to reflect the information shared with the Finance Subcommittee.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
Many projects in the CIP currently underway have been carried over from previous years, several of which are multi-year efforts. Over the past few years, due to limited staff and resources, certain projects were prioritized because they were either already underway, had a

regulatory component, or were grant funded and had sensitive funding timelines. Several projects were recommended for deferral due to various factors, which include:
• Dependency on completion of precursor capital projects/master plans in progress; • Dependency on other capital projects for coordinated, efficient implementation; • Pending grant award results and obligations to complete grant funded projects; • Coordination with private developers and utilities on associated projects; and • Limited staff resources
On February 7, 2023, Staff presented a Capital Projects Prioritization Matrix which will serve as a planning and evaluation tool to optimize the use of available resources. Staff will utilize this tool to generate rankings for projects which will appear in the Preliminary Proposed five - year CIP which is scheduled for presentation to City Council later.

Below is a summary of projects in the draft FY 2024-25 through 2027-28 CIP.

Projects added to the CIP by the City Council during FY 2023/24 • None
Projects removed from the CIP by the City Council during FY 2023/24 • None
Projects removed from the CIP by the Staff during FY 2023/24 • FA1902 – Energy Upgrades
• RO1802 – Hazel Street Gap Closure (Sunnyview)
Projects expected to be complete by FY 2023/24
• PA2301 – Tree Mitigation
• PA2101 – Installation of High-Capacity Trash Bins
• SS2102 – Air Release Valve Replacements
• SW1901 – Hazel Street Storm Drain Improvements
• RO2304 – Safety Improvements at Tennent Ave./Pear & Plum • RO1714 – Safety Improvements at Appian Way & Marlesta Rd. (formerly known as HAWK at Appian Way and Marlesta)
• IN2201 – Energy Conservation, Generation, & Storage Assessment (formerly known as Energy Audit)
• IN2106 – Active Transportation Plan
• IN2102 – Municipal Broadband Feasibility
• IN1704 – Parks Master Plan
New projects that staff recommended for addition because they are high priority or they have a substantial outside funding contribution
• FA 2401 – Tiny Tots Flooring and Painting
• SS-2406 – WPCP Solar and Battery
• SS2405 – Lower Tennent Trunk Sewer Capacity
• SS2404 – WPCP Boiler Replacement
• SS2403 – WPCP Centrifuge Replacement
• SS2402 – Pinon-2 Capacity
• SS2401 – Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Phase 2 (Phase 2 of SS2201) • SW2401 – Storm Drain Creek Discharge Improvements
• RO2403 – Old Town Traffic Calming

• RO2402 – Sidewalk Rehabilitation Program
• RO2401 – Road Maintenance Repairs
The FY 2024/25 – 2028/29 CIP contains 35 capital improvement projects and 5 infrastructure assessments that are scheduled to be undertaken over the five-year timeframe and are fully or partially funded. The CIP also includes information for 38 unfunded projects.

FISCAL IMPACT
The draft FY 2024-25 through 2028-29 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) includes $74,238,464 in identified projects of which, $29,315,000 are listed as unfunded. The draft FY 2024-25 through 2028-29 CIP constitutes the proposed FY 2024-25 budget in the amount of $19,118,464. Years two through five of the CIP will be used in forecasting funding needs.

ATTACHMENTS
A. DRAFT CIP Narrative
B. DRAFT - CIP Summary
C. DRAFT - CIP Sheets
D. DRAFT- CIP Unfunded Project List

CITY OF PINOLE

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
FY 2024/25 – 2028/29
DRAFT April 30, 2024

CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENT PLAN
FY 2024/25 – 2028/29

CITY COUNCIL
Maureen Toms, Mayor
Cameron N. Sasai, Mayor Pro Tem
Devin T. Murphy, Council Member
Anthony L. Tave, Council Member
Norma Martínez-Rubin, Council Member

INTERIM CITY MANAGER
Neil Gang

PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
Sanjay Mishra

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT &

ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM MANAGER
Vacant

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN: FY 2024/25 THROUGH FY 2028/29

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction...............................................................................................................................1 Capital Projects Prioritization Matrix.......................................................................................2 Next Steps in Capital Planning.................................................................................................2 Project Funding.........................................................................................................................2 Funding Sources.......................................................................................................................3 Grants ........................................................................................................................................4 Overview of Recommended Capital Budget ...........................................................................5 Funding Summary ....................................................................................................................6 Project Description Sheets – Facilities ............................................................................9-17 Project Description Sheets – Parks..............................................................................18-22 Project Description Sheets – Sanitary Sewer................................................................23-29 Project Description Sheets – Stormwater......................................................................30-32 Project Description Sheets – Roads..............................................................................33-44 Project Description Sheets – Infrastructure Assessments .............................................45-53 Unfunded Project List.............................................................................................................55 Project Description Sheets ...........................................................................................56-67

Introduction
The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a multi-year tool used to identify the City’s capital needs and schedule capital improvement projects over the upcoming five-year period. Capital improvements include the design, purchase, construction, maintenance, or improvement of public capital assets (i.e., streets, parks, buildings, etc.).

The projects in the CIP fall into the following broad categories:
• Facility maintenance;
• Parks;
• Sewer collection and treatment;
• Stormwater;
• Streets and roads; and
• Infrastructure assessments.

The FY 2024/25 – 2028/29 CIP contains 35 capital improvement projects and 5 infrastructure assessments that are scheduled to be undertaken over the five-year timeframe and are fully or partially funded. The CIP also includes information for 38 unfunded projects. A funded project is one that has identified specific funding, including on-going existing resources to fully implement the project. A partially funded project has funding to accomplish various phases of the project but lacks sufficient funding to complete the project. An unfunded project is one that has been identified in the CIP as a need but no funding secured to implement the project. Should funding become available through grant or other sources, the unfunded list can be reviewed to determine if it is suitable to seek such funding.

Each project is assigned a project number and described in detail in the project sheets. The nomenclature for the project number is derived as follows:
• Project numbers begin with the abbreviation of the
project category, followed by the year the project was
first programmed, and then a unique sequence
number. For example, FA2001 refers to a facilities
project which was first programmed in 2020 with a
unique sequence number of 01. Unfunded projects
begin with UF and are followed by a unique sequence
number.

The CIP is reviewed and updated annually. In recent years, the City has increased its focus on assessing the state of the City’s infrastructure by inventorying all the assets, assessing their contributions to a safe and vibrant Pinole, assessing their current conditions, and creating a disciplined investment approach resulting in a strong and purpose driven Capital Investment Plan.

The preparation and adoption of the CIP is an important part of Pinole’s financial planning and budgeting process. Proposed projects are reviewed by the Planning Commission for consistency with the General Plan. The project description sheet provides information on the General Plan goal or policy that the project aligns with. Appendix I describes the applicable General Plan goals and policies. The Finance Subcommittee also reviews the CIP and makes recommendations.

Category Abbreviation
Facilities FA
Parks PA
Sewer SS
Stormwater SW
Streets &
Roads
RO
Infrastructure
Assessments
IN
Unfunded UF

The process for developing the CIP involves the following steps:

Development of the FY 2024/25 through FY 2028/29 CIP
Most of the projects in the FY 2024/25 through FY 2028/29 CIP are the continuation of multiyear projects that have already been initiated or are projects that were included in the prior year’s CIP but have not yet been initiated. The FY 2024/25 through FY 2028/29 CIP was developed by taking the adopted FY 2023/24 thru FY 2027/28 CIP, then deleting projects that have been completed or no longer seem necessary and adding new projects. Below is a summary of the changes during FY 2023/24.

Projects added to the CIP by the City Council during FY 2023/24 • None
Projects removed from the CIP by the City Council during FY 2023/24 • None
Projects removed from the CIP by the Staff during FY 2023/24 • FA1902 – Energy Upgrades
• RO1802 – Hazel Street Gap Closure (Sunnyview)
Projects expected to be complete by FY 2023/24
• PA2301 – Tree Mitigation
• PA2101 – Installation of High-Capacity Trash Bins
• SS2102 – Air Release Valve Replacements
• SW1901 – Hazel Street Storm Drain Improvements
• RO2304 – Safety Improvements at Tennent Ave./Pear & Plum • RO1714 – Safety Improvements at Appian Way & Marlesta Rd. (formerly known as HAWK at Appian Way and Marlesta)
• IN2201 – Energy Conservation, Generation, & Storage Assessment (formerly known as Energy Audit)
• IN2106 – Active Transportation Plan
• IN2102 – Municipal Broadband Feasibility
• IN1704 – Parks Master Plan
The City’s capital projects have historically been prioritized based on a number of factors, including regulatory compliance, health/safety, grant funding availability, sustainability and conservation, and others. In FY 2022/23, City staff created a more structured, quantitative methodology for prioritizing capital projects. The prioritization matrix is a planning and evaluation tool to optimize available resources. Staff ranks capital projects which have not been initiated based on the following methodology.

Identify projects
for CIP budget
Prioritize projects
and identify
funding
Prepare budget
for CIP
CIP Review by
Finance
Subcommittee
and Planning
Commission
City Council
adoption
Implementation of
approved projects
in CIP

CATEGORY SCORE (1-5) CATEGORY
WEIGHT

WEIGHTED
SCORE
Regulatory Compliance 4
Health/Safety 3
Project
Dependency/Bundling
3 Long-Term Planning 2
State of Infrastructure 2
Operating Budget Impact 2
Quality of Life 2
Grant Funding 1
Sustainability and
Conservation
1 TOTAL SCORE (100 Points Maximum)
The methodology scores each potential capital project on nine weighted criteria. This results in a score between 0 and 100 for each project. Staff used this new methodology for the first time in creating the FY 2023/24 through 2027/28 Five-Year CIP.

Staff ranked all projects in the CIP including unfunded projects. The scores are listed on each project sheet and serve as the basis for selecting which capital projects staff initiates based on available resources. Note, this matrix does not consider infrastructure assessments. Project sheets contain the weighted score. Additional information on category scoring guidelines are described in Appendix II. Staff rated the projects in the current CIP that have not yet been initiated. The ranking of these not-yet-initiated projects was used by staff to propose, in the FY 2024/25 through 2028/29 Five-Year CIP, which projects to schedule for FY 2024/25 and which to schedule for later years.

Projects from the adopted FY 2023/24 through 2027/28 Five-Year CIP that have not yet been started and staff recommends for deferral because they are low priority • None
New projects that staff recommended for addition because they are high priority or they have a substantial outside funding contribution
• FA 2401 – Tiny Tots Flooring and Painting
• SS-2406 – WPCP Solar and Battery
• SS2405 – Lower Tennent Trunk Sewer Capacity
• SS2404 – WPCP Boiler Replacement
• SS2403 – WPCP Centrifuge Replacement
• SS2402 – Pinon-2 Capacity
• SS2401 – Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Phase 2 (Phase 2 of SS2201) • SW2401 – Storm Drain Creek Discharge Improvements
• RO2403 – Old Town Traffic Calming
• RO2402 – Sidewalk Rehabilitation Program
• RO2401 – Road Maintenance Repairs

Below are the list of capital improvement projects and infrastructure assessments included in the FY 2024/25 – 2028/29 CIP:

FACILITIES
Project # Project Name
FA2401 Tiny Tots Flooring and Painting
FA2302 Plum St. Parking Lot Improvements
FA2301 Public Safety Building Modernization
FA2202 Senior Center Modernization
FA1901 Senior Center Auxiliary Parking Lot
FA1703 City Hall Modernization
FA1702 Citywide Roof Repairs and Replacement
PARKS
Project # Project Name
PA2202 Skatepark Rehabilitation
PA2201 Pocket Parks - Galbreth Rd.

PA1901 Pinole Valley Park Soccer Field Rehabilitation

SANITARY SEWER
Project # Project Name
SS2406 WPCP Solar and Battery
SS2405 Lower Tennent Trunk Sewer Capacity
SS2404 WPCP Boiler Replacement
SS2403 WPCP Centrifuge Replacement
SS2402 Pinon-2 Capacity
SS2401 Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Phase 2
SS2203 Effluent Outfall
SS2201 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation
SS2101 Secondary Clarifier Rehabilitation
SS2002 Water Pollution Control Plan Lab Remodel
SS1702 Sewer Pump Station Rehabilitation

STORMWATER
Project # Project Name
SW2401 Storm Drain Creek Discharge Improvements
SW2001 Roble Road Storm Drainage Improvements

STREETS & ROADS
Project # Project Name
RO2403 Old Town Traffic Calming
RO2402 Sidewalk Rehabilitation Program
RO2401 Road Maintenance Repairs
RO2303 Pinole Smart Signals
RO2302 Safety Improvements on Arterial Roadways
RO2301 Road Rehabilitation
RO2107 Brandt St. Improvements
RO2102 Tennent Ave Rehabilitation
RO2101 Arterial Rehabilitation
RO1902 Pedestrian Improvements at Tennent Ave. Near RXR RO1710 San Pablo Avenue Bride Over BNSF Railroad
RO1708 Pinole Valley Road Improvements

INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENTS
Project # Project Name
IN2301 Facilities & Real Estate Master Plan
IN2105 Appian Way Complete Streets
IN2103 Recycled Water Feasibility
IN2101 Emergency Power for Critical Facilities
IN1703 Storm Drain Master Plan
The FY 2024/25 – 2028/29 CIP contains a list of 38 unfunded projects.

The following projects were added as a result of recommendations from recently completed master planning efforts and bridge inspections:
• UF034 City Hall Energy Upgrades
• UF035 Public Safety Building Energy Upgrades
• UF036 WPCP Energy Upgrades
• UF037 Youth Center Upgrades
• UF038 Park Energy Upgrades
The following projects were added as a result of Council requests:
• UF033 – Old Town Traffic Calming
The following projects were removed:
• Pinon-1
• Pinon-2
• Tennent-1

Next Steps in City Capital Planning
The City is in the process of completing a condition assessment of all of the City’s capital assets to identify the funding levels required to maintain these assets. The City will continue to integrate capital planning information into the Long-Term Financial Plan, so City decision makers are aware of the City’s capital needs when they consider allocation of the City’s limited financial resources and consider possibly pursuing additional sources of City revenue.

Project Funding
A variety of funding sources support projects listed in the CIP. The first year’s program in the CIP is adopted by the City Council as the Capital Budget, as a counterpart to the annual Operating Budget. The fiscal resources are appropriated only in the first year, the subsequent four years of the CIP are important for long term planning and subject to further review and modification.

The CIP is funded primarily with funds restricted for specific purposes. The next section descibes various funding sources and their restrictions. Some projects are entirely or partially funded by grants and reimbursements from state and federal government and other agencies.

Funding Sources
Fund # Fund Name
(restriction)
Description
100 General Fund
(unrestricted)
The General Fund is the main operating fund for the City.

It accounts for sources and uses of resources that
(primarily) are discretionary to the City Council in the provision of activities, programs and services deemed
necessary and desirable by the community.
106 Measure S 2014
(unrestricted)
Accounts for 2014 voter-approved half-cent Local Use Tax which levies 0.5% each on all merchandise. Although these are unrestricted General Fund revenues, the 2014 Use
Taxes have been allocated by the City Council to fund
Infrastructure Projects as their highest funding priority. 200
Gas Tax - RMRA
(roads and right-ofway)
Accounts for the Highway Users Tax (HUTA) State imposed excise taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel sales within the City limits. Gas Tax funds are restricted for use in the construction, improvement and maintenance of public
streets. The taxes are allocated to Pinole through the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA)
established by the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017.
214 Solid Waste
Accounts for special revenue received from Republic
Services from a surcharge assessed on customer rates for solid waste services. These funds are set aside for future solid waste capital and for a rate stabilization fund.
276
Growth Impact Fees
(nexus identified
needs)
Accounts for development fees collected to mitigate the impact of new development. Provides funds for nexus
identified needs only.

325
City Street
Improvements
(roads only)
Accounts for funds set aside by the City of Pinole to fund street improvement projects. The Measure S 2014 funding plan allocates $250k annually to this fund.
500 Sewer Enterprise
(sewer only)
Accounts for fees charged to residents and businesses for sewer utilities. Fees are used to operate the PinoleHercules Water Pollution Control Plant which services the Pinole and Hercules areas.

Grants
Certain projects are eligible to receive grant funds from state, federal, or other agencies. City staff actively pursues outside funding sources to support projects that are programmed in the CIP. Grants differ based on scope of work, funding source, requirements, and timelines. A grant’s scope is determined by the policy goals of the grantor, and the grantee is obligated to provide deliverables based on the terms and conditions set forth in the grant funding agreement.

Before responding to a grant opportunity, staff reviews the grant solicitation to evaluate the:
• eligibility requirements to ensure the City can apply for funds; • alignment of scope with the City’s adopted CIP;
• feasibility of undertaking the responsibility of grant deliverables; • short term revenue vs. long term costs of the oppprtunity to ensure that the grant revenue does not result into a fiscal burden of unprecedented permanent or long term expenditures such as the need to hire additional staff, ongoing operations and maintenance;
• required resources vs. available resources such as staff support and grant match; • indirect costs related to administration of the grant such as legal fees; and • cost benefit analysis to confirm that the grant is in the City’s best interests.

Once a viable grant opportunity is identified, staff follows the grantors’ determined application process to develop application materials and submit the grant. After notification of grant award, staff is responsible for grant implementation which includes project execution, oversight, reporting/reimbursement requests, record keeping, and project closeout. Effective management of the grant funds limits the City’s exposure to grant-related legal liability and improves the efficiency and impacts of projects which are funded through grants.

Road projects listed in the CIP receive grant funding from a variety of sources such as:
➢ California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
o Highway Bridge Program (HBP) – funds to improve bridge structural safety. ▪ Project: RO1710
o Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) – funds projects that significantly reduce fatalities and injuries on all public roads.
• Project: RO2302

➢ West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) o Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program (STMP) – funds projects that provide congestion relief and mitigate traffic impacts on regional routes through capacity improvements on those routes, improved transit services for subregional and regional travel, and improved facilities that allow West County residents to more efficiently access regional routes and transit service. ▪ Projects: IN2105, RO1902, and RO1710
➢ Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
o One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) – policy framework for MTC’s distribution of federal State Transportation Program and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program funds. The OBAG program provides funding for local street and road maintenance, streetscape enhancements, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, Safe Route to School projects, Priority Conservation Areas, and Transportation planning.
▪ Projects: RO2303 (County funding), RO1902
o Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 – funds construction and/or engineering of bicycle or pedestrian capital or quick build projects, maintenance of Class I or Class IV separated bikeways, bicycle and/or pedestrian safety education projects, development of a comprehensive bicycle or pedestrian facilities plans, and restriping Class II bicycle lanes and buffered bicycle lanes. • Project: None
GRANT TLC Project: RO1710
The receipt of certain grants and reimbursements typically follow the award of contracts; therefore, other City funding is programmed for front-end financing of the total estimated project costs.

CITY OF PINOLE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN: FY 2024/25 THROUGH FY 2028/29

FUNDING SUMMARY
SOURCES BY FUND FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 5-Year Total 100 - General Fund $ 90,000 $ 480,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 570,000 106 - Measure S 2014 $ 4,125,262 $ 2,090,000 $ 270,000 $ 270,000 $ 270,000 $ 7,025,262 200 - Gas Tax $ 1,195,000 $ 381,082 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,576,082 215 - Grant: TLC $ 133,579 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 133,579
215 - Grant: HSIP $ 239,040 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 239,040
215 - Grant: OBAG $ 464,000 $ 556,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,020,000 276 - Growth Impact Fees $ 1,225,000 $ 65,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,290,000 325 - City Street Improvements $ 870,000 $ 1,151,507 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 3,071,507 325 - Grant: STMP Fees $ 1,650,189 $ 99,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,749,189 325 - Grant: HBP $ 41,394 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 41,394
377 - Arterial Streets Rehabilitation $ 895,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 895,000 500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund $ 8,190,000 $ 3,847,411 $ 7,445,000 $ 4,995,000 $ 2,835,000 $ 27,312,411 Sources Total $ 19,118,464 $ 8,670,000 $ 8,065,000 $ 5,615,000 $ 3,455,000 $ 44,923,464 Unfunded Total $ - $ 29,315,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 29,315,000 Total Sources Required $ 19,118,464 $ 37,985,000 $ 8,065,000 $ 5,615,000 $ 3,455,000 $ 74,238,464

PROJECT DESCRIPTION SHEETS

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN: FY 2024/25 THROUGH FY 2028/29

UNFUNDED PROJECTS
# Unfunded Projects
UF001 Railroad Avenue Bridge Removal and Replacement
UF002 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations in City Lots
UF003 Parking Lot Resurfacing
UF004 LLAD Landscape Restoration and Improvement
UF005 Dog Park Restroom Replacement
UF006 Dog Park Resurfacing and Fencing Improvements
UF007 Eucalyptus Grove Restoration
UF008 Fernandez Park Baseball Grandstand Improvement
UF009 Repave Trails
UF010 ADA Ramps
UF011 Appian Complete Streets
UF012 Pedestrian Bridge Maintenance (formerly known as Bridge Maintenance) UF013 Fernandez Park Improvements
UF014 Pavement Maintenance
UF015 I-80/Pinole Valley Rd. Interchange Improvements
UF016 Shale Hill Retaining Wall and Sidewalk Gap
UF017 Sidewalks Gaps
UF018 Signal System Upgrades
UF019 Tennent-2
UF020 Tree Master Plan
UF021 San Pablo Avenue Bridge over BNSF Railroad
UF022 Installation of Solar at City Facilities
UF023 All Access Weather Roads
UF024 Faria House Renovations
UF025 San Pablo Avenue Complete Streets
UF026 Signalized Intersections
UF027 Pedestrian Safety at Signalized Intersections
UF028 Safety at Unsignalized Intersections
UF029 Roadway Segments #1
UF030 Roadway Segments #2
UF031 Roadway Segments #3
UF032 Vehicular Bridge Maintenance
UF033 Old Town Traffic Calming
UF034 City Hall Energy Upgrades
UF035 Public Safety Building Energy Upgrades
UF036 WPCP Energy Upgrades
UF037 Youth Center Upgrades
UF038 Park Energy Upgrades
Legend:

New unfunded projects added

APPENDIX I: Capital Improvement Plan consistency with General Plan Funding is estimated for specific projects or asset plans in the FY 2024/25 – 2028/29 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) which support the goals and policies of following elements of the General Plan:
• Community Character (CC)
• Growth Management (GM)
• Land Use & Economic Development (LU)
• Housing (H)
• Circulation Element (CE)
• Community Services and Facilities (CS)
• Health and Safety (HS)
• Natural Resources and Open Space (OS)
• Sustainability Element (SE)
The acroynms and associated General Plan goals/policies are listed on individual project sheets.

The FY 2024/25 – 2028/29 CIP includes funding for projects over the next five (5) fiscal years that support General Plan policies and enhance public infrastructure, amenities, and services in Pinole. The CIP is consistent with and helps implement the following General Plan goals and policies:

Community Character Element
GOAL CC.1 Maintain Pinole’s unique qualities and sense of place to preserve the established historic and small-town character of the city.

POLICY CC.1.2 Require all new development to incorporate high-quality site design, architecture and planning to enhance the overall quality of the built environment in Pinole and create a visually interesting and aesthetically pleasing town environment.

POLICY CC.1.3 To enhance a sense of arrival and create a strong appealing image that promotes community identity, the City shall develop community entry features at key gateways or city entries along Interstate 80. Entryways shall incorporate landscaping, trees, structural architectural elements, signage and public art.

POLICY CC.1.5 Encourage project compatibility, interdependence and support with neighboring uses, especially between commercial and mixed-use centers and the surrounding residential neighborhoods. Uses should relate to one another with pedestrian connections, transit options, shared parking, landscaping, public spaces, and the orientation and design of buildings.

GOAL CC.2 Emphasize and enhance the visual and physical connection between the city’s natural environment and the community’s quality of life.

POLICY CC.2.1 Provide visual and physical connections between the natural environment and the built environment through careful site design, building placement, architectural features that allow views of Pinole’s unique environment such as ridgelines or the San Pablo Bay shoreline, public access to open space such as via the Bay Trail, and the use of native vegetation in the urban environment such as for landscape buffers for sidewalk areas and street trees.

POLICY CC.2.2 Preserve natural resources within the built environment, including trees, marshes, creeks and hillsides.

GOAL CC.5 Enhance the quality of life in Pinole by acknowledging the cultural diversity and by promoting, preserving and sustaining the cultural and performing arts.

POLICY CC.5.1 Celebrate the city’s cultural diversity through public art, cultural centers and community events for the benefit and enjoyment of all residents.

POLICY CC.5.2 Develop programs and facilities that promote the cultural and performing arts in Pinole.

Growth Management Element
GOAL GM.1 Regional Planning. Support cooperative transportation, land use and public service planning in Contra Costa County.

POLICY GM.1.1 West Contra Costa County Planning Activities. Achieve efficient public service delivery by coordinating with affected jurisdictions and agencies concerning public and private developments.

GOAL GM.3 Efficient Transportation. Support land use patterns that make efficient use of the transportation system and enhance public safety.

POLICY GM.3.1 Transportation Management. Make more efficient use of the regional and subregional transportation system.

POLICY GM.3.3 Provide Adequate Transportation Facilities and Services. Provide adequate transportation facilities while maintaining neighborhood integrity.

POLICY GM.3.7 Mobility-Impaired. Support efforts to provide safe and convenient transportation systems for all citizens of Pinole, particularly mobility-impaired individuals.

GOAL GM.4 Compact Development and Service Areas. Encourage infill and redevelopment in areas that are already served by utilities, infrastructure and public services.

POLICY GM.4.1 Planning for Present and Future Community Needs. Plan for, provide and maintain a level of public infrastructure facilities and services that adequately serves the present and future needs of the community.

Land Use & Economic Development Element
GOAL LU.1 Preserve and enhance the natural resources, high-quality residential neighborhoods and commercial areas, and small-town (semi-rural) character of Pinole.

POLICY LU.1.3 Establish and implement a continuing program of civic beautification, gateway or entryway enhancement, tree planting, maintenance of homes and streets, and other measures which will promote an aesthetically desirable environment and attractive neighborhood areas.

GOAL LU.4 Preserve and strengthen the identity and quality of life of Pinole’s residential neighborhoods.

POLICY LU.4.1 Ensure all new development, renovation or remodeling preserves and strengthens Pinole’s residential neighborhoods by requiring projects to be harmoniously designed and integrated with the existing neighborhood.

GOAL LU.6 Protect and enhance the natural resources of the San Pablo Bay waterfront for the enjoyment of Pinole residents.

POLICY LU.6.3 Provide waterfront parks, pedestrian pathways and recreation areas that are safe, accessible, and attractive for public use.

Housing Element
GOAL H.2 Protect Existing Character and Heritage. Protect and enhance the integrity and distinctive character and heritage of Pinole encouraging the development of high quality, welldesigned housing and conserving existing housing.

POLICY H.2.4 Maintain Existing Housing and Neighborhood Amenities. Maintain Pinole’s lifestyle characteristics by encouraging the maintenance of existing housing stock, and in particular housing with historic value, and preserving the amenities of existing neighborhoods.

GOAL H.3 Provide Adequate Services and Facilities. Provide adequate services and facilities to meet the needs of the city’s current and future population.

POLICY H.3.1 Plan For Public Facility and Services Needs. Future development shall be planned based on public facility and service capacity, community-wide needs, sound citywide and neighborhood planning and public improvement programming.

POLICY H.3.4 Encourage new pedestrian-oriented development. Encourage new development and redevelopment that places residences in close proximity to a variety of services and facilities.

Circulation Element
GOAL CE.1 Reduce vehicle miles traveled and encourage the use of public transit.

POLICY CE.1.1 Encourage strategic growth that concentrates future development along Pinole’s three primary transit corridors (San Pablo Avenue, Appian Way and Pinole Valley Road).

POLICY CE.1.3 Encourage development that is sensitive to both local and regional transit measures and that promotes the use of alternative modes of transportation.

POLICY CE.1.4 Encourage maximum utilization of the existing public transit system and alternate modes of transportation in Pinole.

GOAL CE.3 Provide timely input and effective means (as appropriate) of programming street and highway improvements to maintain the objective peak hour level of service without detrimentally impacting community character or commercial activity.

POLICY 3.2. Maintain roadway network at or above established LOS thresholds.

GOAL CE.4 Establish programs to support sidewalk, trail and street enhancements, where feasible.

POLICY CE.4.5 Inventory sidewalk conditions to identify opportunities for enhancements to the circulation system and to help prioritize repair and maintenance activities as funding becomes available.

GOAL CE.5 Provide adequate parking and loading facilities while encouraging alternative means of transportation.

GOAL CE.7 Support bicycle use as a mode of transportation by enhancing infrastructure to accommodate bicycle and rides.

POLICY CE.7.1 Enhance the City’s Bikeway network through the use of Class I, II, and III bikeways.

POLICY CE.7.3 Establish a network of multi-use paths to facilitate safe and direct offstreet bicycle and pedestrian travel.

Community Services and Facilities Element
GOAL CS.1 Provide safe, attractive and efficiently designed infrastructure and sustainable facilities to serve the public.

POLICY CS.1.1 The City will strive to provide safe, attractive and efficiently designed facilities for public and quasi-public organizations.

POLICY CS.1.3 The City will endeavor to provide convenient access to community facilities and services to all areas of the community.

GOAL CS.2 Ensure and maintain a high level of public safety in the community.

POLICY CS.2.6 The City will continue to fund the repair, maintenance and expansion of facilities to respond to evolving service needs.

GOAL CS.3 Provide adequate and high-quality recreational opportunities and programs for the community.

POLICY CS.3.1 Continue to provide a variety of recreational opportunities that serve and represent all aspects of the community.

POLICY CS.3.3 Expand and organize a multi-use trail system.

GOAL CS.6 Provide adequate, economical and dependable wastewater collection service and treatment.

POLICY CS.6.1 The City shall continue to make capital improvements to the wastewater collection and treatment system to maintain system capability and reliability.

GOAL CS.7 Minimize flooding.

POLICY CS.7.1 The City will ensure that the storm drain system has adequate capacity to minimize street flooding and, where feasible, shall expand the capacity of the system to control storm flows.

GOAL CS.9 Provide economical and dependable community services while conserving energy resources.

POLICY CS.9.1 The City will seek opportunities to improve the energy efficiency of facilities and operations.

GOAL CS.10 Provide safe, efficient roadway infrastructure to support multiple modes of transportation and to meet existing and future circulation needs.

POLICY CS.10.2 The City will update, where possible, the existing roadway network to enhance pedestrian, bicycle and transit circulation while maintaining safe vehicular circulation.

Health and Safety Element
GOAL HS.1 Minimize the potential for loss of life, injury, damage to property, economic and social dislocation, and unusual public expense due to natural and man-made hazards.

GOAL HS.2 Protect the community from the risk of flood damage and improve surface water quality.

POLICY HS.2.4 Continue to monitor studies that identify anticipated changes in sea level and create appropriate standards and improvements to minimize flood risks.

POLICY HS.2.5 Establish appropriate capital improvements and management programs to reduce wet weather sewer treatment demand and avoid discharge to the shallow water outfall.

GOAL HS.3 Minimize hazards of soil erosion, weak and expansive soils, potentially hazardous soils materials, other hazardous materials, geologic instability and seismic activity.

POLICY HS.3.5 Require proper handling, storage, disposal and cleanup of hazardous materials to prevent leakage, potential explosions, fires or the escape of harmful gases and to prevent individually innocuous materials from combining to form hazardous substances, especially at the time of disposal.

GOAL HS.4 Ensure that government agencies, citizens and businesses are prepared for an effective response and recovery in the event of emergencies or disasters.

POLICY HS.4.1 Continue to provide essential emergency public services during natural catastrophes
POLICY HS.4.3 Incorporate technological enhancements in new and substantially remodeled structures and facilities to support and improve emergency services.

GOAL HS.6 Support multiple forms of transportation and a circulation system design that reduces vehicle trips and emissions.

POLICY HS.6.1 Promote and encourage walking and bicycling as viable forms of transportation to services, shopping and employment.

GOAL HS.7 Ensure that all new development meets or exceeds state and federal water quality standards.

POLICY HS.7.1 Support Regional, state and federal clean water programs.

POLICY HS.7.3 Reduce the transport of runoff and surface pollutants.

POLICY HS.7.6 Establish appropriate capital improvements and management programs to reduce wet weather sewer treatment demand and avoid discharge to the shallow water outfall.

Natural Resources and Open Space Element
GOAL OS.1 Ensure the preservation of natural resources by determining appropriate land use and compatibility with natural resources and open space.

POLICY OS.1.2 Agency Cooperation. Work with Federal, State and local regulatory and trustee agencies to promote the long-term sustainability of local natural resources.

Sustainability Element
GOAL SE.3 The City will reduce its contribution to climate change and mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change as appropriate.

POLICY SE.3.1 Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from City operations and community sources by a minimum of 15 percent below current or baseline levels by the year 2020.

POLICY SE.3.4 Reduce GHG emissions by reducing vehicle miles traveled and by increasing or encouraging the use of alternative fuels and transportation technologies.

POLICY SE.1.3 Enhance the energy efficiency of all City facilities.

GOAL SE.4 Optimize energy efficiency and renewable energy.

POLICY SE.4.2 Explore opportunities for City-wide expansion of Programs and Facilities related to energy efficiency and conservation.

GOAL SE.5 Achieve a solid waste diversion of 75% of the waste stream by 2020.

GOAL SE.7 Air quality will be maintained and improved for the City of Pinole and the Bay Area as a region and not decline below levels measured in early 1990’s.

POLICY SE 7.3 Support efforts to comprehensively address air quality issues through education, regulation, and innovation.

GOAL SE.8 Utilize transit options and reduce vehicle miles traveled and single-occupancy vehicle use.

POLICY SE.8.7 Work to improve Pinole’s pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure and to meet the needs of all pedestrians and bicyclists.

POLICY SE.8.10 Support and promote the use of low- and zero-emissions vehicles, alternative fuels, and other measures to directly reduce emissions from motor vehicles.

Community Character Element
GOAL CC.1 Maintain Pinole’s unique qualities and sense of place to preserve the established historic and small-town character of the city.

POLICY CC.1.2 Require all new development to incorporate high-quality site design, architecture and planning to enhance the overall quality of the built environment in Pinole and create a visually interesting and aesthetically pleasing town environment.

POLICY CC.1.3 To enhance a sense of arrival and create a strong appealing image that promotes community identity, the City shall develop community entry features at key gateways or city entries along Interstate 80. Entryways shall incorporate landscaping, trees, structural architectural elements, signage, and public art.

APPENDIX II: Prioritization Matrix Category Scoring Guidelines

1. Regulatory Compliance – Compliance with regulatory mandates issued by agencies likes California State Water Resources Control Board, California Department of Resources, Recycling and Recovery, Department of Fish and Wildlife, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, or other County, State and federal laws. This also includes the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and self-imposed City ordinances. The score should be based on the answers to the following example questions:
a. Does the proposed project address a current regulatory mandate? b. Will the proposed project proactively address a foreseeable (within the next 5 years) regulatory mandate?
Scoring scale:
0 2-3 5
The project does
not address a
regulatory
compliance issue
The project provides a short-term
fix for an existing regulatory
compliance issue or for one
anticipated in the near future
The project resolves a
pressing or long-term
regulatory compliance
issue

2. Health/Safety – Projects that improve the overall health and safety of the community such as multi-purpose trails, transportation safety improvements, new recreation facilities, address safety issues at City facilities, enhancements to police, fire, and emergency medical services.

The score should be based on answers to the following example questions:
a. Does the proposed project impact the health and wellbeing or safety of Pinole residents and/or employees?
b. Does the project mitigate a serious risk or liability health/safety issue and to what degree? c. Does the project help assist the City to respond more effectively and efficiently to emergencies throughout the community?
Scoring scale:
0 2-3 5
The project
does not impact
the health
and/or safety of
the community
The project addresses a serious
health and/or safety issue that
has a limited impact or
addresses a less-serious issue
but serves the health and or
safety of the broader community
The project directly
addresses a serious health
and/or safety issue that
has a widespread impact
and/or improves the health
of the community

3. Project Dependency/Bundling– The completion of the proposed project is complementary to the completion of a precursor capital project/master plan or the proposed project would be implemented efficiently if it was coordinated with another capital project. A project that is not

needed for many years would score lower than a project that needs to be completed before another project can start. The score should be based on answers to the following example questions:
a. When is the proposed project needed?
b. Do any other projects require the proposed project to be completed first? c. Does the proposed project require other projects to be completed first? d. Can the proposed project be completed in conjunction with another project for coordinated, efficient implementation?
Scoring scale:
0 2-3 5
The project does
not have a project
dependency
The project can be completed
in conjunction with another
project for coordinated,
efficient implementation
The project must be
completed before another
priority project can start

4. Long-Term Planning – General Plan, Three-Corridor Specific Plan, 2020-2025 Strategic Plan, Long-Term Financial Plan, Pinole Economic Development Strategy, Master Plans, Emergency Operations Plan, Communication and Engagement Plan, Climate Action Plan, Local Road Safety Plan, Active Transportation Plan, Parks Master Plan, and departmental strategic plans which serve as a resource for the City to meet goals set forth by City departments, advisory boards and commissions, and the community at-large. Plans include documents that have been prepared internally to assure consistent adherence to industry best practices, as well as those documents that are created with the assistance of outside consultants. A component of long-term planning includes public discussion and/or public engagement. The score should be based on the answers to the following example questions:
a. Is the proposed project contained in one or more of the City’s long-term planning documents?
b. Is the proposed project listed as a high priority?
Scoring scale:
0 2-3 5
The project is not
part of any longterm planning
document
The project is included in a
long-term planning
document, but may not be
high priority
The project is included
in a long-term planning
document and is a high
priority

5. State of Infrastructure – Projects that address failing infrastructure (i.e., sidewalks, streets, lighting, municipal buildings, recreation facilities) or facilities that have exceeded their useful life. The score should be based on answers to the following example questions:
a. Does the proposed project maintain the condition or value of existing infrastructure? b. Does the proposed project avoid potential failure due to substandard conditions?

c. Will the proposed project address a facility that is outdated or exceeded its useful life? d. Is the proposed project supported by a life cycle analysis of repair versus replacement and a master plan for that type of asset?
Scoring scale:
0 2-3 5
The project
maintains
existing
infrastructure
at current
service levels
The project extends the
service life of an existing
asset or adds new
infrastructure to support
growth
The project addresses existing
infrastructure which has reached
the end of its useful life and is
supported by a life cycle analysis
of repair vs. replacement

6. Operating Budget Impact – Some proposed projects may impact the operating budget for the next few years or for the life of the facility. Some proposed projects can offer cost savings or revenue generation opportunities. The score should be based on answers to the following questions:
a. Will the proposed project require additional personnel to operate? b. Will the proposed project require additional annual maintenance? c. Will the proposed project require additional equipment not included in the project budget?
d. Will the proposed project reduce staff time and City resources thereby resulting in a positive impact on the operational budget?
e. Are there cost savings or revenue generation opportunities as a result of the efficiency of the proposed project?
Scoring scale:
0 2-3 5
The project will have
a negative impact
on the budget. It will
require additional
money to operate
The project will not
impact the operating
budget as it is
cost/revenue neutral
The project will have a positive
impact on the budget. It will
result in significant savings in
staff time, materials, or offer
revenue generation

7. Quality of Life – Projects that provide widespread economic prosperity, recreational and cultural activities, environmental benefits, beautify Pinole, and attract new residents and visitors. The score should be based on answers to the following example questions:
a. Does the proposed project help to create a beautiful and clean community? b. Does the proposed project encourage participation in recreational and cultural activities?
c. Does the proposed project attract new residents, businesses, or visitors? d. Does the proposed project increase environmental stewardship?

e. Does the proposed project contribute towards economic development and revitalization efforts?
Scoring scale:
0 2-3 5
The project will not
have an impact on the
quality of life for the
Pinole community
The project has
moderate impact on the
quality of life for the
Pinole community
The project greatly
impacts the quality of life
for the Pinole community

8. Grant Funding – The proposed project is partially or fully supported by grants from State or Federal funds. The percentage of total cost funded by an external source will determine the score in this category.

Scoring scale:
0 1 2 3 4 5
0% - 16%
External
Funding
17% - 33%
External
Funding
34% - 50%
External
Funding
51% - 67%
External
Funding
68% - 84%
External
Funding
85% to
100%
External
Funding

9. Sustainability and Conservation – The proposed project furthers the City’s sustainability and conservation goals. The score should be based on answers to the following example questions:
a. Does the proposed project improve the health of the community and natural environment through sustainable designs with improved air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change? b. Does the proposed project increase use of active modes of transportation and reduces the need for auto-dependency?
c. Does the proposed project incorporate design that meets or exceeds federal and State standards in the field of energy efficiency, such as State of California Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards, LEED building standards, etc.?
Scoring scale:
0 2-3 5
The project will not
impact the City’s
ability to achieve
sustainability and
conservation goals
The project will have a
modest positive impact
on the City’s ability to
achieve sustainability
and conservation goals
The project will have a
significant positive impact on
the City’s ability to achieve
sustainability and
conservation goals

FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 5-Year Total $ 90,000 $ - 480,000 $ - $ - $ 570,000 $
$ 4,125,262 $ 270,000 2,090,000 $ 270,000 $ 270,000 $ 7,025,262 $ $ 1,195,000 $ - 381,082 $ - $ - $ 1,576,082 $
$ - $ - - $ - $ - $ - $
$ 133,579 $ - - $ - $ - $ 133,579 $
$ 239,040 $ - - $ - $ - $ 239,040 $
$ 464,000 $ - 556,000 $ - $ - $ 1,020,000 $
$ 1,225,000 $ - 65,000 $ - $ - $ 1,290,000 $
$ 870,000 $ 350,000 1,151,507 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 3,071,507 $ $ - $ - - $ - $ - $ - $
$ 1,650,189 $ - 99,000 $ - $ - $ 1,749,189 $
$ 41,394 $ - - $ - $ - $ 41,394 $
$ 895,000 $ - - $ - $ - $ 895,000 $
$ 8,190,000 $ 7,445,000 3,847,411 $ 4,995,000 $ 2,835,000 $ 27,312,411 $ $ 19,118,464 $ 8,065,000 8,670,000 $ 5,615,000 $ 3,455,000 $ $ 44,923,464 $ - $ - 29,315,000 $ - $ - $ $ 29,315,000
$ 19,118,464 $ 8,065,000 37,985,000 $ 5,615,000 $ 3,455,000 $ 74,238,464 $

FACILITIES
PRJ # PROJECT FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 5-Year Total FA2401 Tiny Tots Flooring and Painting $ 50,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 50,000 FA2302 Plum St. Parking Lot Improvements $ 80,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 80,000 FA2301 Public Safety Building Modernization $ 300,000 $ 350,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 650,000 FA2202 Senior Center Modernization $ 250,000 $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 350,000 FA1901 Senior Center Auxiliary Parking Lot $ 1,060,000 $ 470,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,530,000 FA1703 City Hall Modernization $ 400,000 $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 600,000 FA1702 Citywide Roof Repairs and Replacement $ 600,000 $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 900,000 PARKS
PRJ # PROJECT FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 5-Year Total PA2202 Skatepark Rehabilitation $ - $ 150,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 PA2201 Pocket Parks - Galbreth Rd. $ - $ 65,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 65,000 PA1901 Pinole Valley Park Soccer Field Rehabilitation $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000

SANITARY SEWER
PRJ # PROJECT FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 5-Year Total SS2406 * WPCP Solar and Battery $ - $ - $ 175,000 $ - $ - $ 175,000 SS2405 Lower Tennent Trunk Sewer Capacity $ - $ - $ 170,000 $ 3,880,000 $ - $ 4,050,000 SS2404 * WPCP Boiler Replacement $ - $ - $ 660,000 $ - $ - $ 660,000 SS2403 * WPCP Centrifuge Replacement $ - $ - $ - $ 990,000 $ - $ 990,000 SS2402 Pinon-2 Capacity $ - $ - $ - $ 125,000 $ 2,835,000 $ 2,960,000 SS2401 Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Phase 2 $ 6,810,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 6,810,000 SS2203 * Effluent Outfall $ 150,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ - $ - $ 3,150,000 SS2201 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation $ 1,185,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,185,000 SS2101 * Secondary Clarifier Rehabilitation $ 425,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 425,000 SS2002 * Water Pollution Control Plan Lab Remodel $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 SS1702 Sewer Pump Station Rehabilitation $ 100,000 $ 2,760,000 $ 4,440,000 $ - $ - $ 7,300,000

STORMWATER
PRJ # PROJECT FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 5-Year Total SW2401 Storm Drain Creek Discharge Improvements $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 600,000 SW2001 Roble Road Storm Drainage Improvements $ 700,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 700,000

STREETS & ROADS
PRJ # PROJECT FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 5-Year Total RO2403 Old Town Traffic Calming $ 20,000 $ 550,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 570,000 RO2402 Sidewalk Rehabilitation Program $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 750,000 RO2401 Road Maintenance Repairs $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 1,750,000 RO2303 Pinole Smart Signals $ 154,302 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 154,302 RO2302 Safety Improvements on Arterial Roadways $ 275,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 275,000 RO2301 Road Rehabilitation $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,000,000 RO2107 Brandt St. Improvements $ - $ 170,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 170,000 RO2102 Tennent Ave Rehabilitation $ 20,000 $ 735,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 755,000 RO2101 Arterial Rehabilitation $ 1,990,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,990,000 RO1902 Pedestrian Improvements at Tennent Ave. Near RXR $ 515,000 $ 905,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,420,000 RO1710 San Pablo Avenue Bride Over BNSF Railroad $ 1,974,162 $ 28,800,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 30,774,162 RO1708 Pinole Valley Road Improvements $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000

INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENTS
PRJ # ASSESSMENT FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 5-Year Total IN2301 Facilities & Real Estate Master Plan $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 IN2105 Appian Way Complete Streets $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 IN2103 Recycled Water Feasibility $ 60,000 $ 140,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 IN2101 Emergency Power for Critical Facilities $ 30,000 $ 170,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 IN1703 Storm Drain Master Plan $ 150,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 Uses by Project Total $19,118,464 $37,985,000 $8,065,000 $5,615,000 $3,455,000 LEGEND:
• Project numbers: FA = Facilities; PA = Parks; SS = Sanitary Sewer; SW = Storm Water; RO = Streets & Roads; IN = Infrastructure Assessments * Project cost to be split 50% with the City of Hercules Total Sources Required
325 - Grant: HBP
377 - Arterial Streets Rehabilitation
500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund
Sources Total
Unfunded Total
215 - Grant: OBAG
276 - Growth Impact Fees
325 - City Street Improvements
325 - Grant: TDA Article 3
325 - Grant: STMP Fees
106 - Measure S 2014
200 - Gas Tax
214 - Solid Waste
215 - Grant: TLC
215 - Grant: HSIP

CITY OF PINOLE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN: FY 2024-25 THROUGH FY 2028-29

FUNDING SUMMARY

SOURCES BY FUND
100 - General Fund

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. Required X Rehabilitation
$ - 50,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 50,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 50,000 $ 50,000$ 50,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 50,000
$ 50,000 $ 50,000
$ 50,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 50,000
FA2401 - TINY TOTS FLOORING AND PAINTING
: Staff Recommendation

TOTAL FUNDS
SOURCE(S)106 - Measure S 2014

TOTAL USES
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyEstimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
Pinole Tiny Tots interior and exterior facility maintenance including flooring and painting. Replacement of existing carpeted areas in the main room with new carpet or carpet tiles and replacement of existing vinyl linoleum with a waterproof plank vinyl in the snack area and craft/play areas. Exterior siding, eaves, and trim repairs and painting. Interior office, main room, kitchen, and restrooms painting.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
The current carpeting and vinyl linoleum flooring are in need of replacement. The carpeted areas are worn and also contain many raised areas that create a tripping hazard. The current exterior and interior paint is from approximately 20 years ago and shows discoloration, fading, chipping, and weathering.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Facilities
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 12
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement X RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ - 80,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 80,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 7,950 $ 7,950
$ 65,500 $ 65,500
$ 6,550 $ 6,550
$ 80,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 80,000
$ 80,000 $ 80,000
$ 80,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 80,000
FA2302 - PLUM ST. PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS
: Staff Recommendation

TOTAL FUNDS
Project Start 7/1/2024
General Plan Goals/Policies
Projected Budget
Policy CS.2.6
Summary of Capital Cost
To provide a secure parking area for Police vehicles in the Plum St. parking lot. The parking lot will remain open for the public. A portion of the parking lot, approximately 25 spaces will be secured with a chain-link fence with security gates for Police vehicles. The layout of the parking lot is in the preliminary design phase.

Functional Area : Facilities
Estimated Expenditures to-date
$ - Year 1 FY 2024-25 Year 5 FY 2028-29
Description
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Estimated Completion
276 - Growth Impact Fees

TOTAL USES
History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)

Project Origin Priority Score 34
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement X RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ 350,000 300,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 650,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 50,000 $ 50,000
$ 270,000 $ 270,000 $ 540,000
$ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 60,000
$ 300,000 $ 350,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 650,000
$ 225,000 $ 350,000 $ 575,000$ 75,000 $ 75,000
$ 300,000 $ 350,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 650,000
FA2301 - PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING MODERNIZATION
: Staff Recommendation

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
SOURCE(S)106 - Measure S 2014276 - Growth Impact Fees
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyPolicy CS.2.6, Goal CS.1, Policy CS.1.1, Policy SE.1.3Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
To extend the useful life of the Public Safety building, there are several items that require attention including but not limited to replacement of the HVAC system, carpet, flooring, water heaters, light fixtures, fans, etc. In addition, the building requires painting (interior and exterior), and the locker rooms also require renovation.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Facilities
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 37
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement X RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ 100,000 250,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 357,896 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 230,000 $ 90,000 $ 320,000
$ 20,000 $ 10,000 $ 30,000
$ 250,000 $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 350,000
$ 105,000 $ 100,000 $ 205,000$ 145,000 $ 145,000
$ 250,000 $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 350,000
FA2202 - SENIOR CENTER MODERNIZATION
: Staff Recommendation

TOTAL FUNDS
SOURCE(S)106 - Measure S 2014276 - Growth Impact Fees

TOTAL USES
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyPolicy CS.2.6, Goal CS.1, Policy CS.1.1, Policy SE.1.3Estimated Expenditures to-date $ 7,895.96
Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
The project includes a facilities condition assessment and design and construction of improvements to modernize the existing Senior Center building located at 2525 Charles Avenue. Work will include upgrades to energy system, and interior renovations.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Facilities
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New X ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ 470,000 1,060,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,656,655 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 100,000 $ 100,000$ 870,000 $ 430,000 $ 1,300,000
$ 90,000 $ 40,000 $ 130,000
$ 1,060,000 $ 470,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,530,000
$ 1,060,000 $ 470,000 $ 1,530,000
$ 1,060,000 $ 470,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,530,000
USE(S)Goal CE.5, Goal CS.1, Policy GM.4.1Estimated Expenditures to-date $ 126,655.00
Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
FA1901 - SENIOR CENTER AUXILIARY PARKING LOT
: Fowler Lot Re-Use Committee
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
PlanningDesignConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)106 - Measure S 2014 Description
On February 2, 2021 City Council adopted Resolution 2021-07 and awarded a contract to a consultant for the preliminary engineering and design for the parking lot. The parking lot will be designed to be a multi-benefit project that includes pavement structural section, striping, lighting, bicycle parking, electric vehicle charging stations, stormwater capture and retention, and drought tolerant landscaping. The final design will offer the maximum number of parking spaces while allowing access for both vehicles and pedestrians and include aesthetic design components. On June 7, 2022, City Council directed staff to incorporate the installation of a solar canopy and backup battery system at the site.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
On April 16, 1990 City Council adopted Resolution 2380 authorizing the purchase of 2548 Charles Street. At the time of purchase, City Council determined that construction of a Senior Center was necessary, and that this property was needed to provide sufficient parking for the Center. The parcel is surrounded by municipal parking lots which serve the Senior Center and Old Town Pinole. The Fowler House tenants remained in the properly till 2010 and many discussions took place to determine the best use of the property. It was determined that the house had asbestos and lead paint. On July 17, 2018, City Council adopted Resolution 2018-67 to create the Fowler Lot Re-use Committee to evaluate the reuse and redevelopment of the property. The Committee evaluated uses for the lot and determined the best use of the property is a parking lot. On October 16, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2018-93 to approve a contract with a construction company to abate and demolish the Fowler house. The property demolition was completed on March 11, 2019. On July 21, 2020, City Council adopted Resolution 2020–68 to accept the final recommendation of the Committee.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Facilities
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 35
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement X RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ 200,000 400,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 600,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 80,000 $ - $ 80,000
$ 290,000 $ 180,000 $ 470,000
$ 30,000 $ 20,000 $ 50,000
$ 400,000 $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 600,000
$ 125,000 $ 125,000$ 275,000 $ 200,000 $ 475,000
$ 400,000 $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 600,000
FA1703 - CITY HALL MODERNIZATION
: Staff Recommendation

TOTAL FUNDS
SOURCE(S)276 - Growth Impact Fees106 - Measure S 2014

TOTAL USES
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyPolicy CS.2.6, Goal CS.1, Policy CS.1.1, Policy SE.1.3Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
Interior improvements and exterior painting to extend the life of the City Hall building and improve its functionality for staff and the public. To extend the useful life of the City hall building, there are several items that require attention including but not limited to the configuration of rooms on the first floor, carpet, flooring, window coverings, light fixtures, etc. The interior and exterior surfaces of the building require repainting as the paint system has reached the end of its useful life. Fading, chipping paint, along with water and mildew damage necessitates the painting.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
Exterior painting is necessary to maintain external protection from the environment.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Facilities
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 43
Budget
New Expansion
X Replacement Renovation
Land/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation
$ 300,000 600,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 900,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 60,000 $ - $ 60,000
$ 490,000 $ 270,000 $ 760,000
$ 50,000 $ 30,000 $ 80,000
$ 600,000 $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 900,000
$ 600,000 $ 300,000 $ 900,000
$ 600,000 $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 900,000
Design
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
Policy GM.4.1, Goal CS.1, Goal CS.9, Policy CS.9.1Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
FA1702 - CITYWIDE ROOF REPAIRS AND REPLACEMENT
: End of life cycle
USE(S)Planning

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
ConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)106 - Measure S 2014
Description
Roof repairs and replacement at four (4) City facilities, the Public Safety Building, City Hall, Senior Center, and Water Pollution Control Plant. In October 2022, City staff received quotes for the rehabilitation of the roofs; it was determined that the Public Safety building roof needs immediate replacement.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
In 2015, comprehensive visual roof inspections were completed by a contractor on various City owned facilities. The purpose of the inspection was to identify the extent, if any, of moisture intrusion into the existing roof assemblies, document observed roof system deficiencies, determine the overall condition of the existing roof systems and to estimate the service life of the inplace roof assemblies.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Facilities
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 34
Budget
New Expansion
X Replacement Renovation
Land/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation
$ 150,000 - $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ - $ 135,000 $ 135,000$ - $ 15,000 $ 15,000$ - $ 150,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 $ - $ 150,000 $ 150,000
$ - $ 150,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000
PA2202 - SKATEPARK REHABILITATION
: Council Request

TOTAL FUNDS
SOURCE(S)106 - Measure S 2014

TOTAL USES
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyGoal CS.2, Goal CS.3, Policy CS 2.6 & 3.1, Policy GM.4.1Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
The ramps at the skatepark have settled and need to be replaced.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Parks
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 15
Budget
X New Expansion
Replacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ 65,000 - $ - $ - $ - $ 65,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 58,500 $ 58,500
$ 6,500 $ 6,500
$ - $ 65,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 65,000
$ 65,000 $ 65,000
$ - $ 65,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 65,000
PA2201 - POCKET PARKS - GALBRETH RD.
: Council Request

TOTAL FUNDS
SOURCE(S)276 - Growth Impact Fees

TOTAL USES
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyGoal CS.3, Policy GM.4.1Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
Installation of two ADA compliant benches and waste receptacles within two pocket parks at a suitable location on Galbreth Ave. A lot line adjustment may be required to develop the pocket parks.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Parks
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 33
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement X RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ - 200,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 180,000 $ 180,000
$ 20,000 $ 20,000
$ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000
$ 200,000 $ 200,000
$ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000
PA1901 - PINOLE VALLEY PARK SOCCER FIELD REHABILITATION : Council Request

TOTAL FUNDS
SOURCE(S)276 - Growth Impact Fees

TOTAL USES
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyGoal CS.1, Goal CS.3, Policy CS 3.1, Policy GM.4.1Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
There are two soccer fields at Pinole Valley Park which are utilized on an annual basis, the Wright Avenue Soccer Field at the southerly end, and Savage Avenue Soccer Field at the northern end. Both fields are heavily used by soccer leagues and the general public. The Savage Avenue Soccer Field requires substantial rehabilitation which includes: upgrading the irrigation system and ongoing turf maintenance. Turf maintenance includes mowing, fertilizing, aeration, overseeding, and topdressing.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
This project has been delayed pending the development of a Park Master Plan (CIP Project# SS2401).

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Parks
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
X New Expansion
Replacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ - - $ 175,000 $ - $ - $ 175,000 $
6/30/2028
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 10,000 $ 10,000
$ 165,000 $ 165,000
$ - $ - $ 175,000 $ - $ - $ 175,000
$ 175,000 $ - $ 175,000
$ - $ - $ 175,000 $ - $ - $ 175,000
SS2406 - WPCP SOLAR AND BATTERY
: Master Plan
DesignConstructionContingency
Functional Area : Sanitary Sewer
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Estimated Expenditures to-dateProject Start 7/1/2026 Estimated Completion Description
Planning and design for renewable solar energy generation and battery storage project at the Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP). Install three (3) photovoltaic (PV) arrays with a total PV capacity of 496 kW: a carport array (50-kW), a ground-mount PV array in the public park area to the southwest of the WPCP (175-kW), and a groundmount PV array along the northeast perimeter of the WPCP, adjacent to the public pathway that runs along the canal (271-kW). Install a 575 kWh capacity battery energy storage system (BESS), controls, and a 450-kW diesel generator.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
In 2024, Tetra Tech prepared an Energy Conservation, Generation, and Storage Assessment study for City facilities which included: 1) evaluation of energy conservation, energy generation, energy storage, and electric vehicle measures and 2) a renewable microgrid analysis to determine the technical and economic feasibility of installing new renewable energy generation systems and battery storage at the Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP). Recommendations included addition of photovoltaic (PV) panel arrays at three different locations, a battery energy storage system (BESS) and generator. Construction would be completed outside of the 5-year budget window.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Policy GM.4.1, Goal CS.6, Policy CS.6.1USE(S)Planning

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
SOURCE(S)500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New X Expansion
X Replacement Renovation
Land/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation
$ - - $ 170,000 $ 3,880,000.00 $ - $ 4,050,000 $
6/30/2028
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 170,000 $ 170,000 $ 340,000
$ 3,370,000 $ 3,370,000
$ 340,000 $ 340,000
$ - $ - $ 170,000 $ 3,880,000 $ - $ 4,050,000
$ 170,000 $ 3,880,000 $ 4,050,000
$ - $ - $ 170,000 $ 3,880,000 $ - $ 4,050,000
SS2405 - LOWER TENNENT TRUNK SEWER CAPACITY
: Master Plan
500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)Policy GM.4.1, Goal CS.6, Policy CS.6.1Estimated Expenditures to-dateProject Start 7/1/2026 Estimated Completion Description

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
PlanningDesignConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)Tennent-1 improvements as identified in the Sanitary Sewer Collection System Master Plan. This project includes the replacement of approximately 130 feet of 24-inch diameter pipeline, 1,250 feet of 30-inch diameter pipeline, and 10 feet of 36-inch diameter pipeline along Tennent Avenue and inside of the Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) with 1,390 feet of 36-inch to 42-inch diameter pipeline.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
The Sanitary Sewer Collection System Master plan identified capacity deficiencies which result in surcharging of the gravity sewer and cause sanitary sewer overflows (SSO's) during modeled peak wet weather flow (PWWF) conditions.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Sanitary Sewer
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New Expansion
X Replacement Renovation
Land/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation
$ - - $ 660,000 $ - $ - $ 660,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 600,000 $ 600,000
$ 60,000 $ 60,000
$ - $ - $ 660,000 $ - $ - $ 660,000
$ 660,000 $ 660,000
$ - $ - $ 660,000 $ - $ - $ 660,000
SS2404 - WPCP BOILER REPLACEMENT
: End of life cycle

TOTAL FUNDS
SOURCE(S)500 - Sewer Enterprise FundGoal CS.1, Goal CS.6, Policy CS.6.1

TOTAL USES
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingency
Description
This project includes replacement of the anaerobic digester process boilers at the WPCP.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
The anaerobic digestion process at the WPCP includes hot water boilers to heat water for use in the digester sludge heat exchanger. Two 40 HP Natural Gas Scotch Boilers, manufactured by Hurst Boiler & Welding Co., Inc. were installed in 2006 during the Anaerobic Digester Improvements project.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Estimated Expenditures to-dateProject Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Sanitary Sewer
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New Expansion
X Replacement Renovation
Land/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation
$ - - $ - $ 990,000.00 $ - $ 990,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 900,000 $ 900,000
$ 90,000 $ 90,000
$ - $ - $ - $ 990,000 $ - $ 990,000
$ 990,000 $ 990,000
$ - $ - $ - $ 990,000 $ - $ 990,000
SS2403 - WPCP CENTRIFUGE REPLACEMENT
: End of life cycle

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
SOURCE(S)500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyGoal CS.1, Goal CS.6, Policy CS.6.1Estimated Expenditures to-dateProject Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion Description
This project includes replacement of a dewatering centrifuge at the WPCP.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
The solids handling process at the WPCP includes solids dewatering using centrifuges. One of two centrifuges at the WPCP was originally installed in 2006 and reused and relocated to the Solids Handling Building during the plant upgrades completed in 2019. The centrifuge is an Alfa Laval, Aldec G2-95 unit.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Sanitary Sewer
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New X Expansion
X Replacement Renovation
Land/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation
$ - - $ - $ 125,000.00 $ 2,835,000.00 $ 2,960,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 250,000
$ 2,460,000 $ 2,460,000
$ 250,000 $ 250,000
$ - $ - $ - $ 125,000 $ 2,835,000 $ 2,960,000
$ 125,000 $ 2,835,000 $ 2,960,000
$ - $ - $ - $ 125,000 $ 2,835,000 $ 2,960,000
SS2402 - PINON-2 CAPACITY
: Master Plan

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
500 - Sewer Enterprise FundPolicy GM.4.1, Goal CS.6, Policy CS.6.1 Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)
Description
Pinon-2 improvements as identified in the Sanitary Sewer Collection System Master Plan. This project includes the replacement of approximately 820 feet of 6-inch to 10-inch diameter pipeline along San Pablo Avenue, 680 feet of 8-inch to 10-inch diameter pipeline along Pinon Avenue, 890 feet of 6-inch to 8-inch diameter pipeline along Appian Way, 290 feet of 6-inch diameter pipeline along Meadow Avenue, and 290 feet of 6-inch diameter pipeline between Meadow Avenue and San Pablo Avenue with 2,970 feet of 10-inch to 15-inch diameter pipelines.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
The Sanitary Sewer Collection System Master plan identified capacity deficiencies which result in surcharging of the gravity sewer and cause sanitary sewer overflows (SSO's) during modeled peak wet weather flow (PWWF) conditions.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Estimated Expenditures to-date
$ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Sanitary Sewer
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29
PlanningDesignConstructionContingency

SOURCE(S)

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New X Expansion
X Replacement Renovation
Land/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation
$ - 6,810,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 6,810,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 20,000 $ 20,000
$ 6,170,000 $ 6,170,000
$ 620,000 $ 620,000
$ 6,810,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 6,810,000
$ 6,810,000 $ - $ 6,810,000
$ 6,810,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 6,810,000
SS2401 - PINON TRUNK SEWER CAPACITY PHASE 2
: Regulatory Requirement
Description
History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
Construction of Phase 2 of the work. Phase 1 construction under SS2201.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Estimated Expenditures to-dateProject Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
PlanningDesignConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)500 - Sewer Enterprise FundPolicy GM.4.1, Goal CS.6, Policy CS.6.1 Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)Phase 2 (from Orleans to San Pablo) of the Pinon-1 improvements to the Sanitary Sewer Collection Sysem, as identified in the Sanitary Sewer Collection System Master Plan. : Sanitary Sewer
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 52
Budget
New X ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. Required X Rehabilitation
$ 1,000,000 150,000.00 $ 2,000,000 $ - $ - $ 3,150,000 $ 6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 135,000 $ 135,000
$ 900,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 2,700,000
$ 15,000 $ 100,000 $ 200,000 $ 315,000
$ 150,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ - $ - $ 3,150,000
$ 150,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 3,150,000
$ 150,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ - $ - $ 3,150,000
Design
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
Policy GM.4.1, Goal CS.6, Policy CS.6.1Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
SS2203 - EFFLUENT OUTFALL
: Regulatory Requirement
USE(S)Planning

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
ConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund Description
The Effluent Outfall project is intended to reduce pressure in the effluent pipe during extreme storm events. Effluent pumping capacity of the treatment plant is limited by the capacity of the pipe size at the effluent outfall in Rodeo. Increasing the pipe size at the Effluent Outfall Eductor Station will increase the wet weather effluent pumping capacity and increase the lifespan of the effluent pipe by reducing the pressure in the line during storm events. This project requires coordination with Rodeo.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Sanitary Sewer
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 57
Budget
New X Expansion
X Replacement Renovation
Land/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation
$ - 1,185,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,530,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 60,000 $ 60,000
$ 1,023,900 $ 1,023,900
$ 101,100 $ 101,100
$ 1,185,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,185,000
$ 585,000 $ - $ 585,000$ 600,000 $ 600,000
$ 1,185,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,185,000
SS2201 - SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION
: Regulatory Requirement

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
SOURCE(S)500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund276 - Growth Impact Fees Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyPolicy GM.4.1, Goal CS.6, Policy CS.6.1Estimated Expenditures to-date $ 345,000.00
Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
Phase 1 (Tennent to Orleans) and Phase 2 (Orleans to San Pablo) of the Pinon-1 improvements to the Sanitary Sewer collection system, as identified in the Sanitary Sewer Collection System Master Plan.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
On October 4, 2022, City staff released an RFP for preliminary engineering design services for phase 1 of the Pinon project described in the City’s recently adopted Sanitary Sewer Master Plan.

On January 18, 2023, a one-year contract was executed with West Valley Construction Company, Inc. for the work.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Sanitary Sewer
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 46
Budget
New Expansion
X Replacement Renovation
Land/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation
$ - 425,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 425,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 315,000 $ 315,000
$ 67,500 $ 67,500$ 42,500 $ 42,500
$ 425,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 425,000
$ 425,000 $ 425,000
$ 425,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 425,000
SS2101 - SECONDARY CLARIFIER REHABILITATION
: End of life cycle

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
SOURCE(S)500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)DesignConstruction SC 5Construction SC 3, SC 4ContingencyGoal CS.1, Goal CS.6, Policy CS.6.1Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
The Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) has five secondary clarifiers which slow the flow to allow the microorganisms and other solids to settle to the bottom of the clarifier where they can be returned to aeration tanks to continue treating waste.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
Secondary Clarifiers 1 and 2 (SC1 and SC 2) were constructed in the early 1970s and are peripheral feed clarifiers. Secondary Clarifiers 3 and 4 (SC 3 and SC 4) were constructed in the early 1980s and are center feed clarifiers. Secondary Clarifier 5 (SC 5) was constructed in early 2000 and is a center feed, flocculator clarifier. In the first quarter of FY 2022-23, a preliminary inspection of the center column of the SC 5 was completed to examine the current condition and determine the scope of work for rehabilitation. In the second quarter of FY 2022-23, it was determined that SC 3 & SC 4 also require rehabilitation. Previously, this project was titled, "Secondary Clarifier - Center Column Rehabilitation" which only focused on the rehabilitation work required for SC 5.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Sanitary Sewer
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 49
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement X RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ - 100,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 6,000 $ 6,000
$ 85,000 $ 85,000
$ 9,000 $ 9,000
$ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000
$ 100,000 $ 100,000
$ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000
SS2002 - WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLAN LAB REMODEL
: Regulatory Requirement

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
SOURCE(S)500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyPolicy GM.4.1, Goal CS.1, Policy CS.2.6Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
The California Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) is responsible for accrediting environmental testing labs including the Pinole - Hercules WPCP. The 2019 ELAP inspection results indicated the lab apparatus, countertops, and the fume hood are past their useful life and recommended replacement.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Sanitary Sewer
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 50
Budget
New Expansion
X Replacement Renovation
Land/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation
$ 2,760,000 100,000.00 $ 4,440,000 $ - $ - $ 7,300,000 $ 6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 100,000 $ 100,000
$ 230,000 $ 370,000 $ 600,000
$ 2,300,000 $ 3,700,000 $ 6,000,000
$ 230,000 $ 370,000 $ 600,000
$ 100,000 $ 2,760,000 $ 4,440,000 $ - $ - $ 7,300,000
$ 100,000 $ 2,760,000 $ 4,440,000 $ 7,300,000
$ 100,000 $ 2,760,000 $ 4,440,000 $ - $ - $ 7,300,000
SS1702 - SEWER PUMP STATION REHABILITATION
: End of life cycle

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
SOURCE(S)500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyPolicy GM.4.1, Goal CS.6, Policy CS.6.1Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
The City owns and operates two lift stations to convey flow from low lying areas to high elevations where the flow continues by gravity to the wastewater treatment plant. Both pump stations have reached the end of their useful life and need to be rehabilitated. The two pump stations are located on San Pablo Ave. and Hazel St. In FY 2019/20, this project was renamed to include both pump stations. Previously, this project was titled, “Hazel Street Sewer Pump Rehabilitation.” This project also includes the San Pablo Lift Station Force Main, approximately 640 feet of existing 6-inch will be replaced with 8-inch diameter force main.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
The City recently completed a Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. In the first fiscal year of construction, the Hazel Street Lift Station will be replaced, followed by the replacement of the San Pablo Ave. Lift Station. The Hazel Street Lift Station will be replaced in coordination with RO2301.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Sanitary Sewer
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. Required X Rehabilitation
$ 120,000 120,000.00 $ 120,000 $ 120,000.00 $ 120,000.00 $ 600,000 $ 6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 100,000$ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 450,000$ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 50,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 600,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 600,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 120,000 $ 600,000 SW2401 - STORM DRAIN CREEK DISCHARGE IMPROVEMENTS
: End of life cycle
USE(S)Planning
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
Policy GM.4.1, Goal CS.7, Policy CS.7.1Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
Condition assessments have identified a number of storm drain pipelines that are structurally deteriorated and failing where they discharge into Pinole Creek. A systematic rehabilitation or replacement of failing storm drain infrastructure will be prioritized as part of the Storm Drain Master Plan.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
Design

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
ConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)106 - Measure S 2014
General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Stormwater
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 33
Budget
New X ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ - 700,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 700,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 135,000 $ 135,000$ 500,000 $ 500,000
$ 65,000 $ 65,000
$ 700,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 700,000
$ 700,000 $ 700,000
$ 700,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 700,000
SW2001 - ROBLE ROAD STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
: Staff Recommendation

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
SOURCE(S)106 - Measure S 2014
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyPolicy GM.4.1, Goal CS.7, Policy CS.7.1Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
The existing system appears to have capacity issues at Roble Ave. and Encina Ave. that warrant review and upgrade. This project will assess the collection system for capacity and hydraulic profile and upgrade the system as necessary.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Stormwater
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score :

Budget
X New Expansion
Replacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ - - $ - $ - $ - $ - $
6/30/2026
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 20,000 $ 20,000
$ 35,000 $ 35,000
$ 465,000 $ 465,000
$ 50,000 $ 50,000
$ 20,000 $ 550,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 570,000
$ 20,000 $ 35,000 $ 55,000
$ 515,000 $ 515,000
$ 20,000 $ 550,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 570,000
RO2403 - OLD TOWN TRAFFIC CALMING
Functional Area : Streets & Roads : Council Request
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Description
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Estimated Expenditures To-Date
$ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
DesignAssess feasibility of and alternatives for, and design and construct traffic calming measures on San Pablo Avenue between John St and Oak Ridge Rd.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Goal CC.1
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)Planning

TOTAL FUNDS
ConstructionContingency

TOTAL USES
SOURCE(S)325 - City Street ImprovementsUnfunded

Project Origin Priority Score 49
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement X RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ 150,000 150,000.00 $ 150,000 $ 150,000.00 $ 150,000.00 $ 750,000 $ 6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 135,000 $ 135,000 $ 135,000 $ 135,000 $ 135,000 $ 675,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 75,000
$ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 750,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 750,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 750,000 RO2402 - SIDEWALK REHABILITATION PROGRAM
: Staff Recommendation
USE(S)Planning
7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
This project involves removing barriers to accessibility for persons using wheelchairsor other personal assistance devices and improving pedestrian accessibility andsafety by reconstructing or upgrading curb ramps at various locations throughout theCity.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
DesignConstruction
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Streets & Roads
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29
Policy CE.1.4, Policy CS.2.6, Policy CS.3.3, Policy H.3.1, Policy GM.3.3, Goal CE.3, Goal CS.10, Policy CS 10.2 Estimated Expenditures to-dateProject Start

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
ContingencySOURCE(S)106 - Measure S 2014

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. Required X Rehabilitation
$ 350,000 350,000.00 $ 350,000 $ 350,000.00 $ 350,000.00 $ 1,750,000 $ 6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ - $ 320,000 $ 320,000 $ 320,000 $ 320,000 $ 320,000 $ 1,600,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ 150,000
$ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 1,750,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 1,750,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 1,750,000 RO2401 - ROAD MAINTENANCE REPAIRS
: Staff Recommendation
USE(S)Planning
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
Estimated Expenditures to-date
$ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
Road repair and rehabilitation at various locations.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
Design

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
ConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)325 - City Street Improvements General Plan Goals/Policies
Policy GM.3.3, Goal CE.3, Goal CS.10, Policy CS 10.2
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Streets & Roads
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 33
Budget
X New Expansion
Replacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ - 154,302.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 154,302 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 154,302 $ 154,302$ 154,302 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 154,302
$ 154,302 $ 154,302
$ 154,302 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 154,302
RO2303 - PINOLE SMART SIGNALS
: Staff Recommendation

TOTAL USES

TOTAL FUNDS
SOURCE(S)106 - Measure S 2014
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyGoal CS.10, Policy CS 10.2Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
The Smart Signals project will develop, manage, and implement ITS initiatives that improve the safety and efficiency of multimodal mobility, maximize highway and arterial system throughput, and improve operational efficiency, safety, and reduce environmental impact throughout Contra Costa County. Contra Costa Tranportation Authority is the project lead and will coordinate the project throughout the county. Twelve traffic signals have been identified as candidates for the Smart Signals project. These signals are located on Pinole arterial roadways (Appian Way & San Pablo Avenue).

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
Deployment of the Smart Signals Project is expected to result in operational and safety improvements for all modes of transportation, such as decrease in travel time and total delay, reduction in number of stops and secondary accidents, reduction of fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, and reduction of response time for emergency vehicles. The initial cost estimate of construction is $1,499,829 of which CCTA will receive $1,345,527 in OBAG funds. The City's match requirement is $154,302.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Streets & Roads
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 38
Budget
X New Expansion
Replacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ - 275,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 275,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 265,000 $ 265,000
$ 10,000 $ 10,000
$ 275,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 275,000
$ 239,040 $ 239,040$ 35,960 $ 35,960
$ 275,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 275,000
RO2302 - SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS ON ARTERIAL ROADWAYS
: Staff Recommendation
PlanningContingency

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
ConstructionDesignSOURCE(S)215 - Grant: HSIP 106 - Measure S 2014 Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)Policy GM.3.3, Goal CE.3, Goal CS.10, Policy CS 10.2Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
This project will install pedestrian crossing enhancements at three mid-block crossings on arterial roadways. The enhancements include continental markings, median refuge islands, advanced stop bars and Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons. The three mid-block crossings are: San Pablo Ave. & Third Ave.; San Pablo Ave. & Quinan St.; and Pinole Valley Road & Savage Ave.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
Funding for improvements was secured through Cycle 11 HSIP grant funds.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Streets & Roads
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 34
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. Required X Rehabilitation
$ 500,000 500,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,000,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 100,000
$ 410,000 $ 410,000 $ 820,000
$ 40,000 $ 40,000 $ 80,000
$ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,000,000
$ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 1,000,000
$ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,000,000
RO2301 - ROAD REHABILITATION
: Pavement Management Program
USE(S)Planning
Estimated Completion
Description
Based on the most current P-TAP report and field inspections, various segments will be recommended annually for rehabilitation. Recommended treatment include patch paving, slurry seal, cape seal, mill and fill. This project includes two projects which appeared in previous CIP's known as RO2501 and RO2401.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
Design
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Streets & Roads
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29
Policy GM.3.3, Goal CE.3, Goal CS.10, Policy CS 10.2
Estimated Expenditures to-date
$ - Project Start 7/1/2024

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
ConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)325 - City Street Improvements

Project Origin Priority Score 27
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. Required X Rehabilitation
$ 170,000 - $ - $ - $ - $ 170,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 30,000 $ 30,000
$ 120,000 $ 120,000
$ 20,000 $ 20,000
$ - $ 170,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 170,000
$ 170,000 $ 170,000
$ - $ 170,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 170,000
RO2107 - BRANDT ST. IMPROVEMENTS
: Council Request
Projected Budget
General Plan Goals/Policies
Estimated Expenditures to-date
$ - Project Start 7/1/2024
Summary of Capital Cost
Goal CE.4, Goal CS.10, Policy CS.10.2, Policy GM.3.3, Goal CS.10 Estimated Completion
Description
Provide improvements on Brandt St. including application of pavement treatments based on type and severity of distresses on existing pavement.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)100 - General Fund

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Streets & Roads
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 43
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. Required X Rehabilitation
$ 735,000 20,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 792,805 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 20,000 $ 80,000 $ 100,000
$ 623,000 $ 623,000
$ 32,000 $ 32,000
$ 20,000 $ 735,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 755,000
$ 381,082 $ 381,082
$ 20,000 $ 87,411 $ 107,411
$ 266,507 $ 266,507
$ 20,000 $ 735,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 755,000
RO2102 - TENNENT AVE REHABILITATION
: Pavement Management Program
USE(S)Planning
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
Estimated Expenditures to-date
$ 37,805.00
Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
The construction impacts from the WPCP upgrade project resulted in pavement deterioration. This project will rehabilitate Tennent Ave. from San Pablo Ave. to WPCP. In February 2021, the City selected a consultant to complete the preliminary engineering for this project.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
In preparation of this project, the City retained a consultant to perform internal CCTV on this section of roadway. The inspection was completed in early 2021. Coordinating collection system improvements with street resurfacing projects ensures that sewer improvements are made prior to the resurfacing so that manholes and valve covers may be properly realigned, and repairs and replacements are made in a cost-effective manner. This also avoids cutting and patching recently paved streets. The City of Hercules will reimburse $86,430 for this project. In addition, this project is being coordinated with RO1902 for efficient implementation. Design

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
ConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)200 - Gas Tax500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund325 - City Street Improvements General Plan Goals/Policies
Policy CE.1.4, Policy CS.2.6, Policy CS.3.3, Policy H.3.1, Policy GM.3.3, Goal CE.3, Goal CS.10, Policy CS 10.2 Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Streets & Roads
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 37
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. Required X Rehabilitation
$ - 1,990,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 2,048,480 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 10,000 $ 10,000
$ 1,800,000 $ 1,800,000
$ 180,000 $ 180,000
$ 1,990,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,990,000
$ 1,095,000 $ 1,095,000$ 895,000 $ 895,000
$ 1,990,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,990,000
RO2101 - ARTERIAL REHABILITATION
: Pavement Management Program
USE(S)Planning
Estimated Completion
Description
The project is currently in the design phase and aims to maximize the funding available to complete rehabilitation work beginning at the southern city limit on Pinole Valley Road to the bridge west of Savage Ave. The project will include replacement, modification, or installation of a ADA compliant curb ramps, road rehabilitation, and striping.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Based on the 2019 P-TAP report, various segments were recommended for treatment by StreetSaver®. The recommendations were further validated through a comparative pavement analysis and coring samples to explore additional treatment options which are not discussed in the P-TAP report. This will allow the City to optimize the available funding. The section of roadway selected based on the analysis was Pinole Valley Road from the southern city limits.

Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
Design
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Streets & Roads
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29
Policy GM.3.3, Goal CE.3, Goal CS.10, Policy CS 10.2
Estimated Expenditures to-date
$ 58,480.00
Project Start 7/1/2024

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
ConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)200 - Gas Tax377 - Arterial Streets Rehabilitation

Project Origin Priority Score 50
Budget
X New Expansion
Replacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ 905,000 515,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,475,300 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 45,000 $ 45,000
$ 425,000 $ 825,000 $ 1,250,000
$ 45,000 $ 80,000 $ 125,000
$ 515,000 $ 905,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,420,000
$ 51,000 $ 99,000 $ 150,000$ 464,000 $ 556,000 $ 1,020,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000
$ 515,000 $ 905,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,420,000
RO1902 - PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS AT TENNENT AVE. NEAR RXR : Staff Recommendation
USE(S)Planning
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
Estimated Expenditures to-date
$ 55,300.00
Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
In 2018, the East Bay Regional Park District completed a trail link to connect Pinole Shores Regional Shoreline to Bayfront Park trail. There remains one very small gap on Tennent Ave. from Bayfront Park to Railroad Ave. Improvements to Tennent Ave. at the Railroad Crossing will facilitate safe movement of bicycles and pedestrians. Since project inception, the scope of work has evolved to include improvements that would maximize parking on Railroad Avenue for park users. In February 2021, the City selected a consultant to complete the preliminary engineering for this project.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
WCCTAC held its STMP Call for Projects in 2018 which committed $100k in funding for preliminary engineering from the 2006 STMP program for this project. City staff also submitted an OBAG 3 application in July 2022 to compete for funding for this project. If awarded, the City will need a match of $345k. Design

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
ConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)325 - Grant: STMP Fees215 - Grant: OBAG106 - Measure S 2014 General Plan Goals/Policies
Policy CE.1.4, Policy CS.2.6, Policy CS.3.3, Policy H.3.1, Policy GM.3.3, Goal CE.3, Goal CS.10, Policy CS 10.2 Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Streets & Roads
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 55
Budget
New Expansion
X Replacement Renovation
Land/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation
$ 28,800,000 1,974,162.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 31,884,899 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 133,579 $ 4,150,000 $ 4,283,579
$ 1,840,583 $ 1,840,583 - $ 24,650,000 $ 24,650,000 - $ 1,974,162 $ 28,800,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 30,774,162 $ 41,394 $ 41,394$ 1,499,189 $ 1,499,189
$ 133,579 $ 133,579$ 300,000 $ 300,000
$ 28,800,000 $ 28,800,000
$ 1,974,162 $ 28,800,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 30,774,162
RO1710 - SAN PABLO AVENUE BRIDE OVER BNSF RAILROAD
: End of life cycle

TOTAL FUNDS
325 - Grant: STMP Fees215 - Grant: TLC106 - Measure S 2014Unfunded

TOTAL USES
Project ManagementPlanning & DesignConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)325 - Grant: HBP Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)Estimated Expenditures to-date
$ 1,110,737.00
Project Start 7/1/2024Policy CS.3.3, Goal H.3, Policy H.3.1, Goal CE.3, Goal CE. 7, Policy CE.7.3, Goal CS.10.

Estimated Completion
Description
The San Pablo Avenue bridge over the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad is an integral part of the area’s transportation network. The age and condition assessment of the bridge supports replacement. The City was approved for initial funding from the Caltrans Highway Bridge Program (HBP). In February 2020, the City awarded a contract to a consultant for preliminary engineering (PE) to advance the project. The PE will be completed in two phases due to funding limitations. Completion of preliminary design is necessary to develop a final cost estimate for the project. Unfunded portions of this project appear in the Unfunded list.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
The total budget identified to complete the PE exceeds the amount of funding Caltrans committed to the project of the State’s share in the current HBP. In October 2022, a draft type selection report was submitted to Caltrans for review. This report is the first step to request additional funding allocations from the Caltrans HBP to complete the PS&E phase and construction phase of the project.

Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Streets & Roads
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score 33
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. Required X Rehabilitation
$ - 100,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 10,000 $ 10,000$ 80,000 $ 80,000$ 10,000 $ 10,000
$ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000
$ 100,000 $ 100,000
$ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000
RO1708 - PINOLE VALLEY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
: Council Request
USE(S)PlanningEstimated Expenditures to-date
$ - Project Estimate FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Streets & Roads
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29
Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
As part of the high school construction project WCCUSD provided road improvements along the school frontage. Improvements to Pinole Valley Road - from Shea Dr. to Helena Ct. will extend the useful life of the pavement. The existing pavement score is high in this area, so a slurry seal may be the recommended treatment.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
Policy GM.3.3, Goal CE.3, Goal CS.10, Policy CS 10.2

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
ConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)200 - Gas TaxDesign

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ - 200,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 200,000 $ 200,000$ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000
$ 200,000 $ 200,000
$ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000
IN2301 - FACILITIES & REAL ESTATE MASTER PLAN
: Staff Recommendation

TOTAL FUNDS
SOURCE(S)106 - Measure S 2014

TOTAL USES
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingencyEstimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
The facilities master plan will serve as a roadmap for achieving identified strategic objectives to improve service delivery and utilization of real estate and facility assets. The masterplan will serve to aid decision-making on capital improvements for a defined list of City owned facilities and provide information on potential major maintenance needs (e.g., repairs vs. replace) as applicable.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Infrastructure Assessment
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ - 100,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 100,000 $ 100,000$ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000
$ 100,000 $ 100,000
$ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000
IN2105 - APPIAN WAY COMPLETE STREETS
: Staff Recommendation
PlanningDesignConstruction
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
Policy CE.1.4, Policy CS.2.6, Policy CS.3.3, Policy H.3.1, Policy GM.3.3, Goal CE.3, Goal CS.10, Policy CS 10.2Estimated Expenditures to-date $ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
Completion of preliminary engineering and design to provide continuous sidewalks and bike lanes along Appian Way beginning from unincorporated El Sobrante to about 1500 lineal feet north of the City limit within Pinole. In December 2021, City Council approved a Cooperative Funding Agreement with WCCTAC to receive STMP funds to complete preliminary design for this project.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
ContingencyUSE(S)

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
SOURCE(S)325 - Grant: STMP FeesThis project will connect with the Contra Costa County’s project to provide continuous sidewalks and bike lanes along Appian Way from San Pablo Dam Rd. in unincorporated El Sobrante. This project will involve coordination with Contra Costa County. The construction phase of this project is unfunded and appears in the Unfunded and Unprogrammed list.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Infrastructure Assessment
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ 140,000 60,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 215,152 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 60,000 $ 140,000 $ 200,000$ 60,000 $ 140,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 $ 60,000 $ 140,000 $ 200,000
$ 60,000 $ 140,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000
IN2103 - RECYCLED WATER FEASIBILITY
: Council Request

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
PlanningDesignConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)100 - General Fund Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)Policy OS.8.1, Policy OS.8.7, Goal SE.9, Policy SE.9.1, Policy SE.9.4Estimated Expenditures to-date $ 15,152.25
Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
A feasibility study will allow the City to plan and phase the construction of future recycled water distribution system infrastructure. The study will identify potential recycled water customers, evaluate the quantity, quality, and recycled water distribution system options to address the needs of potential users in surrounding areas, seek opportunities to phase the construction of a recycled water delivery system, and develop planning-level cost options for the phased system.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
Recycled water delays or eliminates the need to construct more potable water facilities, sustains the economy with increased water supply reliability, protects the environment, safeguards investments in parks and landscaping with drought proof or drought resistant water supply, and contributes to a green and healthy environment. In 2019, East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) prepared an Updated Recycled Waster Plan which considered the potential for potable reuse in EBMUD’s water service area. The development of a new recycled water supply for the Phillips 66 refinery in Rodeo using effluent from the Pinole-Hercules and Rodeo wastewater treatment plants was among the recommended non-potable reuse projects. This project is estimated to deliver up to 3.67 MGD of recycled water to the refinery for use in their boilers and cooling towers. The combined final disinfected effluent from both plants would be pumped at the Rodeo Pump Station to the refinery for treatment a new advanced recycled water treatment plan. This project was recommended by EBMUD because it would deliver a large amount of water to a single customer, with comparatively few pipelines required due to the short distance between the sources of wastewater and the Phillips 66 Refinery General Plan Goals/Policies Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Infrastructure Assessment
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ 170,000 30,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 30,000 $ 30,000
$ 170,000 $ 170,000
$ 30,000 $ 170,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000
$ 30,000 $ 170,000 $ 200,000
$ 30,000 $ 170,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000
IN2101 - EMERGENCY POWER FOR CRITICAL FACILITIES
: Council Request
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Infrastructure Assessment
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29
Policy GM.4.1, Policy CS.2.6, Goal CS.9, Goal HS.4
Estimated Expenditures to-date
$ - Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
During severe natural hazard events, it is highly likely that utility power will not be available for an extended period of time. Critical facilities will need reliable sources of sustained electrical power to continue operations. This project will: 1) identify critical facilities in need of back-up power in coordination with an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) , 2) assess power loads in each critical facility that requires back-up power, 3) determine the costs and technology options including solar battery storage, and 4) make any additional recommendations to Council before advancing to construction.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
The Public Safety Building, Fire Station 74, and the Water Pollution Control Plant have stand by generators.

General Plan Goals/Policies
Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)PlanningDesignConstructionContingency

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
SOURCE(S)100 - General Fund

Project Origin Priority Score
Budget
New ExpansionReplacement RenovationLand/Row Acq. RequiredRehabilitation $ - 150,000.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 250,000 $
6/30/2025
Budget Project Estimate
FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 FY 2028-29 FY 2024 - 2029 $ 150,000 $ 150,000$ 150,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000
$ 150,000 $ 150,000
$ 150,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000
IN1703 - STORM DRAIN MASTER PLAN
: Staff Recommendation

TOTAL FUNDS

TOTAL USES
PlanningDesignConstructionContingencySOURCE(S)106 - Measure S 2014 Summary of Capital Cost
Projected Budget
USE(S)Policy GM.4.1, Policy CS.7.1Estimated Expenditures to-date $ 100,000.00
Project Start 7/1/2024 Estimated Completion
Description
Preparation of a storm drain master plan will provide an analysis of the existing collection system. The plan will identify system deficiencies related to capacity, functionality, and permit compliance. The plan can serve to guide future budget allocations for improvements to the system.

History, Status, or Impact if Delayed
General Plan Goals/Policies
Project Estimate
FY 2024 - 2029
Functional Area : Infrastructure Assessment
Type of CIP Unappropriated Subsequent Years
Year 1
FY 2024-25
Year 2
FY 2025-26
Year 3
FY 2026-27
Year 4
FY 2027-28
Year 5
FY 2028-29

UF001 - Railroad Avenue Bridge Removal and Replacement
Project Information
The Contra Costa County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District has advised
removal of the Railroad Avenue Bridge. The
bridge is a flood barrier. The first step is to
determine if the City of Pinole is the responsible
agency for this project.

UF002 - Electric Vehicle Charging Stations in City lots Project Information
Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Roads/Sanitary Sewer/
Stormwater
Cost Estimate:

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 11
The City desires to promote and encourage the
use of electric vehicles. With increased adoption
of alternative fuel vehicles, the need for
charging infrastructure is growing. The City
wishes to install charging stations in city owned
parking lots. The first step is to complete a load
study at City owned parking lots to determine
the electrical capacity at each site. There may
be significant electrical upgrades necessary to
install charging stations. Electrical capacity and
siting determine ultimately determine the cost of
each project. There are incentives available for
the charging equipment.

Origin: Council Request
Budget Unit: Facilities
Cost Estimate:

Potential Funding Sources: Bay Area
Air Quality Management District, West
Contra Costa Transportation Authority,
Marin Clean Energy
Priority Score: 43

UF003 - Parking lot resurfacing
Project Information
This project is to maintain and enhance
existing City owned parking facilities and
infrastructure, to increase parking supply,
and to support ongoing multi-modal and
streetscape improvements. Improvements
include saw cutting and demolition,
pavement removal, earthwork, pavement
installation, curb and gutter, striping, and
signage.

UF004 - LLAD Landscape Restoration and Improvement
Project Information
Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Facilities
Cost Estimate:

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 32

The Pinole Valley Road Landscape and Lighting
Assessment District was formed in 2008. The
City installed various improvements on Pinole
Valley Road between Henry Avenue and
Ramona Street. The district provides
maintenance to traffic signals, streetlights,
median landscaping, irrigation for landscaping,
electricity to traffic signals and streetlights, and
graffiti removal. This project will maintain and
restore turf, shrubs, plants and trees within the
District. In FY 2022/23, this work was completed
for Zone A (between I-80 and Henry Ave.)
Origin: LLAD Report
Budget Unit: LLAD
Cost Estimate:

Potential Funding Sources: Fund 345
& 348
Priority Score: 27

UF005 - Dog Park Restroom Replacement
Project Information
The existing restroom located at the Dog
Park is beyond its useful life and requires
replacement.

UF006 - Dog Park resurfacing and fencing improvements
Project Information
Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Parks
Cost Estimate: $200,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 36
Resurfacing and fencing improvements
Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Parks
Cost Estimate: $75,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 36

UF007 - Eucalyptus Grove Restoration
Project Information
The open space located between the Old Town
area between John St. and Pinole Valley Road
is forested with Eucalyptus trees. In 2014, a
Safety Inspection was conducted by a
consultant. A total of 8 trees were
recommended for removal, and root crown
excavation was recommended for 3 trees. 2
trees were determined to be hollow and
recommended for further investigation to
evaluate the level of internal decay. In 2018, the
City hired a company to remove 20 Eucalyptus
trees in the area. There are still many trees left
and many of the prior trees were felled with the
trunks remaining on site. This project will
remove the remaining trees, both standing and,
on the ground, and regreen this area with native
trees.

UF008 - Fernandez Park Baseball grandstand improvement
Project Information
Origin: Council Request
Budget Unit: Parks
Cost Estimate: $150,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 22
The current grandstand is aging and
requires increased maintenance to
maintain its serviceability.

Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Parks
Cost Estimate: $250,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 27

UF009 - Repave Trails
Project Information
The City’s goal is to develop safe,
connected, and comfortable bicycle and
pedestrian facilities for people of all ages
and abilities. Repaving trails will enhance
trail access from the City’s roadway
network to encourage alternative modes of
transportation. The Active Transportation
Plan is underway and will identify a trail
network and recommend improvements.

UF010 - ADA Ramps
Project Information
Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Parks
Cost Estimate:

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 25
This project involves removing barriers to
accessibility for persons using wheelchairs
or other personal assistance devices and
improving pedestrian accessibility and
safety by reconstructing or upgrading curb
ramps at various locations throughout the
City.

Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate:

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 49

UF011 - Appian Complete Streets
Project Information
This project will provide continuous sidewalks and bike lanes along Appian Way from San Pablo Dam Rd. in unincorporated
El Sobrante to about 1500 lineal feet north
of the city limit within the City of Pinole.

The City received STMP funds
from West Contra Costa Transportation
Authority for preliminary design. The
construction phase remains unfunded.

UF012 - Pedestrian Bridge Maintenance
Project Information
Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate: $970,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 30
Maintenance of pedestrian bridges as
identified in the Pedestrian Bridge
Inspection Reports completed by Quincy
Engineering, Inc. In FY 2023/24 there is
$50,000 budgeted in the operating budget
for maintenance activities.

Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate: $224,700

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 22

UF013 - Fernandez Park Improvements
Project Information
Renovations to the baseball field to
decrease water and energy usage and
increase accessibility and safety.

UF014 - Pavement Maintenance
Project Information
Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate: $850,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 24

The City uses a pavement management
software known as StreetSaver to
strategize the most cost effective method
to extend the pavement life. Pavement
Maintenance is necessary to maintain the
City’s pavement network. Deferred
maintenance results in increased costs
over time.

Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate: $42,000,000

Potential Funding Sources: Fund 200
and Fund 106
Priority Score: 25

UF015 - I-80/ Pinole Valley Rd. Interchange Improvements Project Information
This project will widen Pinole Valley Road
ramp terminal intersections at I-80 to
provide a dedicated right turn lane to the
eastbound and westbound I-80 on ramps.

This project will also provide crossing
enhancements at the Pinole Valley Road
and I-80 intersection.

UF016 - Shale Hill Retaining wall and sidewalk gap
Project Information
Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate: $10,959,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 9
Shale Hill is located on San Pablo Ave.
near Oak Ridge Road. The cut slope
above the pavement is comprised of shale
which is loose and sloughs onto the road.

There is no sidewalk in this area because
the toe of the embankment is uncontrolled
and there is inadequate space to
accommodate a sidewalk. Staff has not
been successful in securing grant funds for
this project.

Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate:

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 9

UF017 - Sidewalk gaps
Project Information
This project will address sidewalk gaps by
installing public sidewalks where sidewalks
are missing on one or both sides of the
street. This work will be coordinated with
other construction projects. Sidewalk gaps
often exist in places with site constraints
(i.e. right of way, grade/slopes, or utility
conflicts) or are adjacent to properties that
have been required to provide sidewalks in
the past due to land uses or ownerships.

Locations for repair will be selected based
on site conditions, pedestrian safety, and
adjacent property attributes.

UF018 - Signal System Upgrades
Project Information
Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate:

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 16
This project will upgrade various aspects
of the City’s traffic signal system including:
traffic signal controller equipment, vehicle
detection, traffic signal arms and heads,
battery backup systems, and
communications systems to reduce
congestion and improve safety for the
Pinole community.

Origin: Staff Recommendation
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate:

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 16

UF019 - Tennent-2
Project Information
This project involves replacement of the
approximately pipeline along Tennent
Avenue.

Origin: Sanitary Sewer Master Plan
Budget Unit: Sewer
Cost Estimate: $4,239,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 59

UF020 - Tree Master Plan
Project Information
In 2019, the City Council established a
Beautification Ad Hoc Committee to
analyze options for, and to make
recommendations to Council regarding
clean-up and beautification projects in
Pinole. Among other projects, the
Committee recommended the development
of a Tree Master Plan to inventory the
existing trees, and to develop a plan for
managing the tree inventory, including
finding tree planting opportunities.

UF021 - San Pablo Avenue Bridge over BNSF Railroad
Project Information
Origin: Beautification AdHoc Committee
Budget Unit:

Cost Estimate: $375,000

Potential Funding Sources: Cal Fire
Urban and Community Forestry Grant
Program
Priority Score: 11
This project will replace the existing
thirteen span reinforced concrete span
structure over the Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railroad adjacent to San Pablo
Avenue at the easterly limits of the City.

On 02/18/20, Council awarded a contract
to a Consultant to begin the preliminary
engineering (PE) for this project (CIP
Project RO1710). The PE will be
completed in two phases due to funding
limitations. The first phase was necessary
to develop a final cost estimate to
facilitate pursuing additional funding
required to complete all phases including
construction.

Origin: End of life cycle
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate: $28,800,000

Potential Funding Sources: Fund 213,
Fund 214, and Economic Stimulus funds.

Priority Score: 58

UF022 - Installation of Solar at City Facilities
Project Information
This project involves procurement and
installation of solar panels at City owned
facilities to offset the City’s electricity
consumption and reduce the greenhouse
gas impacts.

UF023 - All Access Weather Roads
Project Information
Origin: Council Request
Budget Unit: Facilities
Cost Estimate:

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 37
The General Plan, Chapter 8 discusses
improvement of open space management
to reduce wildfire risks. There is a desire
to have improved, all-weather access
roads through open space to improve access to and from Hercules and El Sobrante to shorten response times and improve
mutual aid.

Origin: General Plan
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate:

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 20

UF024 - Faria House Renovations
Project Information
The building commonly referred to as the
“Faria House” is a two-story residence
constructed in about 1890 and originally
located at what is now 1301 Pinole Valley
Road. In 2005, the Faria House was
relocated to 2100 San Pablo Avenue. On
June 7, 2022, City Council directed staff
pursue hazard remediation and renovations to create a lower-level office, and upper-level warm shell. This project was later unfunded by City Council.

UF025 - San Pablo Avenue Complete Streets
Project Information
Origin: Council Request
Budget Unit: Facilities
Cost Estimate: $420,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 17
A complete streets plan would create a
new vision for San Pablo Avenue, to
transform it into a place where people of
all ages and abilities can travel safely and
comfortably whether walking, bicycling,
riding transit, or driving
Origin: Council Request
Budget Unit: Infrastructure Assessment
Cost Estimate: $200,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Subregional Transportation Mitigation
Program (STMP) funds
Priority Score: 15

UF026 - Signalized Intersections
Project Information
Improvement to signal hardware, signal
timing, or protected left turn phases at:
• Appian Way & Fitzgerald Drive
• San Pablo & Tennent Ave.
• Appian Way & Canyon Dr./Tara Hills
• Pinole Valley Rd./Tennent Ave./Ellerhorst St.
• San Pablo Ave. & Pinole Valley Rd.
• San Pablo Ave. & Pinon Ave./Appian Way
• Pinole Valley Rd. & Estates Ave.

Refer to the LRSP document for detailed
recommendations.

UF027 - Pedestrian Safety at Signalized Intersections
Project Information
Origin: Local Road Safety Plan
Budget Unit: Streets & Roads
Cost Estimate: $183,792

Potential Funding Sources: Highway
Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
Priority Score: 46
Installation of advance stop bars before
crosswalk, raised median on approaches,
raised pavement markers and striping
through intersection at:
• Appian Way & Fitzgerald Drive
• San Pablo & Tennent Ave.
• Appian Way & Canyon Dr./Tara Hills
• Pinole Valley Rd./Tennent Ave./Ellerhorst St.
• San Pablo Ave. & Pinole Valley Rd.
• Fitzgerald Drive and Best Buy Parking Lot
• Pinole Valley Rd. & Estates Ave.

Refer to the LRSP document for detailed
recommendations.

Origin: Local Road Safety Plan
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate: $514,548

Potential Funding Sources: Highway
Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
Priority Score: 46

UF028 - Safety at Unsignalized Intersections
Project Information
Install intersection lighting, install/upgrade
larger or additional stop signs or other
intersection warning/regulatory signs, or
install RRFB:
• Walter Ave. & San Pablo Ave.
• Pinole Valley Rd. & Simas Ave.
• Pinole Valley Rd. & Wright Ave.
• Pinole Valley Rd. & Rafaela St.
• Wright Ave. & Carol St.
• Simas Ave. & Moraga Dr.

Refer to the LRSP document for detailed
recommendations.

UF029 - Roadway Segments # 1
Project Information
Origin: Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP)
Budget Unit: Streets & Roads
Cost Estimate: $879,830

Potential Funding Sources: Highway
Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
Priority Score: 46
Install segment lighting, or install/upgrade
signs with new fluorescent sheeting, or
install delineators, reflectors/object
markers.
• Pinole Valley Rd: San Pablo Ave. to Collins
Ave.
• San Pablo Ave.: Oak Ridge Rd. to
Pinole Valley Rd.
• San Pablo Ave.: Golden Gate to Del Monte Dr.
• Tara Hills: Kilkenny Way to Appian Way
• Walter Ave: North Terminus to San Pablo Ave.
• Fitzgerald Dr.: Jovita Ln. to Appian Way
• Appian Way: San Pablo Ave. to Michael Dr.
• Tennent Ave.: San Pablo Ave. to Pinole Valley
Rd.

Refer to the LRSP document for detailed
recommendations.

Origin: Local Road Safety Plan
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate: $1,469,474

Potential Funding Sources: Highway
Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
Priority Score: 46

UF030 - Roadway Segments # 2
Project Information
Install centerline rumble strips/stripes, or
install edge-lines and centerlines, or install
RRFB
• Pinole Valley Rd: San Pablo Ave. to Collins
Ave.
• San Pablo Ave.: Oak Ridge Rd. to
Pinole Valley Rd.
• San Pablo Ave.: Golden Gate to Del Monte Dr.
• Tara Hills: Kilkenny Way to Appian Way
• Walter Ave: North Terminus to San Pablo Ave.
• Tennent Ave.: San Pablo Ave. to Pinole Valley
Rd.

Refer to the LRSP document for detailed
recommendations.

UF031 - Roadway Segments # 3
Project Information
Origin: Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP)
Budget Unit: Streets & Roads
Cost Estimate: $914,375

Potential Funding Sources: Highway
Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
Priority Score: 46
Implement road diet, or install dynamic/
variable speed warning signs, or install/
upgrade pedestrian crossing
• Pinole Valley Rd: San Pablo Ave. to Collins
Ave.
• San Pablo Ave.: Oak Ridge Rd. to
Pinole Valley Rd.
• Tara Hills: Kilkenny Way to Appian Way
• Fitzgerald Dr.: Jovita Ln. to Appian Way
• Appian Way: San Pablo Ave. to Michael Dr.

Refer to the LRSP document for detailed
recommendations.

Origin: Local Road Safety Plan
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate: $1,483,510

Potential Funding Sources: Highway
Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
Priority Score: 46

UF032 - Vehicular Bridge Maintenance
Project Information
Maintenance of vehicular bridges as
identified in the Caltrans Bridge Inspection
Reports. The latest bridge inspection
issued in May 2023, contains
recommendations for three bridges near:
• PVHS High School on Pinole Valley Rd.
• Wright Ave. on Pinole Valley Rd.
• On Simas Ave. near Pinole Valley Rd.

Origin: Caltrans Bridge Inspection
Budget Unit: Streets & Roads
Cost Estimate:

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: 22
UF033 - Old Town Traffic Calming
Project Information
Assess feasibility of and alternatives for,
and design and construct traffic calming
measures on San Pablo Avenue between
John St and Oak Ridge Rd.

Origin: Council Request
Budget Unit: Roads
Cost Estimate: $570,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score:

UF034 - City Hall Energy Upgrades
Project Information
Energy conservation measures
recommended in the Energy Conservation,
Generation, and Storage Assessment.

UF035 - Public Safety Building Energy Upgrades
Project Information
Origin: Energy Conservation,
Generation, and Storage Assessment
Budget Unit: Facilities
Cost Estimate: $189,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score:

Energy conservation measures
recommended in the Energy Conservation,
Generation, and Storage Assessment.

Origin: Energy Conservation,
Generation, and Storage Assessment
Budget Unit: Facilities
Cost Estimate: $160,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score:

UF036 - WPCP Energy Upgrades
Project Information
Energy conservation measures
recommended in the Energy Conservation,
Generation, and Storage Assessment.

UF037 - Youth Center Energy Upgrades
Project Information
Origin: Energy Conservation,
Generation, and Storage Assessment
Budget Unit: Sanitary Sewer
Cost Estimate: $1,686,000

Potential Funding Sources: SelfGeneration Incentive Program (SGIP) Priority Score:

Energy conservation measures
recommended in the Energy Conservation,
Generation, and Storage Assessment.

Origin: Energy Conservation,
Generation, and Storage Assessment
Budget Unit: Facilities
Cost Estimate: $17,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score:

UF038- Park Energy Upgrades
Project Information
Energy conservation measures
recommended in the Energy Conservation,
Generation, and Storage Assessment.

Origin: Energy Conservation,
Generation, and Storage Assessment
Budget Unit: Parks
Cost Estimate: $30,000

Potential Funding Sources:

Priority Score: