CITY COUNCIL
Cameron Sasai, Mayor
Anthony Tave, Mayor Pro Tem
Norma Martínez-Rubin, Council Member
Devin T. Murphy Council Member
Maureen Toms Council Member
PINOLE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING AGENDA
November 18, 2025
5:00 PM
Attend in Person: PINOLE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 2131 PEAR STREET OR 2500 North Hollywood Way, Burbank, CA 91505 (Teleconference - Councilmember Murphy) 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 - November 18, 2025
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.pinole.gov 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-Spears 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.pinole.gov. 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 - November 18, 2025
1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present, and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.
3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision: (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself /herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov't Code § 87105.
4. CONVENE TO A CLOSED SESSION
Citizens may address the Council regarding a Closed Session item prior to the Council adjourning into the Closed Session, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk.
A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: City Manager, Kelcey Young, Human Resources Director, Stacy Shell, Finance Director, Markisha Guillory, and Gregory Ramirez, IEDA Employee organizations: The Pinole Police Employees Association (PPEA) B. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT
Gov. Code § 54957
Title: Interim City Manager
5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION
6. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker. Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting. PLEASE SEE THE COVERSHEET OF THE
AGENDA FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO SUBMIT PUBLIC COMMENTS
7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Mayor Report
1. Announcements
B. Mayoral & Council Appointments
1. Reappointment to the Contra Costa County Library Commission C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
City Council
Agenda - November 18, 2025
D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
E. City Manager Report / Department Staff
F. City Attorney Report
8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMUNITY EVENTS
A. Proclamations
1. Family Court Awareness Month
B. Presentations
1. None
9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any interested party or Council member(s) wishes to comment on an item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of the Consent Calendar.
A. Approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting on November 4, 2025.
B. Receive the November 1, 2025 – November 14, 2025, List of Warrants in the Amount of $1,091,413.46 and the November 7, 2025, Payroll in the Amount of $554,858.64.
C. FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report Action: Receive a Report (Markisha Guillory) D. FY 2025/26 First Quarter Investment Report Action: Receive a Report (Markisha Guillory) E. Fiscal Year (FY) 2025/26 1st Quarter Strategic Plan Status Report Action: Recieve the report (Kelcey Young)
F. Receive Update On Capital Projects, Inspection And Permitting, And Maintenance Action:
Receive report (Heba El-Guindy)
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Citizens wishing to speak regarding a Public Hearing item should fill out a speaker card prior to the completion of the presentation, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk. An official who engaged in an ex parte communication that is the subject of a Public Hearing must disclose the communication on the record prior to the start of the Public Hearing.
A. None
11. OLD BUSINESS
A. Update on Implementation of the Residential Health and Safety Rental Inspection Ordinance (Pinole Municipal Code Chapter 8.30) and Adoption of Administrative Regulations Action:
Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Jared Murti, Housing Fellow, Lilly Whalen)
City Council
Agenda - November 18, 2025
12. NEW BUSINESS
A. Republic Services Credit Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Action: Review and approve Republic Services MOU and credit to subscribers for work stoppage and delegate authority to City Manager to finalize terms and execute MOU. (Kelcey Young) B. Approve a Memorial Renaming Bayfront Park and Sign Installation in Honor of Ohlone Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Fiona Epps)
13. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Continued from Item 6) (Public Comments) Open only to members of the public who did not speak under the first Citizens to Be Heard, Agenda Item 6 Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes for City Council items and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.
Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future meeting.
14. ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting of December 2, 2025 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-Spears, CMC
City Clerk
POSTED: Friday, November 14, 2025 at 12:40 pm
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 7.B.1.
DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 2025
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Heather Bell, City Clerk, [email protected]
SUBJECT: REAPPOINTMENT TO THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY LIBRARY
COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council reappoint George Pursley to the Contra Costa County Library Commission to a term expiring on June 30, 2028.
BACKGROUND
The Contra Costa County Library Commission was established by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors in March 1991. The Commission was created to serve in an advisory capacity to the Board of Supervisors and the County Librarian. The Library Commission is comprised of 24 voting members and 4 non-voting (ex-officio) members:
• Eighteen members representing the cities/towns in Contra Costa County - these Commissioners are appointed by the city/town councils (Richmond does not participate) • Five members represent Contra Costa County - each member of the Board of Supervisors appoints one Commissioner
• One member representing the Central Labor Council
• Four Ex-Officio members representing the College District, East Bay Leadership Council, Office of Education and the Friends Council
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
George Pursley was appointed to the Library Commission on August 15, 2017. Mr. Pursley has been diligent in his representation of the City of Pinole on this County Commission and past attendance records show his commitment to this responsibility. Staff has confirmed Mr.
Pursley’s willingness to continue serving Pinole in this capacity.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact.
ATTACHMENTS
None
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
November 4, 2025
1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS
The City Council Meeting was held in a hybrid format (in-person and via Zoom videoconference and broadcast) from the Pinole Council Chambers, 2131 Pear Street, Pinole, California. Mayor Sasai called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 5:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.
3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision; (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself/herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov.
Code § 87105.
A. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT
Cameron Sasai, Mayor
Anthony Tave, Mayor Pro Tem*
Norma Martinez-Rubin, Council Member
Devin Murphy, Council Member
Maureen Toms, Council Member**
*Arrived after Roll Call
**Participating remotely under the provisions of the Brown Act B. STAFF PRESENT
Kelcey Young, City Manager
Heather Bell-Spears, City Clerk
Eric Casher, City Attorney
Andrea Dwyer, Community Services Director
Maria Picazo, Recreation Manager
Heba El-Guindy, Public Works Director
Markisha Guillory, Finance Director
Roxane Stone, Deputy City Clerk
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
City Clerk Heather Bell-Spears announced the agenda had been posted on October 30, 2025 at 4:00 p.m. with all legally required written notices. Written comments had been received in advance of the meeting, distributed to the City Council and staff, posted to the City website and made available to the public to view in the Council Chambers.
Following an inquiry, the Council reported there were no conflicts with any items on the agenda.
4. CONVENE TO A CLOSED SESSION
Citizens may address the Council regarding a Closed Session item prior to the Council adjourning into the Closed Session, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk.
A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54956.8
Property: 651 Pinole Shores Road
402-220-021
Agency negotiators: City Manager Kelcey Young, City Attorney Eric Casher Negotiating parties: Jaclyn Bellicitti, Site Acquisition Centerline Communications, Authorized Representative for Verizon
B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54956.8
Property: 2100 San Pablo Avenue
Agency negotiators: City Manager Kelcey Young and City Attorney Eric Casher Negotiating party: Art Pakpour
Under negotiation: Price and Terms
C. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54956.8
Property: 2101 Pear St. Pinole, CA 94564-1797/APN: 401-163-004-5 Agency negotiators: City Manager Kelcey Young
Negotiating party: American Postal Infrastructure Partners, LLC D. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54956.8
Property: 2301 San Pablo Avenue
APN: 401-162-001-2
Agency negotiators: City Manager Kelcey Young and City Attorney Eric Casher Negotiating party: Raquel Conter; Sonny and Kamal Randhawa E. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Gov. Code § 54957
Title: City Manager
Mayor Sasai reported that Item 4E would be taken out of order and the City Council would reconvene to Closed Session at the conclusion of the public portion of the meeting agenda and following Item 13, Citizens to be Heard.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Irma Ruport, speaking to Item 4A, reported that Verizon had been a big headache for the City. A group found a past contract between the City of Pinole and Verizon had been signed and delivered without the consent of the public. The past Verizon contract involved a cell tower that was to have been built in a City park, although it was an inappropriate location given restrictions in place. At that time, the then City Manager and no one knew about that information but a contract between the City and Verizon had been signed. Subsequently, the state had explained that a cell tower could not be placed in the park and the contract was deemed null and void to avoid litigation. She also referenced the fact that Fire Station 74 had been built in the wrong place in that it had been built in the park. In the end, that situation involved significant attorney fees as part of the negotiations and the City decided to swap park land to ensure the Verizon cell tower was not built.
Verizon ultimately located elsewhere in the City. The contract had been very costly for citizens and she suggested the City Council should look back and read about that history and not repeat it. If the City Council approved a contract with Verizon as part of Item 4A, she asked that citizens be made aware given that the citizenry wanted to be a part of the process and not be excluded from decisions.
For Item 4B, Ms. Ruport pointed out the City Council voted to sell the Faria House three years ago and finally negotiations were ongoing; however, decisions had been made in the past with Assistant City Attorney Mog about how some of those properties could and should be sold. She urged the City Council to do their homework and bring some of that information back. She wanted assurance the Faria House would be sold without any attachment to taxpayers. She suggested it was about time for the property to be sold and reported she had requested accounting records on the property but the City did not have them. As a 50-year resident, she sought some resolution to the property that had been a financial burden to taxpayers.
As to Item 4D, Ms. Ruport questioned whether the spelling of the names of the negotiating parties shown on the meeting agenda were accurate. For Item 4E, she referred to the multiple performance evaluations for the City Manager who had only been on the job a year and a half.
She found that to be unsatisfactory. She had made requests for information from the City but the information provided was incomplete. She referenced the fact the City Council had recently held a workshop for possible tax increases in the future when the Council should actually be working on today’s needs. Some cities were currently cutting back on personnel and budgets, whereas Pinole was considering things two or three years into the future.
Ms. Ruport commented that the City Manager had been interviewed by a city in the State of Arizona, which was on YouTube, was public information and reflected the City Manager was looking for a job elsewhere. She emphasized the City Council was voted into office by the residents and taxpayers deserved better and expected more. She did not appreciate being told the City did not have enough staff, and urged the City Council to get serious and realize the difficult economic situation and that many people were not getting their benefits and were losing their jobs.
Sheila Grist referenced Item 4A and stated the cell tower was located in the valley, not in the park.
She supported Items 4A through 4C, but suggested the process should be open and transparent to the community. When a Closed Session was over, whether an item moved forward, was tabled or possible action taken to sell property, as an example, that information should be reported out in open session and not just with a statement that there was nothing to report.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Ann Moriarty, Boardmember, Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed, referenced Item 4E and suggested City Manager Kelcey Young had done a fantastic job and had committed early to the community. From the perspective of Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed, City Manager Young’s commitment had resulted in specific actions, including the pursuit of grants, thoughtful approaches and a visible desire to work for the good of Pinole. City Manager Young stood out as being accessible and responsive to residents. She suggested the City of Pinole was lucky to have her.
Paula Jarvis, Boardmember, Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed and an active volunteer, also referenced Item 4E, and reported on her frequent contact with City Manager Young and her excellent staff. City Manager Young had been supportive of the efforts to raise public awareness of Pinole Creek, had participated during monthly trash cleanups, set up challenges to stimulate participation and increased the fun factor and demonstrated her commitment to the City time and again by her professional engagement with the community, its volunteers and businesses. She witnessed significant improvements in City services under the City Manager’s leadership and would rank her performance in the job as excellent.
Jonathan Jarvis, Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed, also commented on Item 4E and expressed concern the City was experiencing a repeat of the same political environment that resulted in the exodus of former City Manager Andrew Murray, who had been a strong and highly confident leader but who had left under circumstances that were not transparent. It appeared they were in the same non-transparent situation with the City Council and the highly competent current City Manager. He did not want to see a revolving door of City Managers like what happened in the City of Clayton, which would not serve the Pinole community or attract highly skilled leaders who could fill City positions. He asked for transparency in the interactions between the City Council and the City’s professional staff.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION At 7:03 p.m., Mayor Sasai reconvened the meeting into open session. He reported the City Council provided direction for Item 4B to execute a letter of non-binding intent with Art Pakpour.
There was no reportable action from Closed Session Items 4A, 4C or 4D.
Mayor Sasai reported the agenda items would be taken out of order. The City Council moved to Item 8. Recognitions / Presentations / Community Events, A. Proclamations, at this time.
8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMUNITY EVENTS
A. Proclamations
1. United Against Hate Week
The City Council read into the record a proclamation recognizing October 19 through 25, 2025 as United Against Hate Week with the proclamation presented to Christy Lam-Julian representing United Against Hate Contra Costa Chapter.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Christy Lam-Julian thanked the City Council for the proclamation and highlighted the work of the Lam-Julian Foundation, formerly known as Shannon Village, which had been facilitating numerous community engagement initiatives since 2021, and which she highlighted at length at this time. This year, for United Against Hate Week, the Foundation would partner with Indivisible North East Bay, Pinole Valley High School (PVHS) and Contra Costa Community College for the Stand up to Hate Pledge Drive, collaborate with the Pinole Grove Residents Association to host a poster-making event and work with the Pinole Library to organize the We all Belong story time.
With United Against Hate, the Foundation would work to restore respect and civil discourse, embrace the strength of diversity, build inclusive and equitable communities for all and defeat hate in all communities. She looked forward to fostering a stronger partnership with the City.
Mayor Sasai thanked Ms. Lam-Julian for her service to the community and for bringing awareness to those issues. He referenced the 2024 Hate Crime Report from the State Attorney General’s Office, and reported that hate crime events had increased 2.7 percent between 2023 and 2024.
Anti-Black bias events were the most prevalent with 49 incidents reported this year and antiJewish bias events rose 7.3 percent from last year. He noted the City Council partnered with the California Versus Hate Initiative, and materials were available in all public facilities and would be provided in every single WestCAT fleet vehicle.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafael Menis thanked Ms. Lam-Julian for the exceptional amount of work she and her Foundation had done putting together the various events for United Against Hate Week and for coordinating those events over the years. Given the current challenges being faced both in the community, across the state, country and the world, he urged everyone to try to commit to being united against hate throughout the entire year. He added that hate did not stop at one group, it grew, expanded and as it succeeded found new targets. He encouraged everyone to join him and unite against hate now.
Stephanie Robillard hoped the proclamation would be a truly meaningful step forward for inclusion rather than a performative gesture. United Against Hate served an important purpose, started conversations, brought visibility to issues of discrimination, signaled a community’s values and respected equity. United Against Hate Week was more than a symbol if it served as a catalyst for ongoing action coupled with measurable commitments, funding for anti-bias education, transparent reporting on hate incidents, training for staff and law enforcement and partnerships with local organizations that were already doing this work year-round. She referred to the current alarming climate and the rise and/or engagement with Nazism and the dramatic increase in surveillance and detention in direct opposition to creating a more inclusive and equity-oriented community that combated mistrust, fear and insecurity. She hoped this was the beginning of a deeper and more continuous effort.
Derilin Hsu thanked Christy Lam-Julian for her work with United Against Hate. She emphasized the importance to recognize hate in this country was not just from the top, but from the bottom up.
She received emails from someone who was a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent who informed her a white supremist group was active and militarizing themselves. She asked of the City’s plans to ensure a sense of safety and belonging for all, not just in a proclamation, but in action. She sought active accountability throughout the year from elected officials and from anyone actively representing the City.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
2. Native American Heritage Month
The City Council read into the record a proclamation recognizing November 2025 as Native American Heritage Month.
Mayor Sasai reported he would present the proclamation to the PVHS Native American Student Union (NASU) at such time as he was able to visit NASU on campus.
3. World Town Planning Day
The City Council read into the record a proclamation recognizing November 8, 2025 as World Town Planning Day, with the proclamation presented to Pinole Planning Commission ViceChairperson Rafael Menis.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafael Menis thanked the City Council for drafting and presenting the proclamation he was honored to accept on behalf of the Pinole Planning Commission, which collectively had done far more work towards improving, organizing, and planning the future of the community than anyone could do alone. He also acknowledged the efforts of City staff assigned to assist the Planning Commission with staff packets, updates, findings and working through all of the details the Planning Commission considered in its meetings and integrating them into a greater and more finished whole. In particular, he thanked Planning Manager David Hanham and Senior Planner Justin Shiu for their work over the years providing the Planning Commission with the bedrock it built upon with their comments and suggestions. He commented that the concept of planning was unnecessary, perhaps, but suggested planning showed there could be a better way and that by working together Planning Commissioners could engage the community, collaborate and find out what the highest and best uses for the entire community were for any given project, combinations of projects, for entire regions of the City and for the City as a whole. As one thought about the value of planning and World Town Planning Day, he asked the public to consider what it would be like if there was no planning or zoning in place.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Mayor Sasai thanked Mr. Menis for his service to the community. He also acknowledged his City Council colleagues who had all served on the Planning Commission prior to being elected to the City Council, and Council member Toms who worked as a Planner professionally.
4. Sikh Appreciation and Awareness Month
The City Council read into the record a proclamation recognizing the month of November 2025 as Sikh Appreciation and Awareness Month.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Mayor Sasai recognized Harpreet Sandhu, Senior District Representative for Congressman John Garamendi, newly appointed to the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit), the first Asian and Sikh City Council member for the City of Richmond who played a major role in the formation of the American Sikh Congressional Caucus and who had been elected to represent Congressional District 7 as the Barack Obama delegate to the 2008 Democratic National Convention (DNC).
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Harpreet Sandhu introduced representatives present from the El Sobrante Gurdwara Sahib Sikh Center. He thanked the City Council for the proclamation and the acknowledgment of inclusion, understanding and respect for all communities. While Sikh history and contributions were celebrated, they also recognized the tragedy of 1984 when thousands of Sikh women and children were massacred in Delhi and other cities in India, which remain etched in their memory as a reminder of the need for truth, justice and protection of human rights. He also thanked Christy Lam-Julian for her work on United Against Hate Week. He reported that Sikhs were the number three victims of hate crime in the United States pursuant to statistical records. He also reported that on November 5, 2025, the Sikh community celebrated the birth of the founder of the Sikh religion, Guru Nanak, whose teaching emphasized the fundamental equality of all people regardless of gender, caste or background and who taught that men and women were equal and all humanity shared a common essence, service, compassion and justice that were the highest calling. Guru Nanak’s philosophy of inclusion, love and respect for all people continued to guide Sikhs in the community and in their daily lives. The contributions of the Sikh community ran the gamut across all businesses and in the armed services and helped to enrich the community and nation guided by the core principles of their faith. He was grateful the City of Pinole was standing up for the Sikh community, in remembrance, in celebration, and in recognition, which gesture honored the Sikh heritage and shared American commitment to diversity, compassion and unity.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Mayor Sasai returned to Item 6, Citizens to be Heard at this time.
6. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.
Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.
Amy Eubanks, President, Pinole Police Employees Association (PPEA), speaking on behalf of a PPEA member unable to attend the meeting read into the record written comments from a Pinole Police Officer, who reported that in the 12 years as a police officer in Pinole, this officer had been affected and/or was part of multiple City contracts and had heard past and present Council members praise Pinole Police Officers and dispatchers, holding them in high regard.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Ms. Eubanks continued to speak on the officer’s behalf, who stated at one point a former Council member stated “our officers were more than their weight in gold,” but the common denominator was Council members were well versed in saying flashy things and were even better at saying what the masses wanted to hear to get elected. Once elected, the Council did not deliver on things promised but changed the narrative to line one’s own pockets. She stated this officer took the job willingly and loved every minute of it, but in the world co-workers, dispatchers and officers lived in, they listened to the worst of the worst, answered the calls to bear witness to the horror humanity could inflict on each other and spilled their blood, sweat and tears on City’s streets. This officer had been hurt in fights with violent subjects, hospitalized after chemical exposures, hit by a drunk driver while walking and conducting a traffic stop and shot at. The officer and his coworkers witnessed things one would consider nightmares, and left their homes each day with the knowledge it could be the last day they may see their families.
Ms. Eubanks noted the officer’s concern that the City Council did not know the toll this took on first responders and their families, and the fact that a culture had developed in Pinole to do more with less, while the reality was it was unsafe to have three officers on duty for 12-hour periods, which killed morale and did nothing to help with retention. Concern was expressed the Pinole Police Department (PPD) had been viewed as a stepping stone agency and would continue to be one if there was no incentive for officers to stay and attract and retain quality officers and dispatchers. The City Council was asked to step-up. While the officer was speaking for themself, co-workers had similar experiences. The officer highlighted the many family events missed while on the job and could say with confidence the City Council took that for granted since they had not been forced to miss similar events. While the officer worked for the PPD willingly, being valued in return was important. A quote from George Orwell was also read into the record. The men and women of the PPD, officers and dispatchers, including those standing in the Council Chambers, via Zoom or through comments or emails, wanted to be truly valued and not just a bullet point on one’s campaign drive.
Barry Duggan, a member of the PPEA for 13-years, stated during that time he had heard current and past City Councils boast about how great and clean the City was. Council members past and present stated they knew the City, but he questioned whether that was the case since Pinole Police Officers and dispatchers had been out of contract for over four months and counting. When the City Council held a recess for a month, the PPEA was out of contract. Pinole Police Officers were the lowest paid in Contra Costa County, and since 2017 Pinole netted zero officers due to new and veteran officers leaving for more reasonable pay, with Pinole continuously being a training ground for other cities. The PPD could not staff open positions since the City was not competitive, with many applicants either looking the other way or coming to the City to get the training and then leave. He had been told by a current Council member that the PPD was at adequate staffing levels, which amounted to only two officers and a supervisor on the street, a consistent level for the last 13 years he had been an officer, but he explained the report meant it was the budgeted staffing levels to which the Department was nowhere near.
Mr. Duggan suggested residents would not agree the PPD was at adequate staffing levels. The PPD prided itself on the quality of service provided to citizens, but he suggested residents should be informed of what was occurring behind closed doors where the City Council had chosen to put money elsewhere instead of where it mattered. A citizen recently suggested to the City Council during budget meetings to “cut the fluff,” but that person had been rebuffed by the City Council, with the statement the City could not just “cut the fluff.”
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Mr. Duggan disagreed and stated it was time for the City to invest in its foundation. The PPEA never asked for top wages, but to be competitive, and what the City could afford. The PPEA was tired being met with the statement it could not get a raise unless everyone else was met with the same raise, while another union had received 10 percent for bilingual pay when the PPEA had received only 3 percent. He also highlighted the various threats officers faced on a daily basis and urged the City Council to invest in its foundation, because without it, the foundation would crumble.
Sheila Grist thanked Pinole’s Police Officers. She otherwise commented she had reviewed the police reports and referenced the arrest of an unregistered sex offender in Pinole. She noted there was a website that showed where sex offenders lived and when those individuals were not registered, their whereabouts were unknown. An alumnus of PVHS, she commented that the City once had a hospital and along with the PPD, those were the reasons she wanted to live in Pinole. The hospital was lost decades ago. She urged the City Council to “cut the fat, cut the fluff,” and get the full PPD back.
Debbie Long commented it had come to her attention Pinole Police Officers had been working without a contract for the past five months. During that time, the City Council had approved the 2025/26 budget without considering the new police contract. The budget had been approved with an expenditure increase of 16 percent including additional employees for the Recreation Department, which lost over a million dollars, as well as the Building and Planning Departments which lost three quarters of a million dollars. The City Council had not looked into the departments to see why they were losing money, which should be revenue neutral. Additionally, the City Council had increased its Council Travel Fund by over 100 percent to $7,200 each, and City Council pay by over 40 percent. There was more, but three minutes does not allow her the opportunity to expand on it.
Ms. Long also recognized the PPD had difficulty retaining current officers and recruiting new officers to the City, which lead to excessive overtime, not optimal for the City or the Police Officers.
That meant for those officers who continued to leave the City, not only did that cause a void in public safety, it added to the unfunded liability without the benefits of retaining qualified and experienced officers. With the current time change and upcoming holidays, there were more opportunities for criminals, and given past experience, that put additional strain on an already overworked PPD. The City Council had been able to come to agreement with other unions in the City but not for the police contract, which led her to believe the City Council did not value its officers. She understood the ins and outs of contracting, but without addressing the police contract at every Council meeting, it had the appearance the City Council was not prioritizing negotiations with the PPD’s contract. During election time, all City Council members campaigned on public safety. She urged the City Council to let the community know they were not all talk and before continuing down the path of more taxation, the City Council should ratify the police contract.
Peter Murray echoed Ms. Long’s comments, and stated as a 28-year member of the City Council, there had never been an issue with the negotiations with the PPD, which was always in a working and workable mentality when it came to doing what was right for the City, and officers never walked off the job. He was sad to learn officers had gone without a contract and there was frustration due to the tenor of the comments, which should not happen. The community valued public service and public safety foremost.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Mr. Murray emphasized the PPD was there when needed, and over the years as had been noted, officers had faced numerous threats, with officers having stepped up in times of confrontations and done the job, which should be honored. He urged the City Council to get this matter settled to avoid losing more officers to other jurisdictions, and to staff the PPD appropriately.
Kirk Wong read into the record a portion of a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) that had been signed in May 2001 between the Pinole Redevelopment Agency and Downtown Pinole Partners, particularly related to the use of site and non-discrimination clauses established by the Pinole Redevelopment Agency, and as it related to property located at 2401 San Pablo Avenue.
He stated he was working with City Hall with respect to a conflict with the property manager who had questionable activities and possibly was not adhering to the use of the site as established by the DDA. He wanted to make that information public with regards to his discussion with City Hall and possible violations of the use of the site. He asked whether the City had taken discrimination seriously when reported.
City Attorney Eric Casher reported he had a meeting scheduled for November 6, 2025 when he would meet with Mr. Wong and members of staff. He looked forward to discussing the issue further.
City Manager Kelcey Young added she too had a meeting scheduled with Mr. Wong on November 6, 2025.
Rafael Menis reported he planned to provide an update on the status of COVID-19 in the community but due to the government shutdown, he was unable to attain that information at this time. He encouraged everyone to get vaccinated, if able, against the flu and COVID-19. With respect to the status of the PPD contract, he understood most of the other City union contracts had been negotiated and treated as linked plans, with one agreement accepted for the others.
He asked whether something similar was planned for the PPD and whether the City was going to negotiate separately with the PPD or whether the PPEA wanted to negotiate a separate contract unlinked from the other bargaining units. In addition, he commented on the topics around pay and retention and stated it was worth noting, even if the City was paying market rate for officers, that market rate changes tended to increase over time, and he questioned how long the City could delay given that other cities had more resources and different obligations than Pinole and he offered examples. He suggested it would be worthwhile for the City to expedite its consideration of the PPD contract, and as part of the process of negotiations, he asked the City Council to keep in mind the fiscal constraints on all departments and the various factors the City must deal with.
Jazmine Louis, a Pinole Police Officer and a member of the PPEA, speaking on behalf of herself and her brothers and sisters in the PPEA, and dispatchers, stated that officers were showing up daily despite feeling abandoned by City leadership. She too commented on the fact that Pinole Police Officers were the lowest paid in the County, had asked for fair wages, but every time the City Council had failed them while telling residents they cared about public safety while also asking residents to pay for additional taxes. All the PPD had seen was a minor facelift of its building but nothing in fair pay, new equipment or additional training. Currently, two offices patrolled the entire City at any given time, which was not safe for officers or the community.
Dispatchers handled calls for three different cities and were the lowest paid in the County.
Dispatchers were overworked and underpaid and yet held the organization together.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Ms. Louis stated that some officers were actively applying for positions in other offices just to make what they deserved and to pay the bills, and most were unable to afford to live within 10- miles of Pinole. The City Council was able to find funds for travel budgets and catered items before every City Council meeting but not for those who ran towards danger while others ran away. City Council decisions had consequences and they were driving away the very people who kept the City safe. She asked the City Council to stop stalling about public safety but actually do something about it.
7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Mayor Report
1. Announcements
Mayor Sasai thanked the City Clerk and her staff for their work on Election Day, those who worked in City engagement to get the vote out and those who submitted their votes before the deadline.
He acknowledged there were a lot of changes at the federal level including the cuts to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits with over 100,000 residents in Contra Costa County in need of essential resources. He reported the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors (BOS) adopted a resolution proclaiming a local emergency caused by the disruption of funding for CalFresh benefits, and allocated $21 million to purchase debit cards for CalFresh eligible residents to have food assistance, and he thanked the BOS for its unanimous support of the item. The Employment and Human Services Department of the County would be responsible for the distribution of those resources to community members and he thanked them for their outreach efforts.
Mayor Sasai also thanked Senator Jesse Arreguín and his staff for providing guidance to local leaders in his district as it related to the threat of the possibility of the National Guard being deployed to the City of San Francisco, and reaffirmed the City had inclusive values and had adopted a resolution to ensure that legal aid materials were available in every public facility. He thanked City staff for ensuring that those materials were fully stocked in every public facility.
Mayor Sasai added that the Annual Veterans Day celebration would be held on November 11, 2025 with a Flag Retirement Ceremony from 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at Fernandez Park, and everyone was encouraged to attend. He thanked the City Council for its support to ensure this was an annual celebration in the community in honor of all veterans.
B. Mayoral & Council Appointments
1. Appointment to the Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging (ACOA)
City Clerk Bell-Spears presented the staff report dated November 4, 2025, and recommended the City Council appoint Zee Handoush to the Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging (ACOA) for a term commencing immediately and ending on September 30, 2027 by minute order.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Responding to questions from the Mayor, City Clerk Bell-Spears clarified that a representative from the ACOA provided her the application for Zee Handoush to serve on the ACOA and who asked that staff bring the item forward to the City Council.
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Zee Handoush, a resident of Pinole for the past 50-years was blessed to offer his services and unique perspective. He looked forward to serving on the ACOA and assisting Pinole in any way.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Council member Martinez-Rubin appreciated the applicant’s initiative to fill the spot available on the ACOA.
ACTION: Motion by Council members Murphy/Toms to appoint Zee Handoush to the Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging, for a term commencing immediately and ending on September 30, 2027 by minute order.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Sasai, Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
Council member Murphy reported he attended the Friends of Pinole Library Board meeting with updates from the Board on activities including the recent Book Sale supporting the local library/organization, and received updates from the Pinole Library Manager, with the library to close temporarily for construction starting in March 2026 for the duration of the year. Updates would be shared to ensure residents could plan accordingly and consider alternative library services during that time.
Council member Murphy also attended a Marin Clean Energy (MCE) Executive Committee meeting and reported on the establishment of a Finance Committee to provide stronger oversight and transparency of the MCE budget, and development of a 360-degree review and compensation plan for the Chief Executive Officer and joined the community and West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD) Ward 1 Trustee Jamela Smith-Folds, to celebrate the PVHS Senior Football players, cheerleaders and team managers. He wished them continued success as they moved on to the next chapter of their lives.
Council member Murphy also reported he attended the State of the Estuary Conference/Breakfast along with other electeds, which event highlighted the ongoing challenges and collaborative efforts to protect and restore the San Francisco Estuary, which directly impacted the Pinole Creek Watershed. He was also excited and looked forward to seeing the community at the Safe and Ready Home Safety and Emergency Preparedness three-part series, hosted by the City of Pinole in partnership with the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD), with the sessions to be held on November 6, 13 and 20, 2025.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Residents interested in the Safe and Ready Home Safety and Emergency Preparedness series were encouraged to attend one or all of the sessions, and Council member Murphy thanked staff for organizing the sessions. He also thanked the Mayor for the report out on the BOS approval of the appropriation of $21 million for one month to address the loss of SNAP benefits. He highlighted the benefits of CalFresh, which benefited residents and contributed to the vitality of small businesses and community wellbeing and emphasized that working at the state, county and local level would ensure prosperity and thriving communities across the board. The $21 million investment from the County would impact nine stores in Pinole, and would generate $302,000 in monthly economic activity.
Council member Toms reported she attended a meeting of the East Bay Wildfire Coalition of Governments, which included a presentation from the California Department of Insurance, Sustainable Insurance Strategies: Safer from Wildfires Discounts and the steps residents could take after non-renewal, which she highlighted. More information was available at www.insurance.ca.gov.
D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
Mayor Sasai offered a motion for the City Council to consider as a future agenda item, an ordinance to prohibit federal immigration enforcement activity on public property in the City of Pinole.
Council member Murphy verified that the Mayor was requesting consideration of an ordinance, and he seconded the motion.
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Sasai/Council member Murphy for the City Council to consider an ordinance to prohibit federal immigration enforcement activity on public property in the City of Pinole, as a future agenda item.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Sasai, Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
E. City Manager Report / Department Staff
City Manager Young reported the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (WCCIWMA) would review a proposed long-term agreement with West County Resource Recovery Inc. for post-collection recycling, composting and disposal services at an upcoming Board meeting on November 13, 2025, which was open to the public and available for view online, with more information at recyclemore.com. She also reminded everyone the next drive through Food Distribution at the Pinole Senior Center would be held on November 10, 2025 and the PPD would be hosting its Annual Thanksgiving Dinner Giveaway on November 20, 2025, with donations of non-perishable foods and Thanksgiving essentials being collected at the Public Safety Building. Gift cards would also be accepted. Donation hours would be Monday through Thursday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and donations would be accepted through November 14, 2025.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
City Manager Young also provided the following grant updates: the PPD would hold a Driving under the Influence (DUI) Checkpoint to be funded by an Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) Grant on December 19, 2025; and the PPD sent an officer to Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement Training paid by a Cannabis Grant, and ordered a pop-up tent, backdrop table cover and pamphlets for outreach and education on cannabis impaired driving, with all items approved by the state. The PPD would receive a new motorcycle for DUI/drug enforcement and potentially other traffic enforcement and ordered and received lighting for the checkpoint; and the City Council approved a resolution approving a Byrne State Crisis Intervention Program (SCIP) Grant and the draft agreement had been signed and staff was waiting for the execution of the grant.
The Pinole Accessible Living (PAL) Program involved an American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) Grant and MCE Community Partnership Grant, which helped with instant permitting; and the City received a Senate Bill (SB) 1383 Grant for education and outreach as well as compost procurement, with the program having been reported out during the October 21, 2025 City Council meeting.
Additionally, the City received a California Energy Commission (CEC) Grant for decarbonization; MTC Electric Vehicle (EV) Chargers Grant for EV Chargers; CalRecycle Water Refill Stations Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) funding, in collaboration with Sacramento State and Pinole Earth Team Trash Capture, and prohousing awards. The City was currently awaiting the receipt of additional grants related to SB 1, a California Ocean Protection Council (OPC) Grant for sea level rise; a Department of Justice (DOJ) Tobacco Grant; Clean California Community Grant; Rose Foundation Grant; Whale Tail Grant, provided by the California Coastal Commission; MCE Community Partnership Grant; Extreme Heat and Community Resilience Program and CalRecycle Illegal Disposal Site Abatement Grant Program. Staff was thanked for their hard work for applying for and administering all of those grant opportunities.
Council member Murphy thanked staff for the recap of the grant status and the City Council for moving forward with a Grant Policy. He asked that the recap be sent out to the City Council via email. He responded to a public commentor who mentioned the City was not investing money into public safety and policing, which was a concern given that when he approved budgets for the City, he prioritized public safety.
Council member Murphy referenced Measure I and the importance of educating the public about Measure I funding. He asked whether any Measure I funds had been allocated and whether funds would be allocated for public safety and police services.
City Manager Young confirmed the recap of all grant opportunities would be emailed to the City Council. She also clarified for Measure I that the City had budgeted $2.6 million and currently based on the amount of funding coming in, that figure was determined to be accurate. A total of $1.8 million of Measure I funds would be used to maintain services with the PPD. The remainder of Measure I funds, around $800,000, would go to deficits in other departments and maintaining services with public works and other things. A breakdown could be provided to the City Council.
F. City Attorney Report: None
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED (Items 7A through 7F)
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
The City Council moved onto Item 8B, Presentations at this time.
B. Presentations
1. Community Services Presentation by Maria Picazo
Recreation Manager Maria Picazo provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Community Services Department, which included an overview of Upcoming Events for 2025 including the November 11, 2025 Veterans Day celebration at Fernandez Park from 11:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.; Holiday Craft Fair, November 15, 2025 at the Senior Center from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.; Holiday Tree Lighting, December 6, 2025 at the Community Corner from 3:00 to 6:30 p.m.; Holiday Breakfast, December 15, 2025 at the Senior Center from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m. and Glow Pinole, with the competition categories for residents and businesses highlighted. More information was available on the City website.
Responding to questions from the City Council, Community Services Director Andrea Dwyer and Recreation Manager Picazo clarified the following:
• Acknowledged appreciation for community events planned in the marketplace for those beyond the City of Pinole to enjoy and participate. The deadline for registration for participation in Glow Pinole was December 14, 2025. An interactive Google Map of participating households and businesses would go live on December 15, 2025 and include a voting link on the same page. (Martinez-Rubin)
• Acknowledged appreciation for quarterly mailers listing upcoming recreation events and recognized the staff work planning and coordinating all events. (Murphy) • Reported staff planned to visit the tree farm this week to view options for the Christmas tree planned for the tree lighting ceremony. The farm was aware of the issues last year and of the City’s desire for a full tree. Staff planned to take photographs of the tree and post them on the City’s social media pages. Clarified in terms of possible sponsorships that donations and sponsorships had been an ongoing item for the Community Services Department. In 2024, Redwood Law offices provided a donation for miscellaneous items and staff hoped they would consider donating again this year. The City had been successful in the past getting donations and reaching out to local businesses. Staff was also working on the development of a tiered system, to develop a formal process where all departments could discuss the tiers of dollar amounts and what that looked like when going out to businesses to solicit donations. Anyone interested in making a donation for any City event was welcome to email City staff at any time. (Murphy)
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Roxane Stone reported there were no comments from the public.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Mayor Sasai looked forward to all of the upcoming community events.
2. City Banner Programs by Andrea Dwyer
Community Services Director Andrea Dwyer provided a PowerPoint presentation on the City Banner Programs, which included an overview of the banner options for streetlights and community banners; purpose and goals of the program; identification of the 26 banner locations throughout the City; design and specifications and the program overview and guidelines.
Responding to questions from the City Council, Community Services Director Dwyer clarified the following:
• Staff could expand the program if the City Council desired. Clarified the brackets for the banners were not that expensive but there was time involved for the Public Works Department team to install the banners and staff needed to have that discussion to ensure the Department had the capacity. Existing banners would not require a repurchase of brackets. The 4 x 8 community sized banners may involve a different range and staff was looking at the different ranges to ensure the banners fell within the scope. Staff wanted a business to purchase a banner, with the business to pay the City for the banner placement for 30-days. A registration fee would be proposed and would account for administrative time and the Public Works Department team time to install and remove the banners. (Mayor Pro Tem Tave)
• Acknowledged the importance of a banner program for the City. Clarified again the approval process and the program overview and guidelines. The banner program was intended to be as modern as possible, with all registration to go through the reservation process at pinolerec.com. Staff walked through the registration process and offered examples. (Murphy)
• Staff would provide the guidelines for the dimensions and specifications of the banners to allow a business to choose the printer they wished to print the banner. Staff would encourage businesses to consider registration a month ahead to ensure the business had 30-days for the banner to be in place. Cost recovery and assessment of fees could come back to the City Council. Staff suggested a final staff report could be presented to show where everything landed and the direction everything was going in. Staff hoped the banner program would kick off by the new year. Staff emphasized that finding ways to market and advertise local businesses and community members would be a success for the City and create a process for businesses and community members. Staff was excited to see the program succeed as a walking advertisement for community events.
Acknowledged a recommendation to embrace other public agencies that had marketing programs such as the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD), the CCCFPD and those trying to communicate and stay connected to the community, as examples, and who may be great pilots of the program in addition to the small and large businesses in Pinole. (Murphy)
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
• Acknowledged a recommendation to also include the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) on the list of public agencies to embrace as part of the banner program. (Mayor Sasai)
• The banner program would be treated similar to the way City facilities were leased, in that requests would be processed on a first-come first-served basis, but with a lesser rate offered to non-profit groups. (Toms)
• Confirmed some of the existing banners were reusable since they consisted of vinyl material. As an example, for Earth Day this year, some older vinyl banners that did not have dates on them had been repurposed and the City had partnered with a firm that used some banners to create totes that were available for purchase and sold-out during Earth Day. That reuse process could be considered again. (Martinez-Rubin) • Clarified again the design specifications for the banner program. Clarified the City would not print the banner but would handle installation and removal. The business owner/nonprofit or other would order the banner after the completion of the approval process and the City had oversight on the appearance of the banners and would review them prior to placement, with the banners to meet City material and safety standards. (Mayor Sasai) • Acknowledged a request to provide a list of union printers. Staff confirmed they had a list of both union and non-union printers that could be shared with the community. (Mayor Sasai)
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafael Menis understood there would be a cap of 30-days per reservation for the banners. He asked if there were plans to prevent one business from grabbing all of the slots or one slot every month and whether there would be a limit on the number of slots an entity could have or how many times a year a particular entity could have a particular slot.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Community Services Director Dwyer clarified all money was good money and similarly to how the City rented its facilities; staff had not considered a maximum limit because those businesses would truly want to advertise themselves and so staff had not thought to create a cap. Should the City Council choose to do so, staff could look into that; however, many of the businesses were local and staff had chatted with them about the banners and the interest was not to monopolize placement but get the word out. If it became an issue, that could be looked into in the future, otherwise the banner program would benefit local businesses and groups.
Mayor Sasai asked whether there was an opportunity to include Pinole branding on the bottom of the banners to insert the City logo.
Community Services Director Dwyer asked if the intent was to have the bottom 3-inches of the banner include standard branding of the City logo.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Mayor Sasai suggested any detail with the new modern branding guidelines, and Community Services Director Dwyer suggested staff could look into that. A 35 x 60-inch banner showed there was substantial space to include City branding but asked if the recommendation was to include City branding on the street light and community banners.
Mayor Sasai suggested just City branding on the street light banners. He was thinking about walking in Broadway Plaza in the City of Walnut Creek, which had a very distinct City branding and which looked really sharp. There could be different designs that could be used in public spaces and he suggested that small detail being added would be nice and really enter into a new era and show that they were proud of the City they lived in.
Community Services Director Dwyer suggested some examples and guidelines could be shown when staff returned with the final pieces, along with the prices. She noted that Seattle, Washington also used banners beautifully as did Walnut Creek, and staff had gathered information from local agencies to ensure that Pinole was on par. She could show a mockup comparison to ensure that was something the City Council wanted to do.
Mayor Sasai thanked staff for the two presentations. He was excited about the energy being put into place.
Mayor Sasai recognized a member of the public wishing to comment at this time.
Anthony Vossbrink asked about the current banners used throughout the City, such as those posted by the Welcome to Pinole intersection at Pinole Valley Road and the I-80 on-ramp, below the fenceline adjoining the Jack in the Box property, which was used for numerous types of banners including political banners, banners advertising events in the City of Hercules and banners advertising events at St. Joseph Church. He asked whether St. Joseph Church was considered a non-profit and whether they would be given priority or some type of reciprocal agreement. He expressed concern littering the City’s fences or banner spaces with banners advertising non-City events and taking precedent over the City banners or business banners, given the limited space in Pinole. He suggested there should be some strong limits on the number of organizations and banners allowed in the City.
Mr. Vossbrink did not want Pinole to look like Reno, Las Vegas, Nevada or LA County and wanted to keep the City clean of sign and banner pollution. He also sought a cost benefit analysis and return on investment on the amount of time and money required from the Public Works Department.
Community Services Director Dwyer shared the concerns with banner placement near Jack and the Box and the I-80 on-ramp, but clarified it was not a City of Pinole placed fence. The City did not have jurisdiction on the fence, which was shared by the Garden Club location who gave permission to the people who hung the banners. When there were advertisements of City of Hercules events, it was run by the Bay Front Chamber of Commerce, which the City of Pinole worked with and supported; however, the Bay Front Chamber of Commerce did not communicate with or got permission from the City of Pinole to place any banners on the fence, which was done through a different entity.
9. CONSENT CALENDAR
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
All matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any interested party or Council member(s) wishes to comment on an item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of the Consent Calendar.
A. Approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting on October 21, 2025.
B. Receive the October 18, 2025 – October 31, 2025, List of Warrants in the Amount of $1,382,362.02 and the October 24, 2025 Payroll in the Amount of $614,031.11.
C. Authorize the Execution of Agreement with Home Match Contra Costa County to Implement Housing Element Program 11: Home Sharing and Tenant Matching.
Action: Adopt Resolutions per Staff recommendation (Lilly Whalen) D. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Memorandum of Agreement with Contra Costa County for Participation in the Brownfields Assessment Coalition Grant (EPA Cooperative Agreement No. BF-97T41601).
Action: Adopt a Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Lilly Whalen)
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Council member Martinez-Rubin requested that Item 9A be removed from the Consent Calendar.
ACTION: Motion by Council member Murphy/Mayor Sasai to adopt Consent Calendar Items 9B, 9C and 9D, as shown.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Sasai, Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
For Item 9A, Council member Martinez-Rubin reported she provided the City Clerk and Deputy City Clerk the text for revisions she would like made to the October 21, 2025 meeting minutes, as follows:
• Revise the last paragraph of Page 22 of 142 of the agenda packet to read:
Council member Martinez-Rubin took the opportunity to thank everyone both in and out of Pinole who participated in local events including the recent Coastal Cleanup and a Town Hall hosted by the City of Pinole and Supervisor Gioia. A number of non-profits representatives that served West Contra Costa County attended. Among the recurrent
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
issues mentioned was food insecurity. She reported the City of Pinole offered Food Distribution at the Senior Center on certain days of the month, with more information available in the City Manager’s Weekly Report.
And revise the last sentence of the second paragraph of Page 23 of 142 of the agenda packet, to read:
Lastly, she [Council member Martinez-Rubin] highlighted her attendance at a workshop in advance of the League of California Cities Conference on Governing Amid Rising Incivility, which emphasized the need to provide a venue for the public to feel safe enough to participate and voice one’s opinion without feeling threatened.
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Sasai/Council member Toms to adopt Consent Calendar Item 9A, as amended by Council member Martinez-Rubin.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Sasai, Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
11. OLD BUSINESS: None
12. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Community Service Commission Bylaws Update. Action: Approve Staff Recommendation (Andrea Dwyer)
Community Services Director Dwyer provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Community Services Commission Bylaws, which included an overview of the role of the Community Services Commission; key updates included clarification of roles and responsibilities, membership and attendance, formatting and language. The revised bylaws strengthened the operational framework of the Community Services Commission and improved alignment with City Council direction, City Clerk procedures and state law. The updates helped to ensure transparency, accountability, and effective community representation in the Commission’s advisory role. The Community Services Commission recommended City Council approval of the bylaws at a meeting on October 22, 2025.
Community Services Director Dwyer explained the next procedural step for this item would be the presentation of an ordinance revising all applicable provisions of Pinole Municipal Code (PMC) Chapter 2.36 “Community Services Commission” to formally review the PMC in order to align with the recent bylaw update. Staff anticipated this presentation would occur at the second City Council meeting in November. The revised bylaws and PMC updates would become effective 30 days following adoption of the ordinance.
Responding to questions from the City Council, Community Services Director Dwyer clarified:
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
• A redline version of the bylaws had not been provided in the agenda packet but could be provided at the next City Council meeting. (Murphy)
• Attachment A, Community Services Bylaws, Article IV: Charge (5) reads: Review the annual operating budget and capital improvement plan for the Community Services Department. The Community Services Commission had been vocal about wanting to know what they were working with in terms of services and programs. This clause provided an opportunity for review of the City’s budget and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) but did not allow for the Commission to change any amounts in the budget. The review would not be part of the annual budget process; the intent was to bring forward that part of the budget and CIP related to parks and community services and not open a conversation about other areas of City government. It would be helpful for the Community Services Commission to learn about the budget and advocate with the community what Community Services was doing on behalf of the City of Pinole. (Murphy) • The bylaws in their final form had been provided in the agenda packet. Again, a redline version could be provided at the next meeting of the City Council. Acknowledged a recommendation to revise Article V: Memberships (D), to reflect the Community Services Commission would be comprised of five, not seven, members and Article V: Memberships A (2), revised to read: Must be at least 18 years of age. (Martinez-Rubin) • The City Council may take action on this item at this meeting or wait for the redline version to be provided at the next City Council meeting. Clarified the Community Services Commission would be on a break during the months of November and December. (Mayor Sasai)
• Clarified again the key updates to the Community Services Commission Bylaws as outlined in the PowerPoint presentation and as shown on Pages 108 and 109 of 142 of the agenda packet. (Mayor Sasai)
• Article VI:, Rules of Procedure (D), which reads: Members shall notify the Chair or staff in the event of an anticipated absence from a regularly scheduled meeting at the earliest possible opportunity and, in any event, prior to 5 p.m. on the date of the meeting. Any Commission member that has three (3) unexcused absences within a one- (l) year period shall be removed from office. It shall be the responsibility of the Commission Chairman to report such person(s) to the Mayor and City Council, who shall appoint a replacement.
Staff will maintain attendance records, could be revised with the reference to Chair revised to read Chairperson. It was also recommended the entire bylaw document be reviewed to make the same change throughout for consistency. (Mayor Sasai) • The Community Services Commission was currently comprised of seven members. The reason it had been recommended to change the composition of the Commission to five members had been each Commissioner had robust ideas and a purpose they wanted to take part in, with staff unable to really satisfy much of the conversations with seven different members. A five-member Commission was more common with other agencies and that data point could be provided. When creating a work plan, the intent was to have something that was attainable, which was difficult with seven members. (Mayor Sasai)
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
A five-member Commission would not go into effect until the end of the term of three Commissioners who would term out, leaving one seat to fill, rather than three. (Mayor Sasai)
• Community Services Commission meetings routinely ran 20 to 30 minutes in length in the past, but more recent meetings had been longer and meetings would likely run longer in the future. (Mayor Sasai)
• Article VI: Rules of Procedure (G), which reads: The Commission shall elect a Chair and a Vice Chair from among its members. These officers shall be elected at the organizational meeting in July to serve for one-year term. Should any office of the Commission become vacant, the Commission shall elect a successor at its next regular meeting to serve for the balance of the unexpired term, was not a new change and this section was already in place in the bylaws; however, should any office of the Commission become vacant, the City Council could elect a successor, or appoint a substitute or alternate at its next regular meeting to serve for the balance of the unexpired term. An alternate member who would not have any voting power may help going from seven to five members. (Mayor Sasai) • Acknowledged a request to see bylaws from other Commissions to see how they addressed vacancies and a request that Article VI: Rules of Procedure (G) be amended to reflect that vacancies would be appointed by the City Council, rather than the Community Services Commission electing a successor at its next regular meeting, with the vacancy to be published and with applications to go through the City Council Interview Ad Hoc Subcommittee, which would make recommendations to the full City Council for appointments. (Mayor Sasai)
• Clarified again the key updates to Article V: Membership and clarified Article VI: Rules of Procedure (D), was not a new addition nor had this section been changed from the initial Community Services Commission bylaws. (Mayor Sasai)
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafael Menis referenced Article VI: Rules of Procedure (G), which was about the election of the Chair and Vice Chair and not about vacancies on the Community Services Commission.
Typically, it was within the power of a Commission to select their own Chair and Vice Chair. For replacement of vacancies, that had been addressed under Article V: Memberships (C), which reads: Members will serve a two-year term on the Commission or until a successor is appointed and able to serve the remainder of the vacancy term. Incumbents wishing to reapply will be reinterviewed by the City Council and re-appointed by the City Council. Terms will commence in July of each year, or when the vacancy is filled. Given the lack of clarity on vacancies, possibly the wording could be revised to make it clearer along with the points Council member MartinezRubin already brought up for revisions.
As to Article VI: Rules of Procedure (A), Mr. Menis suggested the City Council consider changing the reference to Robert’s Rules of Order to read “Rosenberg’s Rules of Order,” which was more efficient for typical Commission rules of process. As to Article VI: Rules of Procedure (E), which reads: The Mayor may, by and with the consent of a majority of the City Council, remove any
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Commissioner of the Commission for misconduct or neglect of duty, Mr. Menis asked if that would be a vote of the City Council or something within the Mayor’s particular power.
For Article V: Memberships (B) which reads: Interested persons must submit an application and proceed through the appointment process. An application-filing period will be announced publicly to solicit applications when vacancies exist on the Commission. The appointment process shall include recommendation for appointment by the Mayor, and final approval by the City Council, Mr. Menis pointed out this section did not include space for the Interview Ad Hoc Subcommittee.
He asked if that section should be modified to maintain the role of the Interview Ad Hoc Subcommittee or have a strong Mayor form. He further commented that other Commissions, such as the Planning Commission, were comprised of seven members and staff seemed to handle the overall load.
City Clerk Bell-Spears confirmed that for all of the City’s Commissions/Committees, historically the City Council filled any vacancies by appointment, which had been the City’s practice for all appointed bodies. She thanked Mr. Menis for catching that item.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Mayor Sasai referenced Article VI: Rules of Procedure (E), as shown, and suggested the intent of this section was that the City Council make the decision to remove any Commissioner of the Community Services Commission for misconduct or neglect of duty. The Mayor could not unilaterally do that but that was not how the section read. The wording could be better clarified to reflect the majority of the City Council may remove any Commissioner for misconduct or neglect of duty.
Community Services Director Dwyer asked that the City Council not make a recommendation for approval of the bylaws at this time given the suggested recommendations and based on the feedback from the City Council, with the item to be brought back.
ACTION: Motion by Council members Murphy/Martinez-Rubin to continue the Community Services Commission Bylaws Update, to the next City Council meeting scheduled for November 18, 2025.
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Sasai, Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
B. Approval of Guidelines for the Private Sewer Lateral Program of Fiscal Year 2025/26 – Project #SS2407, and Approval of Updating the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan to Continue the Program during Fiscal Year 2026/27 through Fiscal Year 2029/30. Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Heba El-Guindy)
Public Works Director Heba El-Guindy provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Review & Approval of Guidelines for the Private Sewer Lateral Program, Project #SS2407.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Public Works Director El-Guindy’s presentation included an extensive overview of the proposed program guidelines and rationale. She recommended the City Council approve the guidelines for the Private Sewer Lateral Program for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025/26 (Project #SS2407) and approve an update to the Five-Year CIP to continue deployment of the program during FY 2026/27 through FY 2029/30 at an annual budget of $150,000 funded by the Sewer Enterprise Fund (Fund #500).
Responding to questions from the City Council, Public Works Director El-Guindy clarified:
• The requirements for an acceptable and compliant sewer lateral were clarified. As an example, the City would start with property addresses already on record, which involved more than 10-years of properties that had not met the minimum requirements of inspection performance. Staff had not considered changing the 10-year period for reassessment since there was no need to change the requirement unless directed by the City Council, but staff was open to any and all changes the City Council may wish to consider for the guidelines. (Martinez-Rubin)
• The reason the properties chosen for the program would be only single-family homes or up to four dwelling units on a property with one sole owner, had been based on the listing the City had on record. The City had a list of 796 residential properties sold between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2024 that were considered to be non-compliant either for not submitting a sewer lateral video inspection or for not addressing identified deficiencies. When the City started with the evaluation it would promote the guidelines community-wide, and in communicating with the properties documented on the City’s list, would start with the earlier ones. The City did not have a significant number of apartment buildings in Pinole, but in the case of commercial properties or industrial type properties, the cost of the sewer lateral replacements tended to be higher. Staff also thought of the community need and who would need the program the most. A commercial property may have more resources than a single-family homeowner. The City of Pinole had a significant percentage of elderly community members and given the amount of funding available this year and what staff proposed continuing in future years for the program, at least until the end of the Five-Year CIP period, staff had to prioritize and choose who was most in need. (Martinez-Rubin)
• The larger the residential development the more likely it would have more than one connection. As an example, Appian Village had multiple connections and in that case the program would not be applicable because of limited funding and resources likely to be available for such development relative to the single-family homes the City had already documented. (Martinez-Rubin)
• The City was considering a rebate program rather than a revolving loan program for residents, although staff was open to any proposal. The proposed guidelines did not have to be approved this date and staff could come back with other thoughts. Reported the City of Richmond currently charged a 5.16 percent interest rate and provided 15-years for repayment, but for the amount of funding Pinole could offer given the staff time spent trying to get funding back, could cost more than a potential repayment. Due to the small limits the City was offering as part of the program, the thought was to offer it as community assistance rather than as a loan program. (Murphy)
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
• Clarified again the proposed program guidelines, as outlined in the PowerPoint presentation, specifically that a property owner would be allowed to participate in the program once and would be required to pay back the City’s rebate if he/she sold the property within one year of the approval/acceptance of the performed work, which was not unique and which was used by other agencies. The reason it was being proposed as part of the guidelines was if the intention of the property owner was to replace the sewer lateral just to sell the property, that was not the purpose of assisting members of the community because it would be a requirement of the sale process anyway. (Murphy) • Acknowledged a request to see findings and lessons learned as part of the program in the next year. (Murphy)
• With respect to the 796 residential properties that were found to be non-compliant, the list included all property addresses when the requirement was triggered. Some properties had already identified the deficiency but had not conducted repair or replacement and others had not done the video inspection, and there were different reasons why a property had been listed. The properties were all residential properties sold between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2024. Clarified that if a sale occurred between that time and a deficiency determined, the City did not collect a bond for the deficiency to ensure the work was done, which was difficult to enforce, particularly with limited staff. Staff also did not want to impact the approval process of building permits being issued. (Toms) • Whether a property was compliant or not was tracked but there was no mechanism in place for enforcement and that may be something the City should consider. If properties were sold during the period mentioned and they did not meet the requirements, they would be on the list of non-compliant properties, but the list did not cover all properties within the City that could potentially be deficient and staff recognized Pinole was a well-established community with older homes. (Toms)
• Clarified the reason for the time period of January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2024 was because the requirement had first been set in 2012. (Mayor Pro Tem Tave) • There were currently only a few parties in the queue for the program, which was the reason the program must be promoted. Staff planned to start communicating again with all property owners on the list to advise of the new guidelines and how the City could help those property owners pursue assistance, starting with the older properties on the list.
Acknowledged a recommendation for a scoring system to help strategize which properties should be prioritized and for the property owners to know where they were on the list.
Clarified some agencies had set requirements, such as requirement for a property to be at least 25-years old to participate in the program while others had set requirements such as part of the PG&E CARE program and based on income levels. Given the average income level within Pinole, and the small area designated as a disadvantaged community, staff thought that may limit the assistance to members of the community, which was why a scoring system had not been proposed. (Mayor Pro Tem Tave)
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Rafael Menis commented that the program had been limited to the subset of property owners that had bought or sold single-family homes and up to one four-unit dwelling within the ten-year time period. He asked if the City was also considering including people who had the need for a sewer lateral repair flagged by the Peers Program, since in some cases the Peers Program required a sewer lateral inspection in order to claim that particular rebate, even though it did not require the actual repair of the sewer lateral but required the property to be on the list to acknowledge that the problem needed to be deal with at some point. He asked if the grant could include that category as well. He understood a property owner could only claim the grant once over the lifetime of the program but if someone owned a property that was split into two separate parcels and they both required sewer lateral repairs, he asked whether the property owner would be able to apply for the grant for each of the parcels separately or for only one of the parcels.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Public Works Director El-Guindy explained the program would be promoted City-wide and not be restricted to only the list of properties earlier referenced. The list only provided assistance in assessing the level of demand. This was one of the reasons for the stipulation for one property owner and setting a limit of up to one four-unit dwelling, in that two units would not necessarily have two connections, particularly if one was split into two parcels. As it was currently set, the grant program would be for one single property owner and/or up one four-unit dwelling on a property with one sole owner. Given the limited funding available, it was the intent to help as many property owners as possible.
Council member Martinez-Rubin preferred the program be offered to more people to help.
Council member Murphy thanked the Public Works Director and appreciated the intentionality and strategy behind it, particularly the data suggesting the demand, which he found commendable.
Mayor Pro Tem Tave offered a motion, seconded by Council member Murphy to adopt the staff recommendation.
On the motion, Public Works Director El-Guindy clarified the resolution included two recommendations: approval of the guidelines and an update to the CIP so that staff could continue with the program for four additional years. Both were in the resolution to be adopted.
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Tave/Council member Murphy to adopt a resolution approving the guidelines for the Private Sewer Lateral Program for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025/26 (Project #SS2407) and approve an update to the Five-Year CIP to continue deployment of the program during FY 2026/27 through FY 2029/30 at an annual budget of $150,000 funded by the Sewer Enterprise Fund (Fund #500).
Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Sasai, Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Murphy, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Mayor Sasai thanked staff for the presentation and for all of the work on the item.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
C. Overview of Procedural Requirements for Authorization and Implementation of a Commercial Cannabis Business Program. Action: Discuss and Provide Direction (Eric Casher, Markisha Guillory)
City Attorney Eric Casher provided a PowerPoint presentation of the procedural requirements for authorization and implementation of a Commercial Cannabis Business Program, which included an overview of the background of commercial cannabis; the procedures for authorizing commercial cannabis by either City Council ordinance or ballot measure with an overview of the two options, comparison of the two options including cost comparisons and the highlights of the pros and cons of each approach. In addition, an overview was provided of neighboring cities’ cannabis regulations and the economic contributions and fiscal impacts.
City Attorney Casher recommended the City Council provide direction regarding whether to prepare resolutions for the City Council to authorize and implement a commercial cannabis business program in the City by ordinance, prepare a resolution calling an election and requesting consolidation with the Tuesday, November 3, 2026 regular election to place a ballot measure before voters to determine whether to authorize and implement a commercial cannabis program within the City or not pursue a commercial cannabis program.
Responding to questions from the City Council, City Manager Young, City Attorney Casher and Finance Director Guillory clarified:
• The fiscal impact had been based on establishing two dispensaries in the City of Pinole, which was projected to gross approximately $200,000 to $300,000 in projected tax revenue to the City. Acknowledged questions whether there was market demand for such a business in Pinole, whether there was a demand for such a business and concerns with security and safety and the fact that dispensaries generally had cash on hand because they could not use banks. Clarified that currently commercial cannabis was not permitted in the City and the existing prohibition would have to be removed and zones within the City would have to be identified where such a use of a property would be permitted.
Conversations would be needed Citywide whether such a business should be located in a commercial or industrial area of the City, with decisions to be made by the City Council and the community more broadly to provide feedback on whether it was appropriate to allow such use of a property.
Also acknowledged discussions amongst the League of California Cities Policy Committee on Revenue and Taxation about cannabis programs and the related market share among local dispensaries and how that had been since legalization. Acknowledged a request to see an analysis for those cities that had a cannabis program, where dispensaries were located, what issues had come about, resources that may be needed, and which costs should be included in the analysis. Confirmed there were safety concerns for those types of programs and noted there were permits issued to operators of cannabis businesses, and in the conditions of approval of the permit, the details of a security plan would be required. The City could place requirements on the type of security the City would like on the permits that could be issued, and the permit process would be developed by the City to help mitigate any negative impacts to public safety. (Martinez-Rubin)
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
• Confirmed commercial cannabis was still a controlled substance under federal law which presented some challenges for banking purposes. Many cities had those types of operations, but there were ways to do that and that issue would need to be addressed as well. (Martinez-Rubin)
• Whether the cannabis business category would be retail sales only or sales and delivery, as an example, remained to be discussed with further discussion anticipated in the form of study sessions or workshops with the City Council. If the City Council decided to move forward with the staff recommendation, staff would bring back more information to answer questions. (Martinez-Rubin)
• The ordinance route had been chosen by most cities and was the most cost-effective and flexible route. As part of that process, the City could have as much community engagement as desired. The ballot measure would be tied and bound to the election schedule. (Martinez-Rubin)
• Confirmed the City of San Pablo had passed an ordinance and recently passed a tax measure as an additional tax to its ordinance. As an example, Pinole could adopt an ordinance, allow two dispensaries to operate and just generate the regular sales tax revenue and the City could decide if there was enough public support for a ballot measure to impose a higher tax on the two dispensaries, where the City could go back out to the voters and increase the sales tax in that way, which had been done by the City of San Pablo. (Murphy)
• The Contra Costa County framework for regulating cannabis had been included in the November 4, 2025 staff report. There were other opportunities through economic development the City may engage to regulate cannabis, including manufacturing and testing. A market analysis prepared in 2019, had reviewed and inquired of the best types of businesses to bring to Pinole, which included the health industry. Noted a market analysis that determined the best placement or framework for a cannabis business in Pinole would likely be a consultant driven exercise, with a consultant to be identified that understood that market and who could provide data points on how such businesses were doing, which would be part of information to come back to the City Council. Whether that also included data for non-dispensaries, the City could entertain any type of commercial cannabis operator, it did not have to be just a dispensary and staff could return with some options of what other cities had done. (Murphy)
• Confirmed the City may adopt and implement an ordinance which allowed the cannabis business to operate for a few years and later the City could go back out to the voters for a ballot measure to increase the tax imposed on the operators. (Toms) • Confirmed going back out to a ballot measure to increase the tax imposed on the operators would be on the products/items sold within the cannabis business. Acknowledged that could potentially result in driving the providers away, if one city had a higher tax rate and the business was taking in less revenue as a result. (Martinez-Rubin)
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
• Clarified again the fiscal impacts based on establishing two dispensaries in the City, which was projected to gross approximately $200,000 to $300,000 in projected tax revenue, a rough estimate based on neighboring jurisdictions. More fiscal impact analyses would be required to obtain a better figure, and staff acknowledged it could be on the lower end, but staff was looking at some of the revenue generated by some of the neighboring agencies that had ordinances in place. (Mayor Sasai)
• Of the neighboring jurisdictions that had cannabis operations and based on a preliminary review, the revenue generated from the cannabis business varied each year and staff had heard mostly anecdotally that some of the revenue was decreasing as there were more dispensaries. While it was possible the market was getting diluted, that would have to be confirmed by a future market analysis. (Mayor Sasai)
• Clarified Attachment A to the November 4, 2025 staff report, identified cities and towns in Contra Costa County that had a cannabis business and whether the business was a retail storefront, retail delivery, distribution, testing, manufacturing or cultivation operation. As to whether any neighboring cities in the County had legalized consumption sites as part of the actual physical dispensary, staff was unaware what cities had consumption sites, and there was a recent state law that was attempting to allow for that, but it had not passed. (Mayor Sasai)
• Clarified the City of Pinole allowed for the cultivation of eight or fewer plants, consistent with state law. The PMC currently does not allow for the sale of any marijuana or commercial cannabis in Pinole. The idea around cultivation was that it would be for personal consumption for medical marijuana purposes to allow for that to be consistent with state law, but not for commercial sales. The larger operators would be cultivating more than eight plants and would be considered a large grow. (Mayor Sasai) • If the City were to move forward with a cannabis program, whether the City considered multiple ordinances for commercial cannabis, such as whether a retail storefront or delivery as examples, could be discussed in a future session. Staff would need to run the numbers to see what type of revenue could be generated by that type of an operator informing the type of use the City Council may want to allow. (Mayor Sasai) • Clarified the City currently did not receive any revenue from marijuana deliveries within the City of Pinole. (Mayor Sasai)
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Jorge Flores, Cannabis Prevention Program Manager, Contra Costa Health, commented on the importance of prioritizing public health protections as the City considered cannabis retail programs and policies in the City of Pinole. While cannabis businesses could bring economic opportunities, it was equally important to ensure community safeguards for the health and wellbeing of youth and children. Research had shown that increased retail availability and advertising could normalize cannabis use among young people and contribute to higher use and related harms.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Mr. Flores encouraged the City Council to incorporate strong public health guardrails in any cannabis retail ordinance, including limiting the density and proximity of retailers near schools, parks and youth serving locations, restricting advertising in storefront visibility to prevent youth exposure and requiring ongoing education and prevention funding from cannabis tax revenue.
By embedding those protections into the decision making the City could create a balanced approach that supported local business interests while keeping public health and youth safety at the forefront. In addition, Contra Costa County only had four land use permits that allowed cannabis storefront retailers and the County also prohibited flavored cannabis vaping liquids from being sold to mirror the County’s tobacco ban which had become state law.
Rafael Menis suggested it would be worthwhile if the City Council wanted to move forward with commercial cannabis to consider an economic analysis since the City had segments of the unincorporated County relatively near to the City of Pinole, the City of El Sobrante and unincorporated space to the south of Pinole directly and the City of Richmond that could potentially act as competition.
Mr. Menis asked whether there was actually a market niche the business could exist in, or whether the City was going to the trouble of creating an ordinance to open up space that in an ecosystem sense would not be occupied since it would not be viable. He also commented on the potential environmental impacts of certain kinds of retail, which could have a lesser impact than commercial cultivation on water, electricity and waste disposal along with public health, as examples, and the security impacts for a retail storefront in particular, which would be the highest security risk as compared to delivery only or manufacturing, processing or testing.
As to public safety, Mr. Menis expected that would be a concern that could probably be mitigated by considering the types of use the City would permit, such as considering a lower as opposed to a higher risk use, based on the City’s tolerance for risk. As to an ordinance versus tax, he suggested it made logical sense to have an ordinance first, to get a sense of whether there were any businesses willing to occupy a space, and then if the ordinance worked out and there were businesses, the City could then consider a tax which should be made clear up front to the business that if the ordinance worked out, the City would consider a tax in the future, to ensure there was no bait and switch issue.
ACTION: Motion by Council member Murphy/Mayor Pro Tem Tave to Extend the City Council meeting to 11:15 p.m.
Vote: Passed 4-1
Ayes: Sasai, Tave, Murphy, Toms
Noes: Martinez-Rubin
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Amy Eubanks, President PPEA, shared the concerns raised by Messiers Menis and Flores about public health. She referenced an article in the Richmond Standard about the City of San Pablo, which required storefronts to be 750-feet from elementary schools, 1,200 feet from high schools and 1,000 feet from other commercial cannabis businesses, which should be extended if the City of Pinole were to pursue cannabis options.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Ms. Eubanks did not want to see any cannabis dispensary, manufacturer or cultivation anywhere near schools and if permitted the cannabis business should be nearer the County. She urged the City Council to consider conditions to be placed on the permits in terms of safety, such as requiring lighting in the area where the business was operating, require video surveillance the PPD would have access to at the moment of the crime, and anything that could done to help the business owner when they were robbed since that was what the PPD had seen time and time again in Sacramento and Oakland where dispensaries were robbed in the daylight and the evening. She also encouraged permitting to include a requirement for security guards, whether armed or not.
In terms of on-site cultivation, Ms. Eubanks noted there was a dispensary located in Isleton in Sacramento County that had on-site consumption, and if the City was to consider that business as a model, the business could be visited and was the only on-site consumption business she was aware of in the area other than in San Francisco. She also urged the City Council to not go the route of manufacturing concentrates, or anything of that nature, since it was a volatile substance and the PPD had seen those substances blow up, even in licensed facilities.
Ms. Eubanks did see the need for such businesses, understood the City was behind the times, and the current moratorium had not served the City since it was now behind the times, with plenty of dispensaries in place. A dispensary in Pinole may not be beneficial but there was revenue there and she was all for the City getting revenue. That being said, she also supported a Cannabis Tax Fund Grant, specifically to keep juveniles and adults from driving under the influence of drugs.
Next year PPD staff would be educated on how to spot and enforce that behavior.
Peter Murray commented he had been a member of the City Council when such businesses had been turned down in the community and the community did not support cannabis facilities, sales, or manufacturing. When reviewing the list of cities that allowed commercial cannabis, he asked what cities the City of Pinole would want to be associated with, those that allowed commercial cannabis or those that cared about their communities. He asked whether the sole goal was to generate revenue. He suggested cannabis was a gateway drug, and sooner or later there would be a transition for a lot of people, which was not needed in Pinole. He was pleased to have representation in the Council Chambers raising concern with impacts to young people.
Mr. Murray opposed a Berkeley-Esque environment, which was not Pinole. People did not move to Pinole to be associated with such behavior. He hoped the City Council would extend the moratorium during their duration on the City Council. He strongly opposed the consideration of commercial cannabis, reiterated this had been opposed in the past and if allowed, asked if the next step was to allow massage parlors. While he recognized the City Council’s vision for the City may not be his own, he was sad that the topic was being discussed.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Council member Murphy offered a motion to direct staff to prepare resolutions for the City Council to authorize and implement a commercial cannabis business program in the City.
On the motion, Mayor Sasai asked the City Attorney if the motion passed whether the item would return to the City Council for consideration, or whether the City Council would go through the process of public engagement with workshops before the item returned to the City Council.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
City Attorney Casher clarified if the motion passed, there would be study sessions and workshops.
Once the City Council agreed on the details for an ordinance, and they were not there yet, there would be a lot more work to be done, economic analyses and studies to be done, and information would be brought back to the City Council. Staff just wanted direction on whether or not to start that process to pursue an ordinance or ballot measure, which would help direct the approach.
Mayor Pro Tem Tave seconded the motion.
Council member Martinez-Rubin asked that the motion be repeated.
Council member Murphy restated his motion to direct staff to prepare resolutions and ordinances for the City Council to authorize and implement a commercial cannabis business program.
Council member Martinez-Rubin asked the City Attorney to clarify the motion since she was unsure it was following the staff recommendation. She asked what the resolutions to be prepared would be for, either an ordinance or ballot measure.
City Attorney Casher clarified the motion as follows: to direct staff to prepare resolutions for the City Council to authorize and implement a commercial cannabis business program in the City by ordinance. An ordinance would not be brought back at the next City Council meeting since it would involve getting the process started to move towards an ordinance.
ACTION: Motion by Council member Murphy/Mayor Pro Tem Tave to direct staff to prepare resolutions for the City Council to authorize and implement a commercial cannabis business program in the City by ordinance.
Vote: Passed 3-2
Ayes: Sasai, Tave, Murphy
Noes: Martinez-Rubin, Toms
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Mayor Sasai thanked all of the community members and advocates who attended the City Council meeting and waited until this time in the meeting to comment on the agenda item. He agreed with the comments on the need to limit the proximity between schools and dispensaries, cultivation and the like, and he agreed with the need to look to the County for guidance and other jurisdictions that had the most restrictions on the proximity between schools and dispensaries when considering an ordinance in Pinole. He also wanted to ensure as part of any engagement that the City not only tap into the community, but also consider public safety, labor groups in the County and the City for input before the City Council made any decision.
Council member Murphy agreed the City was behind on this issue with its counterparts/neighboring cities, across the state, the region and nation. He suggested there was an opportunity to prioritize economic vitality and public health and while he heard the concerns from the public commenters and concerns from his fellow Council members, he suggested there was a way to do this and Pinole was not the only City to consider commercial cannabis.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
Council member Murphy offered a motion to: 1) Direct City staff to evaluate the feasibility of permitting commercial cannabis activities in the City of Pinole and return to the City Council with findings and policy options; 2) This evaluation to include but not be limited to the economic impact and revenue analysis that was discussed, land use and zoning assessment to identify zoning districts and potential sites where each cannabis business type may be compatible; 3) A community engagement plan to help develop a community outreach and education plan that potentially could have stakeholder meetings and public information sessions; 4) A public safety and regulatory cost evaluation that could identify fee structures to ensure full cost recovery for permitting and ongoing compliance but also evaluate regulatory oversight needs and anticipate law enforcement or code enforcement impacts; and 5) Provide the policy options through matrixes or preliminary recommendation to provide a preliminary recommendation regarding which business type of the framework provided in the staff report may be most appropriate for initial consideration in the City.
Council member Murphy recognized the motion was a lot but he wanted to be clear. He recognized all of the comments provided, including residents he had spoken to about this topic and who were not present. He was confident this was the way to go given the City’s history.
Mayor Sasai asked if the motion included a recommendation on the number of licenses that should be given in the City.
Council member Murphy suggested that should be part of the economic impact and revenue analysis.
Mayor Sasai seconded the motion.
Council member Martinez-Rubin asked whether all the requested direction in the motion would have happened if not included as part of the motion.
City Attorney Casher appreciated the direction provided, which made it clear the expectation of the City Council and which offered a roadmap. A lot of the information would have been provided and brought back, but it was good to know the City Council’s priorities since staff sought direction from the City Council.
Council member Toms did not support the motion and had not supported the previous motion since more public outreach was needed before assigning staff a significant amount of work.
ACTION: Motion by Council member Murphy/Mayor Sasai, to 1) Direct City staff to evaluate the feasibility of permitting commercial cannabis activities in the City of Pinole and return to the City Council with findings and policy options; 2) This evaluation to include but not be limited to the economic impact and revenue analysis that was discussed, land use and zoning assessment to identify zoning districts and potential sites where each cannabis business type may be compatible; 3) A community engagement plan to help develop a community outreach and education plan that potentially could have stakeholder meetings and public information sessions; 4) A public safety and regulatory cost evaluation that could identify fee structures to ensure full cost recovery for permitting and ongoing compliance but also evaluate regulatory oversight needs and anticipate law enforcement or code enforcement impacts; and 5) Provide the policy options through matrixes or
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – November 4, 2025
preliminary recommendation to provide a preliminary recommendation regarding which business type of the framework provided in the staff report may be most appropriate for initial consideration in the City.
Vote: Passed 3-2
Ayes: Sasai, Tave, Murphy
Noes: Martinez-Rubin, Toms
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Mayor Sasai thanked the City Attorney and City staff for working on this item.
13. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Continued from Item 6) (Public Comments) Only open to members of the public who did not speak under the first Citizens to be Heard, Agenda Item 6.
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.
Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.
Mayor Sasai reported the City Council would reconvene to Closed Session Item 4E and then adjourn to a Regular City Council meeting on November 18, 2025. Any reportable action from the Closed Session would be reported out at the next City Council meeting.
14. RECONVENE to Closed Session Item 4E and ADJOURNED to the Regular City Council Meeting of November 18, 2025 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.
At 11:13 p.m., Mayor Sasai reconvened to Closed Session Item 4E and adjourned to a Regular City Council Meeting on November 18, 2025 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.
Submitted by:
_________________________________
Heather Bell-Spears CMC
City Clerk
Approved by City Council:
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.C.
DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 2025
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Markisha Guillory, Finance Director, 510-724-9823, [email protected] SUBJECT: FY 2025/26 FIRST QUARTER FINANCIAL REPORT
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommend that the City Council receive the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report.
BACKGROUND
The quarterly financial report is intended to provide the City Council, City staff and management, and the community a general update on the financial activities and condition of the City.
The City operates on an annual budget cycle. Through the budget, the City Council approves revenue estimates and authorizes City staff to expend the City’s limited financial resources. As one of the many activities that the City undertakes to help ensure its financial soundness, staff provides quarterly financial reports on the City’s budget condition.
The First Quarter Financial Report (Attachments A and B) covers financial activity through the first quarter of the FY 2025/26, ending September 30, 2025. It provides preliminary year-end results.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
At its meeting on June 17, 2025, the City Council adopted the FY 2025/26 Operating and Capital Budget. The budget is a status quo budget, meaning that the revenue sources and service and staffing levels included in the budget are similar to those included in the prior year’s budget. The City remains in a stable financial position and is able to fund its operating and capital expenditures through annual, recurring funding sources. The budget does include the use of unassigned fund balance (residual, unrestricted funds) primarily for several onetime, Council-directed initiatives, which is an acceptable use of unrestricted funds.
Overall, General Fund revenues and expenditures are on target with budgeted amounts as expected at this point in the fiscal year.
The First Quarter Financial Report also includes descriptions and financial activity of the City’s Non-General Funds.
The FY 2025/26 budget and actual revenue, expenditures, and estimated beginning and
ending fund balance for each City fund is listed in the Financial Summary (Attachment B).
Next Steps
The FY 2025/26 Second Quarter Financial Report (Mid-Year Budget Review) is scheduled to be presented to the City Council in February 2026.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact as a result of receiving this report. Staff is not recommending any budget adjustments at this time.
ATTACHMENTS
A. FY 2025-26 First Quarter Financial Report
B. FY 2025-26 First Quarter Financial Report Summary by Fund
0 City of
Pinole
Prepared by Finance Department
November 18, 2025
FY 2025/26 First Quarter
Financial Report
0 This page intentionally blank
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
Table of Contents
1 Table of Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................................3 General Fund Overview ................................................................................................................4 General Fund Revenue.................................................................................................................5 Sales Tax ..............................................................................................................................6 Property Tax..........................................................................................................................7 Utility Users’ Tax ...................................................................................................................8 Intergovernmental Tax...........................................................................................................9 Franchise Tax......................................................................................................................10 Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) ...........................................................................................11 Business License Tax ..........................................................................................................12 Public Safety Charges .........................................................................................................13 Other Revenue....................................................................................................................14 Transfers In.........................................................................................................................14 General Fund Expenditures ........................................................................................................15 Salaries and Wages.............................................................................................................17 Employee Benefits ..............................................................................................................18 Professional and Administrative Services.............................................................................19 Other Operating Expenses...................................................................................................19 Materials and Supplies........................................................................................................19 Interdepartmental Charges .................................................................................................20 Asset/Capital Outlay...........................................................................................................20 Debt Service .......................................................................................................................20 Transfers Out......................................................................................................................20 Non-General Funds....................................................................................................................21 Special Revenue Funds ..........................................................................................................21 Gas Tax Fund (Fund 200) .....................................................................................................21 Public Safety Augmentation Fund (Fund 203) .......................................................................21 Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (Fund 206)...................................................22 NPDES Storm Water Fund (Fund 207) ..................................................................................22 Recreation Fund (Fund 209) ................................................................................................22 Building and Planning Fund (Fund 212) ................................................................................23 Refuse Management Fund (Fund 213)..................................................................................23
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
Table of Contents
2 Solid Waste Fund (Fund 214)...............................................................................................23 Measure J Fund (Fund 215)..................................................................................................24 Development Growth Impact Fund (Fund 276) .....................................................................24 Housing Assets for Resale Fund (Fund 285)..........................................................................25 Lighting and Landscape District Fund (Fund 310) .................................................................25 Capital Project Funds .............................................................................................................25 City Street Improvement Fund (Fund 325)............................................................................25 Arterial Streets Rehabilitation Fund (Fund 377) ....................................................................26 Enterprise Funds ....................................................................................................................26 Sewer Enterprise Fund (Fund 500) .......................................................................................26 Cable Access TV Fund (Fund 505)........................................................................................26 Information Systems Fund (Fund 525)..................................................................................27 Financial Summary by Fund .......................................................................................................28
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
Introduction
3 Introduction
The quarterly financial report is intended to provide the City Council, City staff and management, and the community a general update on the financial activities and condition of the City.
The City operates on an annual budget cycle. Through the budget, the City Council approves revenue estimates and authorizes City staff to expend the City’s limited financial resources.
As one of the many activities that the City undertakes to help ensure its financial soundness, staff provides quarterly financial reports on the City’s budget condition.
The First Quarter Financial Report details financial activity through the first quarter of the FY 2025/26, July 1, 2025 through September 30, 2025. It also provides projected year-end results.
The City’s full budget document, FY 2025/26 Operating and Capital Budget, and other financial reports, can be found on the City’s website at https://www.pinole.gov/financialreports/.
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Overview
4 General Fund Overview
The FY 2025/26 budget is a status quo budget, meaning that the revenue sources and service and staffing levels included in the budget are similar to those included in the prior year’s budget. The City remains in a stable financial position and is able to fund its operating and capital expenditures through annual, recurring funding sources. The budget does include the use of unassigned fund balance (residual, unrestricted funds) primarily for several onetime, Council-directed initiatives, which is an acceptable use of unrestricted funds.
Additionally, the City maintains a separate General Reserve Fund, which is required by the City’s Cash Reserve Policy to maintain a reserve balance equal to 25% of total ongoing General Fund operating expenditures. The General Reserve fund balance is projected to end the fiscal year with a balance of approximately $7.8 million.
At its meeting on June 17, 2025, the City Council adopted the FY 2025/26 budget, which included the use of the General Fund’s unassigned fund balance to fund several Councildirected initiatives as well as several capital improvement projects. The FY 2025/26 adopted budget includes the use of General Fund (including Measure S 2006 and 2014) unassigned fund balance in the amount of $1.3 million.
The City is projecting to close FY 2025/26 with total revenues totaling $31.6 million and expenditures totaling $32.8 million, and an estimated ending fund balance of $4.5 million.
The table below summarizes the General Fund budget to actuals for the first quarter.
General Fund (including
Measure S 2006 and 2014, and
Measure I 2024)
FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of
Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 31,537,898 $ 31,537,898 $ - $ 31,537,898 $ 3,414,135 $ 3,414,135 11% $ 31,537,898 Expenditures 32,801,047 32,801,047 - 32,801,047 8,080,314 8,149,765 25% 32,801,047 Net surplus/deficit (1,263,149) (1,263,149) - (1,263,149) $ (4,666,179) $ (4,735,629) (1,263,149) Beginning Fund Balance 5,746,650 5,746,650 5,746,650 5,746,650 Ending Fund Balance $ 4,483,501 $ 4,483,501 $ 4,483,501 $ 4,483,501 Page 65 of 178 FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Revenue
5 General Fund Revenue
The City Council authorized General Fund revenues of $31,537,898 for FY 2025/26. Actual revenues for the first quarter totaled $3,414,135, 11% of the budget. As the first quarter represents approximately 25% of the fiscal year, actual revenues are expected to be around 25% of the annual budget. However, variations may occur due to the timing of certain receipts. The table below summarizes General Fund revenue activity for the first quarter.
The following section provides detailed explanations of first quarter financial activities for each revenue category, as well as historical trend data.
Category FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Property Taxes $ 6,698,790 $ 6,698,790 $ - $ 6,698,790 $ 36,929 1% $ 6,698,790 Sales and Use Taxes 4,567,189 4,567,189 - 4,567,189 639,160 14% 4,567,189 Sales and Use Taxes - Measure S 2006 2,599,000 2,599,000 - 2,599,000 364,083 14% 2,599,000 Sales and Use Taxes - Measure S 2014 2,599,000 2,599,000 - 2,599,000 364,090 14% 2,599,000 Sales and Use Taxes - Measure I 2024 2,599,000 2,599,000 - 2,599,000 327,038 13% 2,599,000 Utility Users Tax 2,345,000 2,345,000 - 2,345,000 651,239 28% 2,345,000 Franchise Taxes 850,000 850,000 - 850,000 108,000 13% 850,000 Other Taxes: TOT 400,000 400,000 - 400,000 91,595 23% 400,000 Other Taxes: Business License 476,172 476,172 - 476,172 16,476 3% 476,172 Intergovernmental Taxes 2,513,149 2,513,149 - 2,513,149 28,949 1% 2,513,149 Public Safety Charges 1,861,497 1,861,497 - 1,861,497 548,304 29% 1,861,497 Total Other Revenue 793,656 793,656 - 793,656 238,272 30% 793,656 Revenue Total: 28,302,453 28,302,453 - 28,302,453 3,414,135 12% 28,302,453 Transfer In from Pension/OPEB Trust 3,235,445 3,235,445 3,235,445 - 0% 3,235,445 Revenue/Sources Total: $ 31,537,898 $ 31,537,898 $ - $ 31,537,898 $ 3,414,135 11% $31,537,898 Page 66 of 178 FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Revenue
6 Sales Tax
Sales Tax is the City’s largest general revenue stream at 39% of total General Fund revenues.
The City’s 10.25% sales tax is levied on taxable sales, and the City receives 1% for the standard Bradley Burns Sales Tax and 0.5% from each of the three local sales tax measures.
This category includes the main General Fund ($4,567,189), Measure S 2006 ($2,599,000), Measure S 2014 ($2,599,000), and Measure I 2024 ($2,599,000). For the first quarter, sales tax receipts totaled $1,694,371, 14% of the budget. This amount reflects collections from the months of July and August. There is typically a two-month lag between sales activity and remittance to the City.
City staff meet quarterly with the sales tax consultant, HdL, to review updates on the prior quarter’s sales tax performance. Highlights from the most recent update for the period April through June 2025 include:
• Overall gross sales tax receipts were up 3.9% compared to the same period in 2024; after adjusting for reporting modifications, actual sales were up 1.1%. • General retail revenues declined 6.2%. While quick-service dining improved, the loss of a couple of casual dining eateries contributed to an overall decline. Grocery store sales declined due to the loss of a business as well.
• Pinole’s share of the Contra Costa County sales tax pool increased 8% due to an increase in the quarterly pool share.
• Taxable sales for all of Contra Costa County declined 2.3% compared to the same period in 2024; the Bay Area was up 1.8%.
FY 2021/22
Actual
FY 2022/23
Actual
FY 2023/24
Actual
FY 2024/25
Actual
FY 2025/26
Actual
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total 9,613,625 9,328,351 9,430,219 10,065,999 1,694,371 12,364,189 Q4 2,322,856 2,307,279 2,425,993 3,146,670
Q3 2,428,400 2,387,064 2,360,669 2,209,133
Q2 2,502,822 2,341,406 2,338,691 2,575,405
Q1 2,359,547 2,292,602 2,304,865 2,134,791 1,694,371
$-
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
$9,000,000
$10,000,000
$11,000,000
$12,000,000
$13,000,000
Sales Tax
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Revenue
7 Property Tax
Property Tax is the City’s second largest revenue stream at 21% of total General Fund revenues. It is comprised of four segments – secured, unsecured, supplemental, and transfer tax. The largest segment is the secured property tax. It is received in three installments in December (55%), April (40%), and June of each year (5%). Secured property tax revenue includes the basic 1% property tax. For the first quarter, revenue collected was $36,929, 0.6% of the budget. The amount reflects receipts from the property transfer tax segment. Revenue from other segments is received later in the fiscal year, with the largest installment in December.
Between July 1 and September 30, 2025, there were 35 single family residential sales in Pinole. The median price was $714,000 and reflects a 0.6% increase compared to the previous quarter and a 7% decrease compared to the same period in 2024.
FY 2021/22
Actual
FY 2022/23
Actual
FY 2023/24
Actual
FY 2024/25
Actual
FY 2025/26
Actual
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total 4,307,208 5,055,790 5,948,810 6,209,280 36,929 6,698,790 Q4 1,492,871 2,060,252 2,816,214 2,925,567
Q3 1,221,885 1,311,320 1,351,164 16,223
Q2 1,564,444 1,670,279 1,765,376 3,212,512
Q1 28,007 13,939 16,056 54,977 36,929
$-
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
Property Tax
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Revenue
8 Utility Users’ Tax
Utility Users’ Tax (UUT) of 8% is levied on telecommunication, electricity, gas, and prepaid mobile telephones. For the first quarter, UUT revenue collected was $651,539, 28% of the budget. Actuals are trending slightly higher in the telecommunications and electricity segments.
FY 2021/22
Actual
FY 2022/23
Actual
FY 2023/24
Actual
FY 2024/25
Actual
FY 2025/26
Actual
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total 2,063,773 2,312,830 2,445,715 2,657,156 651,239 2,345,000 Q4 471,356 572,657 581,069 611,163
Q3 622,765 699,442 714,965 763,370
Q2 493,892 520,972 596,338 638,050
Q1 475,760 519,759 553,343 644,573 651,239
$(100,000)
$100,000
$300,000
$500,000
$700,000
$900,000
$1,100,000
$1,300,000
$1,500,000
$1,700,000
$1,900,000
$2,100,000
$2,300,000
$2,500,000
Utility Users' Tax
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Revenue
9 Intergovernmental Tax
Intergovernmental Tax is comprised of the Motor Vehicle License Fee (VLF), which is the City’s share of motor vehicle license fees levied, collected, and apportioned by the State.
This category also includes the Homeowners Property Tax Relief, which is a reimbursement from the State to offset loss of property tax for the state-imposed homeowner exemption.
For the first quarter, revenue collected was $28,949, 1% of the budget. The amount reflected is from the excess VLF collection. The regular VLF revenue is received in equal installments in December and June.
FY 2021/22
Actual
FY 2022/23
Actual
FY 2023/24
Actual
FY 2024/25
Actual
FY 2025/26
Actual
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total 2,079,739 2,219,137 2,319,153 2,431,824 28,949 2,513,149 Q4 1,028,682 1,099,865 1,147,883 1,214,314
Q3 22,376 19,408 23,388 29,855
Q2 1,028,682 1,099,865 1,147,883 1,187,655
Q1 - - - - 28,949
$-
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
$1,400,000
$1,600,000
$1,800,000
$2,000,000
$2,200,000
$2,400,000
$2,600,000
Intergovernmental Tax
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Revenue
10 Franchise Tax
Franchise Tax is levied on gas (1%), electricity (2%), cable (5%), and refuse. For the first quarter, revenue collected was $108,000, 13% of the budget. The amount reflected includes refuse revenue only. Revenue from the remaining segments—gas, electricity, and cable—is received later in the fiscal year.
FY 2021/22
Actual
FY 2022/23
Actual
FY 2023/24
Actual
FY 2024/25
Actual
FY 2025/26
Actual
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total 788,146 813,494 901,208 910,745 108,000 850,000
Q4 332,661 322,641 402,957 403,529
Q3 157,804 165,387 167,826 171,030
Q2 149,190 162,326 167,133 169,109
Q1 148,492 163,140 163,292 167,075 108,000
$-
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
$800,000
$900,000
Franchise Tax
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Revenue
11 Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), also known as the “hotel tax,” is levied at 10% on persons staying 30 days or less in a motel or lodging facility within City limits. For the first quarter, revenue collected was $91,595, 23% of the budget.
FY 2021/22
Actual
FY 2022/23
Actual
FY 2023/24
Actual
FY 2024/25
Actual
FY 2025/26
Actual
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total 487,687 456,288 401,499 322,889 91,595 400,000
Q4 130,974 114,768 105,338 69,068
Q3 105,958 101,466 96,822 66,229
Q2 114,050 106,897 87,439 64,364
Q1 136,705 133,158 111,900 123,228 91,595
$-
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
$450,000
$500,000
Transient Occupancy Tax
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Revenue
12 Business License Tax
Business License Tax is assessed on all businesses doing business within City limits. For the first quarter, revenue collected was $16,476, 3% of the budget. The bulk of the revenue is received in December and January through annual business license renewals.
FY 2021/22
Actual
FY 2022/23
Actual
FY 2023/24
Actual
FY 2024/25
Actual
FY 2025/26
Actual
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total 441,779 438,329 464,672 486,344 16,476 476,172
Q4 38,852 42,421 34,119 28,693
Q3 223,061 287,509 263,646 293,428
Q2 135,421 86,522 145,533 141,476
Q1 44,445 21,876 21,374 22,747 16,476
$-
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
$450,000
$500,000
Business License Tax
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Revenue
13 Public Safety Charges
Public safety charges are received for dispatch services provided to the cities of Hercules and San Pablo under an Intergovernmental Service Sharing agreement. For the first quarter, actual receipts were $548,304, 29% of the budget.
FY 2021/22
Actual
FY 2022/23
Actual
FY 2023/24
Actual
FY 2024/25
Actual
FY 2025/26
Actual
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total 1,447,934 1,568,849 1,803,884 1,960,443 548,304 1,861,497 Q4 353,105 368,748 415,192 457,762
Q3 353,105 368,748 415,192 457,184
Q2 353,105 368,748 415,192 457,486
Q1 388,620 462,606 558,308 588,009 548,304
$-
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
$1,400,000
$1,600,000
$1,800,000
$2,000,000
Public Safety Charges
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Revenue
14 Other Revenue
Other revenue includes permits, fees, fines and forfeitures, rental income, proceeds from the sale of property, interest income, and grants. All revenues in this category totaled $23,272, 30% of the budget. Actual revenues are trending higher in the permit fees, abandoned vehicle fees, abatement fees, and reimbursements subcategories.
Transfers In
The transfer in comes from the Pension and OPEB Trust to offset the increase in pension and other post-employment benefits costs in the General Fund. The anticipated amount of the transfer is $3,235,445. The actual amount will be determined and processed at year-end.
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Expenditures
15 General Fund Expenditures
The City Council authorized General Fund expenditures of $32,801,047 for FY 2025/26. For the first quarter, expenditures including encumbrances totaled $8,149,765, 25% of the budget. As the first quarter represents approximately 25% of the fiscal year, actual expenditures are expected to be around 25% of the annual budget. However, variations may occur due to the timing of certain disbursements. The tables below summarize General Fund expenditure activity for the fiscal year.
Below are explanations of expenditure variances exceeding the 25% threshold by department.
• City Manager, City Clerk, Finance, Human Resources, and Police expenditures exceeded the threshold primarily due to the full payment of the workers’ compensation and general liability insurance premiums at the beginning of the fiscal year.
• City Attorney expenditures consist of two subcategories—attorney services and reimbursements (credits) from Non-General Funds. The table above presents the net amount. The higher percentage is primarily due to delayed reimbursements from other funds for legal services provided. Actual expenditures were below the threshold.
Below are explanations of expenditure variances exceeding the 25% threshold by category.
Department FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of
Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
City Council $ 252,450 $ 252,450 $ - $ 252,450 $ 48,531 $ 48,531 19% $ 252,450 City Manager 535,563 535,563 - 535,563 187,421 187,421 35% 535,563 City Clerk 733,895 733,895 - 733,895 211,467 211,467 29% 733,895 City Treasurer 9,990 9,990 - 9,990 2,194 2,194 22% 9,990 City Attorney 305,965 305,965 - 305,965 135,623 135,623 44% 305,965 Finance Department 1,025,744 1,025,744 - 1,025,744 288,787 288,787 28% 1,025,744 Human Resources 965,908 965,908 - 965,908 278,253 278,253 29% 965,908 Non-Departmental 5,128,503 5,128,503 - 5,128,503 1,144,982 1,144,982 22% 5,128,503 Police Department 12,758,655 12,758,655 - 12,758,655 3,385,080 3,385,080 27% 12,758,655 Fire Department 6,742,965 6,742,965 - 6,742,965 1,656,427 1,656,427 25% 6,742,965 Public Works 3,283,599 3,283,599 - 3,283,599 631,720 694,932 21% 3,283,599 Community Development 610,142 610,142 - 610,142 108,821 115,060 19% 610,142 Community Services 447,667 447,667 - 447,667 1,008 1,008 0% 447,667 Expenditure Total: $ 32,801,047 $ 32,801,047 $ - $ 32,801,047 $ 8,080,314 $ 8,149,765 25% $ 32,801,047 Category FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustment
s
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of
Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Salaries & Wages $ 10,526,279 $ 10,526,279 $ 10,526,279 $ 2,363,736 $ 2,363,736 22% $ 10,526,279 Benefits 8,178,351 8,178,351 8,178,351 2,422,179 2,422,179 30% 8,178,351 Professional/Admin Services 9,382,408 9,382,408 9,382,408 2,105,771 2,154,157 23% 9,382,408 Other Operating 378,156 378,156 378,156 68,362 68,362 18% 378,156 Materials and Supplies 184,998 184,998 184,998 38,759 38,759 21% 184,998 Interdepartmental Charges (665,537) (665,537) (665,537) 400,689 400,689 -60% (665,537) Asset/Capital Outlay 986,440 986,440 986,440 29,837 50,902 5% 986,440 Debt Service 653,545 653,545 653,545 650,981 650,981 100% 653,545 Transfers Out 3,176,407 3,176,407 3,176,407 - - 0% 3,176,407 Expenditure Total: $ 32,801,047 $ 32,801,047 $ - $ 32,801,047 $ 8,080,314 $ 8,149,765 25% $ 32,801,047 Page 76 of 178 FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Expenditures
16 • Benefits expenditures were 30% of the budget, primarily due to the full payment of the workers’ compensation insurance premium at the beginning of the fiscal year. • Debt service expenditure was 100% of the budget due to the annual payment of the 2006 Pension Obligation Bonds made at the beginning of the fiscal year.
The following section provides detailed explanations of FY 2025/26 financial activities for each expenditure category, as well as historical trend data.
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Expenditures
17 Salaries and Wages
The FY 2025/26 budget includes salaries and wages based on the City’s staffing level of 115 full-time equivalents (FTEs), and salary increases for different classifications already agreed upon in the City’s current labor memorandums of understanding (MOUs). The budget includes a savings factor equal to 3% of total annual salary and benefits expenditures to account for savings resulting from position vacancies. For the first quarter, salaries and wages totaled $2,363,736, 22% of the budget.
FY 2021/22
Actual
FY 2022/23
Actual
FY 2023/24
Actual
FY 2024/25
Actual
FY 2025/26
Actual
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total 10,550,396 11,006,433 10,113,758 10,502,237 2,363,736 10,526,279 Q4 3,282,972 2,534,186 2,609,792 2,832,962
Q3 2,405,510 3,025,957 2,772,505 2,863,902
Q2 2,814,371 2,822,048 2,405,708 2,341,722
Q1 2,047,542 2,624,243 2,325,753 2,463,651 2,363,736
$-
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
$9,000,000
$10,000,000
$11,000,000
Salaries and Wages
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Expenditures
18 Employee Benefits
Employee benefits include health, dental, vision, pension and other post-employment benefits, workers' compensation, and other miscellaneous benefits.
The cost of retirement benefits is the City’s annual required contribution for employees’ pension to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS). The City’s annual required contribution is determined by an annual actuarial valuation report, the most recent of which is as of July 2024. The budget reflects the net cost to the City (the required total contribution minus the employee contributions). All classic employees currently contribute the required employee contribution plus a portion of the employer’s contribution for a total of 15%.
Other benefits include employee medical, dental, and vision care, workers’ compensation, and others. For the first quarter, benefits totaled $2,422,179, 30% of the budget. As noted above, the workers’ compensation insurance premium is paid in full at the beginning of each fiscal year.
FY 2021/22
Actual
FY 2022/23
Actual
FY 2023/24
Actual
FY 2024/25
Actual
FY 2025/26
Actual
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total 6,030,608 6,884,786 6,843,938 7,573,521 2,422,179 8,178,351 Q4 1,493,949 1,556,478 1,583,218 1,816,789
Q3 1,386,804 1,643,164 1,616,513 1,783,803
Q2 1,850,799 1,856,854 1,796,869 1,678,685
Q1 1,299,057 1,828,289 1,847,339 2,294,244 2,422,179
$-
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
Employee Benefits
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Expenditures
19 Professional and Administrative Services
Professional and administrative services include consulting services, legal services, temporary services, network and software maintenance, and equipment and building maintenance. Contract services with other government agencies, such as the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (ConFire) and County animal services and library services, are also included in professional services. The majority of this category consists of the $6 million fire services contract with Confire. For the first quarter, expenditures including encumbrances totaled $2,154,157, 23% of the budget.
Other Operating Expenses
Other operating expenses consist of gas, electricity, telephone utilities for City facilities. For the first quarter, expenditures totaled $68,362, 18% of the budget.
Materials and Supplies
Materials and supplies include fuel, supplies, and maintenance materials. For the first quarter, expenditures totaled $38,759, 21% of the budget.
FY 2021/22
Actual
FY 2022/23
Actual
FY 2023/24
Actual
FY 2024/25
Actual
FY 2025/26
Actual
FY 2025/26
Budget
Total 4,083,329 5,686,937 9,049,450 8,827,367 2,154,157 9,382,408 Q4 2,003,524 2,861,758 2,927,276 2,349,141
Q3 825,459 1,236,020 2,050,634 2,364,150
Q2 785,639 867,167 2,116,252 2,137,380
Q1 468,707 721,992 1,955,288 1,976,696 2,154,157
$-
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
$9,000,000
$10,000,000
Professional & Administrative Services
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
General Fund Expenditures
20 Interdepartmental Charges
Interdepartmental charges include indirect costs for personnel costs allocated to other funds, information technology and legal services, and general liability insurance. For the first quarter, expenditures totaled $400,689. Reimbursements from other funds were offset by the payment of the general liability insurance premium, which is paid in full at the beginning of the fiscal year.
Asset/Capital Outlay
Asset/capital outlay includes non-major asset acquisition and improvements, such as computer equipment and furniture, as well as several major capital projects to be funded by the General Fund unassigned fund balance. For the first quarter, asset/capital outlay expenditures including encumbrances were $50,902, 5% of the budget. Expenditures were low due to the timing of the projects.
Each fiscal year, capital needs are assessed and prioritized through the CIP planning process. Major capital improvement projects are detailed in a separate Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) that can be found on the City’s website at:
https://www.pinole.gov/engineering-administration/capital-improvement-plan/.
Debt Service
Debt service includes the payment of debt for the 2006 pension obligation bonds (POBs) that were issued to finance the City’s unfunded accrued actuarial liability with CalPERS. The payment is made in full at the beginning of each fiscal year.
Transfers Out
Transfers out include transfers from the General Funds to other funds to support Recreation, Planning and Building, and Pinole Community Television (PCTV) operations, and the Equipment Reserve Fund. Transfers will be processed at year-end based on actual need, to ensure that operating funds maintain positive fund balances.
FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
Non-General Funds
21 Non-General Funds
The following analysis outlines the financial activity for select non-general funds, which operate independently from the General Fund. Their sources of funding include state apportionments, property tax assessments, fees, permits, grants, and accumulated fund balance. Expenditures supported by these sources are typically restricted to designated uses.
Special Revenue Funds
Gas Tax Fund (Fund 200)
The Gas Tax Fund accounts for revenue from State excise taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel sales (referred to as the Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA)) as well as revenue from the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (SB1) (referred to as the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA)). Gas Tax Fund resources are restricted for use in the construction and maintenance of public streets. These funds support both annual operating and capital projects. For the first quarter, revenues totaled $239,916, 22% of the budget.
There is typically a delay in the timing of when the allocation is received. Expenditures including encumbrances totaled $95,484, 4% of the budget. Actual expenditures were low due to the timing of budgeted capital projects.
Public Safety Augmentation Fund (Fund 203)
The Public Safety Augmentation Fund (PSAF) accounts for monies allocated by the County Auditor-Controller under Proposition 172 from the statewide 0.5% sales tax based on a share of statewide taxable sales. These funds are used for public safety personnel costs and safety equipment purchases. For the first quarter, revenues totaled $55,773, 22% of the budget. There is typically a two-month lag between sales activity and remittance to the City. Expenditures totaled $161,876, 26% of the budget.
Gas Tax Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of
Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 1,068,574 $ 1,068,574 $ 1,068,574 $ 239,916 22% $ 1,068,574 Expenditures 2,512,167 2,512,167 - 2,512,167 95,484 4% 2,512,167 Net surplus/deficit (1,443,593) (1,443,593) - (1,443,593) $ 144,432 (1,443,593) Beginning Fund Balance 2,175,570 2,175,570 2,175,570 2,175,570 Ending Fund Balance $ 731,977 $ 731,977 $ 731,977 $ 731,977 Public Safety Augmentation Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 249,584 $ 249,584 $ 249,584 $ 55,773 22% $ 249,584 Expenditures 613,388 613,388 613,388 161,876 26% 613,388 Net surplus/deficit (363,804) (363,804) - (363,804) $ (106,103) (363,804) Beginning Fund Balance 136,597 136,597 136,597 136,597
Ending Fund Balance $ (227,207) $ (227,207) $ (227,207) $ (227,207) Page 82 of 178 FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
Non-General Funds
22 Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (Fund 206) The Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) accounts for funds received from the County under AB 3229, which enacted the Citizens Option for Public Safety (COPS) Program, through which the City receives $100,000 annually. In addition to the $100,000 annual payment, the City receives a Growth Allocation payment. The funds are used for officer personnel costs and safety equipment purchases. For the first quarter, revenues totaled $30,014, 16% of the budget. There is typically a delay in the timing of when the allocation is received. Expenditures totaled $57,702, 19% of the budget.
NPDES Storm Water Fund (Fund 207)
The NPDES Storm Water Fund accounts for assessments collected by the County via property tax bills and provided to the City for stormwater programs pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations, a federally mandated program. Assessments are levied at $35 per Equivalent Runoff Unit (ERU). Revenues are received in December, April, and June through property tax assessments. For the first quarter, revenues have not yet been received. Expenditures totaled $89,358, 23% of the budget.
Recreation Fund (Fund 209)
The Recreation Department Fund accounts for funds received from fees for participation in recreational programs. While the recreation programs of the Community Services Department have operated on a limited basis in some areas, program participation and facility rentals are increasing. For the first quarter, program revenues were $79,255, 14% of the budget. Expenditures were $657,969, 28% of the budget. The General Fund transfer (operating subsidy) will be processed at year-end based on need.
Supplemental Law Enforcement
Services Fund
FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 185,000 $ 185,000 $ 185,000 $ 30,014 16% $ 185,000 Expenditures 303,281 303,281 - 303,281 57,702 19% 303,281 Net surplus/deficit (118,281) (118,281) - (118,281) $ (27,688) (118,281) Beginning Fund Balance 259,977 259,977 259,977 259,977
Ending Fund Balance $ 141,696 $ 141,696 $ 141,696 $ 141,696 NPDES Storm Water Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 253,272 $ 253,272 $ 253,272 $ - 0% 253,272
Expenditures 385,631 385,631 385,631 89,358 23% 385,631 Net surplus/deficit (132,359) (132,359) - (132,359) $ (89,358) (132,359) Beginning Fund Balance (333,734) (333,734) (333,734) (333,734) Ending Fund Balance $ (466,093) $ (466,093) $ (466,093) $ (466,093) Page 83 of 178 FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
Non-General Funds
23 Building and Planning Fund (Fund 212)
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. Additionally, it accounts for funds received from various grants, including the California Energy Commission Grant, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission EV Charging Grant, and the Marin Clean Energy Grant. For the first quarter, revenues totaled $322,720, 18% of the budget. Grant revenue is received on a reimbursement basis, after expenditures have been incurred. Expenditures totaled $540,106, 20% of the budget. The General Fund transfer (operating subsidy) will be processed at year-end based on need.
Refuse Management Fund (Fund 213)
The Refuse Management Fund accounts for resources received from the City’s franchise waste hauler, Republic Services, from a monthly fee imposed under AB 939 on all residential customers in Pinole. These revenues are restricted to programs and activities that promote recycling of solid waste and source reduction. For the first quarter, revenues totaled $15,247, 23% of the budget. Expenditures totaled $36,803, 19% of the budget.
Solid Waste Fund (Fund 214)
The Solid Waste Fund accounts for funds received from Republic Services from a monthly fee it assesses on customer rates for solid waste services. These funds are set aside for Recreation Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues
Program Revenue $ 573,563 $ 573,563 $ - $ 573,563 $ 79,255 14% $ 573,563 Transfers In 1,750,050 1,750,050 - 1,750,050 - 0% 1,750,050 Total Revenues 2,323,613 2,323,613 - 2,323,613 79,255 3% 2,323,613 Expenditures 2,323,613 2,323,613 - 2,323,613 657,969 28% 2,323,613 Net surplus/deficit (0) (0) - (0) $ (578,714) (0)
Beginning Fund Balance (18,379) (18,379) (18,379) (18,379) Ending Fund Balance $ (18,379) $ (18,379) $ (18,379) $ (18,379) Building and Planning Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 1,836,137 $ 1,836,137 $ - $ 1,836,137 $ 322,720 18% $ 1,836,137 Transfers In 908,095 908,095 - 908,095 - 0% 908,095
Total Revenues $ 2,744,232 $ 2,744,232 $ - $ 2,744,232 $ 322,720 12% 2,744,232 Expenditures 2,744,232 2,744,232 - 2,744,232 540,106 20% 2,744,232 Net surplus/deficit (0) (0) - (0) $ (217,387) (0)
Beginning Fund Balance (2,545,963) (2,545,963) (2,545,963) (2,545,963) Ending Fund Balance $ (2,545,964) $ (2,545,964) $ (2,545,964) $ (2,545,964) Refuse Management Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 66,060 $ 66,060 $ 66,060 $ 15,247 23% $ 66,060 Expenditures 189,710 189,710 189,710 36,803 19% 189,710 Net surplus/deficit (123,650) (123,650) - (123,650) $ (21,556) (123,650) Beginning Fund Balance (33,476) (33,476) (33,476) (33,476) Ending Fund Balance $ (157,126) $ (157,126) $ (157,126) $ (157,126) Page 84 of 178 FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
Non-General Funds
24 future solid waste capital projects. For the first quarter, revenues totaled $427,952, 116% of the budget. The majority of the revenue was primarily from the vehicle impact fee; the revenue budget will be amended during the mid-year budget review. Expenditures totaled $27,312, 15% of the budget.
Measure J Fund (Fund 215)
The Measure J Fund accounts for special sales tax revenues collected by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) and reapportioned to the cities for local street projects. The City must submit a checklist each year to confirm compliance with a Growth Management Program in order to receive these funds. Estimates of annual funding are provided by the CCTA, and jurisdiction allocations are based on a formula that considers both population and road mileage. Additionally, the fund accounts for funds received from State grants, including the Transportation Land-Use Connections (TLC) Grant, the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) Grant, and the Climate Implementation Grant. For the first quarter, revenue from interest income totaled $8,345, 1% of the budget. Grant revenue is received on a reimbursement basis, after expenditures have been incurred. Expenditures including encumbrances totaled $116,939, 10% of the budget. Actual expenditures were low due to the timing of budgeted capital projects.
Development Growth Impact Fund (Fund 276)
The Development Growth Impact Fund accounts for development fees collected to mitigate the impact of new development. Specifically, it provides for the expansion, design, construction, or upgrade to facilities, roadways, and equipment. The City collects impact fees for police, fire protection, municipal, community, wastewater, roadways, and drainage.
For the first quarter, revenue from interest earned on the cash balance was $11,912. No development impact fee revenue is expected this fiscal year as fees are now collected after occupancy of new developments. Expenditures totaled $9,391, 0.4% of the budget. Actual expenditures were low due to the timing of budgeted capital projects.
Solid Waste Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 368,000 $ 368,000 $ 368,000 $ 427,952 116% $ 368,000 Expenditures 177,241 177,241 177,241 27,312 15% 177,241 Net surplus/deficit 190,759 190,759 - 190,759 $ 400,640 190,759 Beginning Fund Balance 3,306,893 3,306,893 3,306,893 3,306,893 Ending Fund Balance $ 3,497,652 $ 3,497,652 $ 3,497,652 $ 3,497,652 Measure J Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 1,397,257 $ 1,397,257 $ 1,397,257 $ 8,345 1% $ 1,397,257 Expenditures 1,191,732 1,191,732 1,191,732 116,939 10% 1,191,732 Net surplus/deficit 205,525 205,525 - 205,525 $ (108,594) 205,525 Beginning Fund Balance 2,777,422 2,777,422 2,777,422 2,777,422 Ending Fund Balance $ 2,982,947 $ 2,982,947 $ 2,982,947 $ 2,982,947 Page 85 of 178 FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
Non-General Funds
25 Housing Assets for Resale Fund (Fund 285)
The Housing Assets for Resale Fund accounts for activities associated with administering housing programs of the former Pinole Redevelopment Agency, use of Housing Set Aside funds, and the provision of affordable housing within the community. For the first quarter, revenue from interest was $12,387, 23% of the budget. Expenditures totaled $30,118, 9% of the budget.
Lighting and Landscape District Fund (Fund 310)
The Lighting and Landscape District Fund accounts for assessments to business property owners to maintain median lighting and landscaping within the Pinole Valley Road North and South areas. Revenue is received in December, April, and June with property tax payments.
For the first quarter, there was no revenue. Expenditures totaled $4,536, 5% of the budget, mostly for utility expenditures.
Capital Project Funds
City Street Improvement Fund (Fund 325)
The City Street Improvements Fund accounts for funds used for street improvement projects. Additionally, it accounts for funds received from various grants, including the Highway Bridge Program (HBP) Grant and the Strategic Management Planning Program (STMP) Grant. For the first quarter, revenue was low as grant revenue is received on a reimbursement basis, after expenditures have been incurred. Expenditures including encumbrances totaled $372,338, 13% of the budget. Actual expenditures were low due to the timing of budgeted capital projects.
Development Growth Impact Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 11,912 0% $ -
Expenditures 2,436,000 2,436,000 2,436,000 9,391 0% 2,436,000 Net surplus/deficit (2,436,000) (2,436,000) - (2,436,000) $ 2,521 (2,436,000) Beginning Fund Balance 3,462,185 3,462,185 3,462,185 3,462,185 Ending Fund Balance $ 1,026,185 $ 1,026,185 $ 1,026,185 $ 1,026,185 Housing Assets for Resale Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 55,000 $ 55,000 $ 55,000 $ 12,387 23% $ 55,000 Expenditures 342,961 342,961 342,961 30,118 9% 342,961
Net surplus/deficit (287,961) (287,961) - (287,961) $ (17,731) (287,961) Beginning Fund Balance 8,251,071 8,251,071 8,251,071 8,251,071 Ending Fund Balance $ 7,963,110 $ 7,963,110 $ 7,963,110 $ 7,963,110 Landscape and Lighting District
Fund
FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 63,911 $ 63,911 $ 63,911 $ - 0% $ 63,911
Expenditures 85,175 85,175 85,175 4,536 5% 85,175
Net surplus/deficit (21,264) (21,264) - (21,264) $ (4,536) (21,264) Beginning Fund Balance 99,053 99,053 99,053 99,053
Ending Fund Balance $ 77,789 $ 77,789 $ 77,789 $ 77,789 Page 86 of 178 FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
Non-General Funds
26 Arterial Streets Rehabilitation Fund (Fund 377)
The Arterial Streets Rehabilitation Fund accounts for funds used for street rehabilitation projects. There were no expenditures due to the timing of budgeted capital projects.
Enterprise Funds
Sewer Enterprise Fund (Fund 500)
The Sewer Enterprise Fund accounts for fees charged to residents and businesses for sewer utilities. Fees are used to operate the Pinole-Hercules Wastewater Treatment Plant, which serves the Pinole and Hercules areas. Revenue from charges for services are received with the property tax assessments in December, April, and June. For the first quarter, revenues totaled $698,033, 5% of the budget. The revenue was primarily from Hercules’ first quarter contribution and interest income. Expenditures totaled $4,592,680, 12% of the budget.
Actual expenditures were low due to the timing of budgeted capital projects.
Cable Access TV Fund (Fund 505)
The Cable Access TV Fund accounts for revenue received from cable franchise fees, video production and broadcast charges, and Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) access fees. PEG access fees are designated for equipment purchases. Transfers from the General Fund also help support the operating costs. For the first quarter, revenues were $10,696, 2% of the budget. Expenditures totaled $149,038, 23% of the budget. The General Fund transfer (operating subsidy) will be processed at year-end based on need.
City Street Improvement Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 1,685,283 $ 1,685,283 $ 1,685,283 $ 216 0% $ 1,685,283 Expenditures 2,907,583 2,907,583 2,907,583 372,338 13% 2,907,583 Net surplus/deficit (1,222,300) (1,222,300) - (1,222,300) $ (372,122) (1,222,300) Beginning Fund Balance 2,377,545 2,377,545 2,377,545 2,377,545 Ending Fund Balance $ 1,155,245 $ 1,155,245 $ 1,155,245 $ 1,155,245 Arterial Streets Rehabilitation Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ - $ - $ - $ - 0% $ -
Expenditures 560,960 560,960 560,960 - 0% 560,960
Net surplus/deficit (560,960) (560,960) (560,960) $ - (560,960) Beginning Fund Balance 1,253,071 1,253,071 1,253,071 1,253,071 Ending Fund Balance $ 692,111 $ 692,111 $ 692,111 $ 692,111 Sewer Enterprise Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 13,035,506 $ 13,035,506 $ 13,035,506 $ 698,033 5% $ 13,035,506 Expenditures 38,229,096 38,229,096 - 38,229,096 4,592,680 12% 38,229,096 Net surplus/deficit (25,193,590) (25,193,590) - (25,193,590) $ (3,894,647) (25,193,590) Beginning Fund Balance 24,440,176 24,440,176 24,440,176 24,440,176 Ending Fund Balance $ (753,414) $ (753,414) $ (753,414) $ (753,414) Page 87 of 178 FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
Non-General Funds
27 Information Systems Fund (Fund 525)
The Information Systems Fund is an internal service fund used to account for activities that provide technology goods or services to other City funds and departments on a costreimbursement basis. For the first quarter, expenditures totaled $454,007, which will be allocated to other City departments based on actual usage.
Cable Access TV Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Revenues $ 653,088 $ 653,088 $ - $ 653,088 $ 10,696 2% $ 653,088 Expenditures 653,088 653,088 - 653,088 149,038 23% 653,088 Net surplus/deficit 0 0 - 0 $ (138,343) 0
Beginning Fund Balance (682) (682) (682) (682)
Ending Fund Balance $ (682) $ (682) $ (682) $ (682)
Information Technology Fund FY 2025/26
Original
Budget
FY 2025/26
Revised
Budget
Proposed
Adjustments
FY 2025/26
Amended
Budget
FY 2025/26
YTD Actuals
w/ Encumb.
% of Amended
Budget
Projected
Year-End
Expenditures 1,434,778 1,434,778 - 1,434,778 454,007 32% 1,434,778 Indirect Cost Allocations (1,434,779) (1,434,779) - (1,434,779) (314,010) 22% (1,434,779) Net surplus/deficit (0) (0) - (0) 139,997 (0)
Beginning Fund Balance 64,910 64,910 64,910 64,910
Ending Fund Balance $ 64,910 $ 64,910 $ 64,910 $ 64,910 Page 88 of 178 FY 2025/26 First Quarter Financial Report
Financial Summary by Fund
28 Financial Summary by Fund
The First Quarter Financial Summary by Fund (Attachment B) summarizes all City funds’ revenues, expenditures, and estimated beginning and ending fund balances. It includes preliminary year-end financial results.
Projected
Year-End
6,698,790 6,698,790 6,698,790 36,929 36,929 (6,661,861) 1% 6,698,790 4,567,189 4,567,189 4,567,189 639,160 639,160 (3,928,029) 14% 4,567,189 2,599,000 2,599,000 2,599,000 364,083 364,083 (2,234,917) 14% 2,599,000 2,599,000 2,599,000 2,599,000 364,090 364,090 (2,234,910) 14% 2,599,000 2,599,000 2,599,000 2,599,000 327,038 327,038 (2,271,962) 13% 2,599,000 2,345,000 2,345,000 2,345,000 651,239 651,239 (1,693,761) 28% 2,345,000 850,000 850,000 850,000 108,000 108,000 (742,000) 13% 850,000 876,172 876,172 876,172 108,071 108,071 (768,101) 12% 876,172 400,000 400,000 400,000 91,595 91,595 (308,405) 23% 400,000 476,172 476,172 476,172 16,476 16,476 (459,697) 3% 476,172 2,513,149 2,513,149 2,513,149 28,949 28,949 (2,484,200) 1% 2,513,149 - - - - - - 0 -
73,022 73,022 73,022 29,611 29,611 (43,410) 41% 73,022
72,025 72,025 72,025 - - (72,025) 0% 72,025
301,700 301,700 301,700 95,873 95,873 (205,827) 32% 301,700 25,500 25,500 25,500 - - (25,500) 0% 25,500
64,809 64,809 64,809 21,086 21,086 (43,723) 33% 64,809
42,000 42,000 42,000 34,430 34,430 (7,570) 82% 42,000
15,550 15,550 15,550 4,178 4,178 (11,372) 27% 15,550
1,861,497 1,861,497 1,861,497 548,304 548,304 (1,313,193) 29% 1,861,497 100,000 100,000 100,000 7,798 7,798 (92,202) 8% 100,000 81,450 81,450 81,450 22,578 22,578 (58,872) 28% 81,450
11,500 11,500 11,500 22,004 22,004 10,504 191% 11,500
5,100 5,100 5,100 714 714 (4,386) 14% 5,100
1,000 1,000 1,000 - - (1,000) 0% 1,000
28,302,453 28,302,453 - 28,302,453 3,414,135 - 3,414,135 (24,888,317) 12% 28,302,453 3,235,445 3,235,445 - 3,235,445 - - (3,235,445) 0% 3,235,445 - - - - - - - 0% -
31,537,898 31,537,898 - 31,537,898 3,414,135 - 3,414,135 (28,123,762) 11% 31,537,898 252,450 252,450 252,450 48,531 48,531 203,919 19% 252,450 535,563 535,563 535,563 187,421 187,421 348,142 35% 535,563 733,895 733,895 733,895 211,467 211,467 522,428 29% 733,895 9,990 9,990 9,990 2,194 2,194 7,796 22% 9,990
305,965 305,965 305,965 135,623 135,623 170,342 44% 305,965 598,565 598,565 598,565 173,565 173,565 425,000 29% 598,565 (292,600) (292,600) (292,600) (37,942) (37,942) (254,658) 13% (292,600) 1,020,844 1,020,844 1,020,844 288,787 288,787 732,058 28% 1,020,844 965,908 965,908 965,908 278,253 278,253 687,655 29% 965,908 1,298,551 1,298,551 1,298,551 494,001 494,001 804,550 38% 1,298,551 5,123,167 5,123,167 - 5,123,167 1,646,278 - 1,646,278 3,476,889 32% 5,123,167 5,823,820 5,823,820 5,823,820 1,417,132 1,417,132 4,406,688 24% 5,823,820 1,468,835 1,468,835 1,468,835 434,801 434,801 1,034,034 30% 1,468,835 2,740,771 2,740,771 2,740,771 735,794 735,794 2,004,977 27% 2,740,771 3,202,461 3,202,461 3,202,461 739,597 739,597 2,462,864 23% 3,202,461 13,235,887 13,235,887 - 13,235,887 3,327,324 - 3,327,324 9,908,563 25% 13,235,887 402,553 402,553 402,553 134,326 4,500 138,826 263,727 34% 402,553 30,000 30,000 30,000 18,976 2,888 21,864 8,136 73% 30,000 715,330 715,330 715,330 247,526 247,526 467,804 35% 715,330 - - - - - - 0% -
1,147,883 1,147,883 - 1,147,883 400,829 7,388 408,216 739,667 36% 1,147,883 12,387 12,387 12,387 2,973 2,973 9,414 24% 12,387
418,050 418,050 418,050 88,065 88,065 329,985 21% 418,050 159,705 159,705 159,705 15,788 6,239 22,027 137,678 14% 159,705 590,142 590,142 - 590,142 106,826 6,239 113,065 477,077 19% 590,142 3,500 3,500 3,500 290 290 3,210 8% 3,500
202,430 202,430 202,430 - - 202,430 0% 202,430
226,437 226,437 226,437 - - 226,437 0% 226,437
432,367 432,367 - 432,367 290 - 290 432,077 0% 432,367
653,545 653,545 653,545 650,981 650,981 2,564 100% 653,545 2,592,907 2,592,907 2,592,907 - - 2,592,907 0% 2,592,907 23,775,898 23,775,898 - 23,775,898 6,132,527 13,626 6,146,153 (17,629,745) 26% 23,775,898 Operating Transfer Out:
Expenditure Total:
Division: 461- Planning Total:
Division: 465- Code Enforcement Total:
Division: 466- Economic Development Total:
Community Development Total:
Division: 551- Recreation Administration Total:
Division: 560- Library Services Total:
Division: 561 Animal Control Services Total:
Community Services Total:
Debt Service:
Division: 222- Police Support Services Total:
Division: 223- Dispatch WBCC Total:
Division: 231- Fire Total:
Total Public Safety:
Division: 341- Administration/Engineering Total:
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Division: 343- Facility Maintenance Total:
Division: 345- Park Maintenance Total:
Public Works Total:
Division: 113- City Treasurer Total:
Division: 114- City Attorney Total:
City Attorney Services
City Attorney Indirect Cost Allocations
Division: 115- Finance Department Total:
Division: 116- Human Resources Total:
Division: 117- General Government Total:
Total Administrative:
Division: 221- Police Operations Total:
Revenue Total:
399- Pension Trust 115 Transfer
399-General Reserve Transfer
Sources Total:
Fund: 100- General Fund
Expenditures
Division: 110- City Council Total:
Division: 111- City Manager Total:
Division: 112- City Clerk Total:
342- Other Fees
343- Abatement Fees
351- Fines and Forfeiture
361- Public Safety Charges
370- Interest and Investment Income
381- Rental Income
383- Reimbursements
384- Other Revenue
392- Proceeds from Sale of Property
315- Other Taxes
Other Tax/Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)
Other Tax/Business License
321- Intergovernmental Taxes
322-Federal Grants
323- State Grants
324- Other Grants
332- Permits
341- Review Fees
General Fund (including Measure S 2006, Measure S 2014, and Measure I 2024)
Revenue
311- Property Taxes
312- Sales and Use Taxes
312- Sales and Use Taxes-Meas S 2006
312- Sales and Use Taxes-Meas S 2014
312- Sales and Use Taxes-Meas I 2024
313- Utility Users Tax (UUT)
314- Franchise Taxes
First Quarter Financial Summary by Fund
City of Pinole, CA For FY2025/26 Period Ending: 9/30/25 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget
Proposed
Adjustments Amended Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances Total Percent
Used
Projected
Year-End
First Quarter Financial Summary by Fund
City of Pinole, CA For FY2025/26 Period Ending: 9/30/25 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget
Proposed
Adjustments Amended Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances Total Percent
Used
2,450 2,450 2,450 - - 2,450 0% 2,450
845,720 845,720 845,720 318,100 318,100 527,620 38% 845,720 1,772,580 1,772,580 1,772,580 459,018 459,018 1,313,562 26% 1,772,580 350,000 350,000 350,000 - - 350,000 0% 350,000
- - - - - - 0% -
2,970,750 2,970,750 - 2,970,750 777,118 - 777,118 2,193,632 26% 2,970,750 - - - - - - 0% -
2,450 2,450 2,450 - - 2,450 0% 2,450
- - - - - - 0% -
2,450 2,450 - 2,450 - - - 2,450 0% 2,450
- - - - - - 0% -
127,055 127,055 127,055 12,895 12,895 114,160 10% 127,055 1,767,924 1,767,924 1,767,924 457,812 457,812 1,310,112 26% 1,767,924 1,894,979 1,894,979 - 1,894,979 470,708 - 470,708 1,424,271 25% 1,894,979 219,653 219,653 219,653 24,652 6,811 31,463 188,190 14% 219,653 198,858 198,858 198,858 25,660 21,065 46,725 152,133 23% 198,858 174,260 174,260 174,260 28,231 28,231 146,029 16% 174,260 543,937 543,937 543,937 28,720 27,949 56,669 487,268 10% 543,937 110,000 110,000 110,000 - - 110,000 0% 110,000
1,246,708 1,246,708 - 1,246,708 107,263 55,825 163,088 1,083,620 13% 1,246,708 20,000 20,000 20,000 1,995 1,995 18,005 10% 20,000
20,000 20,000 - 20,000 1,995 - 1,995 18,005 10% 20,000
- - - - - - 0% -
15,300 15,300 15,300 718 718 14,582 5% 15,300
- - - - - - 0% -
15,300 15,300 - 15,300 718 - 718 14,582 5% 15,300
3,179,437 3,179,437 - 3,179,437 580,684 55,825 636,509 2,542,928 20% 3,179,437 283,500 283,500 - 283,500 - - 283,500 0% 283,500
3,462,937 3,462,937 - 3,462,937 580,684 55,825 636,509 2,826,428 18% 3,462,937 1,752,454 1,752,454 1,752,454 466,357 466,357 1,286,097 27% 1,752,454 182,752 182,752 182,752 25,543 25,543 157,209 14% 182,752 356,256 356,256 356,256 98,085 98,085 258,171 28% 356,256 300,000 300,000 300,000 - - 300,000 0% 300,000
2,591,462 2,591,462 - 2,591,462 589,986 - 589,986 2,001,476 23% 2,591,462 32,801,047 32,801,047 - 32,801,047 8,080,314 69,451 8,149,765 24,651,281 25% 32,801,047 (1,263,149) (1,263,149) - (1,263,149) (4,666,179) (69,451) (4,735,630) 3,472,481 375% (1,263,149) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 5,746,650 5,746,650 5,746,650 5,746,650 5,746,650 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 4,483,501 4,483,501 4,483,501 1,080,471 4,483,501 300,000 300,000 300,000 97,622 97,622 (202,378) 33% 300,000 300,000 300,000 - 300,000 97,622 - 97,622 (202,378) 33% 300,000 2,400,000 2,400,000 2,400,000 - - (2,400,000) 0% 2,400,000 (2,100,000) (2,100,000) - (2,100,000) 97,622 97,622 2,197,622 -5% (2,100,000) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 9,907,357 9,907,357 9,907,357 9,907,357 9,907,357 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 7,807,357 7,807,357 7,807,357 10,004,979 7,807,357 Fund: 150 - General Reserve
370- Interest and Investment Income
Revenue Total:
499- Transfer Out Total:
General Reserve Net Results:
Fund: 107 - Measure I
Expenditures
Division: 221- Police Operations Total:
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Division: 345- Park Maintenance Total:
Operating Transfer Out:
Expenditures Total:
General Fund Measure S and Measure I Expenditure Total:
General Fund and Measure S Net Results:
Community Development Total:
Division: 551- Recreation Admin Total:
Division: 553- Tiny Tots Total:
Division: 554- Youth Center Total:
Community Services Total:
Sub-Total:
Operating Transfer Out:
Expenditure Total:
Division: 231- Fire Total:
Total Public Safety:
Division: 341- Admin/Engineering Total:
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Division: 343- Facility Maintenance Total:
Division: 344- NPDES Storm Drain Total:
Division: 345- Park Maintenance Total:
Public Works Total:
Division: 466- Economic Development Total:
Expenditures Total:
Fund: 106 - Measure S-2014
Expenditures
Division: 110- City Council Total:
Division: 115- Finance Department Total:
Division: 118- Information Systems Total:
Total Administrative:
Division: 221- Police Operations Total:
Division: 222- Police Support Services Total:
Fund: 105 - Measure S -2006
Expenditures
Division: 115- Finance Department Total:
Division: 221- Police Operations Total:
Division: 231- Fire Total:
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Division: 343- Facility Maintenance Total:
Projected
Year-End
First Quarter Financial Summary by Fund
City of Pinole, CA For FY2025/26 Period Ending: 9/30/25 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget
Proposed
Adjustments Amended Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances Total Percent
Used
- - - - - - 0% -
- - - - - - - - 0% -
150,000 150,000 150,000 - - (150,000) 0% 150,000
150,000 150,000 - 150,000 - - - (150,000) 0% 150,000
- - - - - - 0% -
120,000 120,000 120,000 - - 120,000 0% 120,000
80,000 80,000 80,000 - - 80,000 0% 80,000
5,000 5,000 5,000 - - 5,000 0% 5,000
- - - - - - 0% -
- - - - - - 0% -
205,000 205,000 - 205,000 - - - 205,000 0% 205,000
(55,000) (55,000) (55,000) - - - 55,000 0% (55,000)
Fund Balance July 1, 2025 229,348 229,348 229,348 229,348 229,348 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 174,348 174,348 174,348 229,348 174,348 1,055,938 1,055,938 1,055,938 232,680 232,680 (823,258) 22% 1,055,938 5,000 5,000 5,000 7,237 7,237 2,237 145% 5,000
7,636 7,636 7,636 - - (7,636) 0% 7,636
1,068,574 1,068,574 - 1,068,574 239,916 - 239,916 828,658 22% 1,068,574 - - - - - - 0% -
2,512,167 2,512,167 2,512,167 95,484 95,484 2,416,683 4% 2,512,167 2,512,167 2,512,167 - 2,512,167 95,484 - 95,484 2,416,683 4% 2,512,167 (1,443,593) (1,443,593) (1,443,593) 144,432 - 144,432 1,588,025 -10% (1,443,593) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 2,175,570 2,175,570 2,175,570 2,175,570 2,175,570 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 731,977 731,977 731,977 2,320,002 731,977 3,175 3,175 3,175 - - (3,175) 0% 3,175
36,816 36,816 36,816 - - (36,816) 0% 36,816
- - - - - - 0% -
39,991 39,991 - 39,991 - - - 39,991 0% 39,991
26,000 26,000 26,000 2,526 2,526 23,474 10% 26,000
26,000 26,000 - 26,000 2,526 - 2,526 23,474 10% 26,000
13,991 13,991 13,991 (2,526) (2,526) (16,517) -18% 13,991 Fund Balance July 1, 2025 116,210 116,210 116,210 116,210 116,210 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 130,201 130,201 130,201 113,684 130,201 239,584 239,584 239,584 55,499 55,499 (184,085) 23% 239,584 10,000 10,000 10,000 273 273 (9,727) 3% 10,000
249,584 249,584 - 249,584 55,773 - 55,773 (193,811) 22% 249,584 613,388 613,388 613,388 161,876 161,876 451,512 26% 613,388 613,388 613,388 - 613,388 161,876 - 161,876 451,512 26% 613,388 (363,804) (363,804) (363,804) (106,103) (106,103) 257,701 29% (363,804) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 136,597 136,597 136,597 136,597 136,597 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 (227,207) (227,207) (227,207) 30,494 (227,207) 20,500 20,500 20,500 4,722 4,722 (15,778) 23% 20,500
4,000 4,000 4,000 1,047 1,047 (2,953) 26% 4,000
- - - - - - 0% -
24,500 24,500 - 24,500 5,770 - 5,770 (18,730) 24% 24,500 22,191 22,191 22,191 3,374 3,374 18,817 15% 22,191
35,000 35,000 35,000 - - 35,000 0% 35,000
57,191 57,191 - 57,191 3,374 - 3,374 53,817 6% 57,191
(32,691) (32,691) (32,691) 2,396 2,396 35,087 -7% (32,691) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 308,427 308,427 308,427 308,427 308,427 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 275,736 275,736 275,736 310,822 275,736 370- Interest and Investment Income
384- Other Revenue
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Division: 227- Police Grants Total:
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Expenditures Total:
Traffic Safety Fund Net Results:
Public Safety Augmentation Fund Net Results:
Fund: 205 - Traffic Safety Fund
351- Fines and Forfeitures
Expenditures Total:
Restricted Real Estate Maint Fund Net Results:
Fund: 203 - Public Safety Augmentation Fund
321- Intergovernmental Taxes
370- Interest and Investment Income
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Division: 221- Police Operations Total:
Expenditures Total:
Expenditures Total:
Gas Tax Fund Net Results:
Fund: 201 - Restricted Real Estate Maintenance Fund
342- Other Fees
381- Rental Income
384- Other Revenue
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Division: 343- Facility Maintenance Total:
Equipment Reserve Net Results:
Fund: 200 - Gas Tax Fund
321- Intergovernmental Taxes
370- Interest and Investment Income
383- Reimbursements
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Division: 341- Admin and Engineering Total:
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Sources Total:
Expenditures
Division: 341- Admin and Engineering Total:
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Division: 345- Park Maintenance Total:
Division: 461- Planning Total:
Division: 462- Building Total:
Division: 551- Recreation Admin Total:
Expenditures Total:
Fund: 160 - Equipment Reserve
392- Sale of Property
Revenue Total:
399- Transfers In Total:
Projected
Year-End
First Quarter Financial Summary by Fund
City of Pinole, CA For FY2025/26 Period Ending: 9/30/25 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget
Proposed
Adjustments Amended Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances Total Percent
Used
180,000 180,000 180,000 29,190 29,190 (150,810) 16% 180,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 824 824 (4,176) 16% 5,000
185,000 185,000 - 185,000 30,014 - 30,014 (154,986) 16% 185,000 303,281 303,281 303,281 57,702 57,702 245,579 19% 303,281 303,281 303,281 - 303,281 57,702 - 57,702 245,579 19% 303,281 (118,281) (118,281) (118,281) (27,688) - (27,688) 90,593 23% (118,281) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 259,977 259,977 259,977 259,977 259,977 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 141,696 141,696 141,696 232,289 141,696 253,272 253,272 253,272 - - (253,272) 0% 253,272
- - - - - - 0% -
- - - - - - 0% -
- - - - - - 0% -
253,272 253,272 - 253,272 - - - (253,272) 0% 253,272
8,081 8,081 8,081 1,970 1,970 6,111 24% 8,081
377,550 377,550 377,550 87,388 87,388 290,162 23% 377,550 385,631 385,631 - 385,631 89,358 - 89,358 296,273 23% 385,631 (132,359) (132,359) (132,359) (89,358) (89,358) 43,001 68% (132,359) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 (333,734) (333,734) (333,734) (333,734) (333,734) Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 (466,093) (466,093) (466,093) (423,092) (466,093) 94,463 94,463 94,463 2,362 2,362 (92,101) 3% 94,463
241,100 241,100 241,100 27,257 27,257 (213,843) 11% 241,100 110,500 110,500 110,500 12,310 12,310 (98,190) 11% 110,500 44,500 44,500 44,500 14,423 14,423 (30,077) 32% 44,500
- - - - - - 0% -
83,000 83,000 83,000 22,904 22,904 (60,096) 28% 83,000
- - - - - - 0% -
- - - - - - 0% -
573,563 573,563 - 573,563 79,255 - 79,255 (494,307) 14% 573,563 1,750,050 1,750,050 1,750,050 - - (1,750,050) 0% 1,750,050 2,323,613 2,323,613 - 2,323,613 79,255 - 79,255 (2,244,357) 3% 2,323,613 -
7,500 7,500 7,500 2,063 2,063 5,437 28% 7,500
923,673 923,673 923,673 278,700 278,700 644,973 30% 923,673 565,670 565,670 565,670 143,680 143,680 421,990 25% 565,670 263,367 263,367 263,367 68,965 68,965 194,402 26% 263,367 343,042 343,042 343,042 71,621 71,621 271,421 21% 343,042 220,360 220,360 220,360 92,832 92,832 127,528 42% 220,360 - - - 107 107 (107) 0% -
2,323,613 2,323,613 - 2,323,613 657,969 - 657,969 1,665,644 28% 2,323,613 (0) (0) - (0) (578,714) - (578,714) (578,714) 826733759% (0) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 (18,379) (18,379) (18,379) (18,379) (18,379) Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 (18,379) (18,379) (18,379) (597,093) (18,379) - - - (149,690) (149,690) (149,690) 0% -
442,800 442,800 442,800 - - (442,800) 0% 442,800
- - - 435 435 435 0% -
332- Permits 506,011 506,011 506,011 233,335 233,335 (272,676) 46% 506,011 341- Review Fees 477,355 477,355 477,355 91,944 91,944 (385,411) 19% 477,355 342- Other Fees 375,511 375,511 375,511 110,023 110,023 (265,488) 29% 375,511 - - - - - - 0% -
30,000 30,000 30,000 15,454 15,454 (14,546) 52% 30,000
- - - 3,851 3,851 3,851 0% -
- - - 17,367 17,367 17,367 0% -
4,460 4,460 4,460 - - (4,460) 0% 4,460
1,836,137 1,836,137 - 1,836,137 322,720 - 322,720 (1,513,417) 18% 1,836,137 908,095 908,095 908,095 - - (908,095) 0% 908,095
2,744,232 2,744,232 - 2,744,232 322,720 - 322,720 (2,421,512) 12% 2,744,232 1,264,879 1,264,879 1,264,879 211,785 211,785 1,053,094 17% 1,264,879 1,479,353 1,479,353 1,479,353 328,321 328,321 1,151,032 22% 1,479,353 2,744,232 2,744,232 - 2,744,232 540,106 - 540,106 2,204,126 20% 2,744,232 (0) (0) - (0) (217,387) - (217,387) (217,386) 57207018% (0) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 (2,545,963) (2,545,963) (2,545,963) 115,802 (2,545,963) Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 (2,545,964) (2,545,964) (2,545,964) (101,585) (2,545,964) Expenditures
Division: 461- Planning Total:
Division: 462- Building Inspection Total:
Expenditures Total:
Building & Planning Net Results:
324- Other Grants
344- Impact Fees
351- Fines and Forfeiture
370- Interest and Investment Income
383- Reimbursements
384- Other Revenue
Revenue Total:
Operating Transfers In:
Sources Total
Division: 557- Swim Center Total:
Division: 559- Tennis Total:
Expenditures Total:
Recreation Fund Net Results:
Fund: 212 - Building & Planning
322- Federal Grants
323- State Grants
Revenue Total:
Operating Transfers in:
Sources Total
Expenditures
Division: 117- General Government Total:
Division: 551- Recreation Administration Total:
Division: 552- Senior Center Total:
Division: 553- Tiny Tots Total:
Division: 554- Youth Center Total:
Fund: 209 - Recreation Fund
Division: 551- Recreation Administration
Division: 552- Senior Center
Division: 553- Tiny Tots
Division: 554- Youth Center
Division: 555- Day Camp
Division: 557- Swim Center
Division: 558- Memorial Hall
Division: 559- Tennis
332- Licenses and Permits
370- Interest and Investment Income
399- Operating Transfer In
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Division: 344- NPDES Storm Drain Total:
Expenditures Total:
NPDES Storm Water Fund Net Results:
323- State Grants
370- Interest and Investment Income
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Division: 227- Police Grants Total:
Expenditures Total:
Sup Law Enforce Svc Fund Net Results:
Fund: 207 - NPDES Storm Water Fund
321- Intergovernmental Taxes
Fund: 206 - Supplemental Law Enforcement Svc Fund
Projected
Year-End
First Quarter Financial Summary by Fund
City of Pinole, CA For FY2025/26 Period Ending: 9/30/25 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget
Proposed
Adjustments Amended Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances Total Percent
Used
60,060 60,060 60,060 15,247 15,247 (44,813) 25% 60,060
6,000 6,000 6,000 - - (6,000) 0% 6,000
66,060 66,060 - 66,060 15,247 - 15,247 (50,813) 23% 66,060 -
189,710 189,710 189,710 36,803 36,803 152,907 19% 189,710 189,710 189,710 - 189,710 36,803 - 36,803 152,907 19% 189,710 (123,650) (123,650) - (123,650) (21,556) (21,556) 102,094 17% (123,650) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 (33,476) (33,476) (33,476) (33,476) (33,476) Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 (157,126) (157,126) (157,126) (55,032) (157,126) - - - 361,851 361,851 361,851 0% -
8,000 8,000 8,000 11,101 11,101 3,101 139% 8,000
360,000 360,000 360,000 55,000 55,000 (305,000) 15% 360,000 368,000 368,000 - 368,000 427,952 - 427,952 59,952 116% 368,000 -
- - - 5,851 5,851 (5,851) 0% -
177,241 177,241 177,241 19,603 19,603 157,638 11% 177,241 - - - 1,859 1,859 (1,859) 0% -
177,241 177,241 - 177,241 27,312 - 27,312 149,929 15% 177,241 190,759 190,759 - 190,759 400,640 - 400,640 209,881 210% 190,759 Fund Balance July 1, 2025 3,306,893 3,306,893 3,306,893 3,306,893 3,306,893 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 3,497,652 3,497,652 3,497,652 3,707,533 3,497,652 - - - - - - 0% -
967,619 967,619 967,619 - - (967,619) 0% 967,619
421,638 421,638 421,638 - - (421,638) 0% 421,638
8,000 8,000 8,000 8,345 8,345 345 104% 8,000
1,397,257 1,397,257 - 1,397,257 8,345 - 8,345 (1,388,912) 1% 1,397,257 - - - - - - 0% -
196,123 196,123 196,123 36,623 36,623 159,500 19% 196,123 993,609 993,609 993,609 65,315 15,000 80,315 913,294 8% 993,609 2,000 2,000 2,000 - - 2,000 0% 2,000
1,191,732 1,191,732 - 1,191,732 101,939 15,000 116,939 1,074,793 10% 1,191,732 205,525 205,525 - 205,525 (93,594) (15,000) (108,594) (314,119) -53% 205,525 Fund Balance July 1, 2025 2,777,422 2,777,422 2,777,422 2,777,422 2,777,422 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 2,982,947 2,982,947 2,982,947 2,683,828 2,982,947 - - - 779 779 779 0% -
- - - - - - 0% -
- - - - 779 - 779 779 0% -
- - - - - - 0% -
- - - 779 779 779 0% -
Fund Balance July 1, 2025 227,215 227,215 227,215 227,215 227,215 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 227,215 227,215 227,215 227,993 227,215 - - - - - - 0% -
- - - 72 72 72 0% -
- - - - 72 - 72 72 0% -
19,268 19,268 19,268 - - 19,268 0% 19,268
19,268 19,268 - 19,268 - - - 19,268 0% 19,268
(19,268) (19,268) - (19,268) 72 72 19,340 0% (19,268)
Fund Balance July 1, 2025 20,255 20,255 20,255 20,255 20,255 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 987 987 987 20,327 987 Expenditures
Division: 221- Police Operations Total:
Expenditures Total:
Asset Seizure-Adjudicated Fund Net Results:
Fund: 225 - Asset Seizure-Adjudicated Fund
351- Fines and Forfeiture
370- Interest and Investment Income
Revenue Total:
Measure C and J Fund Net Results:
Fund: 216 - Rate Stabilization Fund
370- Interest and Investment Income
383- Reimbursements
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
Rate Stabilization Fund Net Results:
324- Other Grants
370- Interest and Investment Income
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Division: 117- General Government Total:
Division: 341- Administration/Engineering Total:
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Division: 343- Facility Maintenance Total:
Expenditures Total:
Expenditures
Division: 341- Administration/Engineering Total:
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Division: 346- Waste Reduction Total:
Expenditures Total:
Solid Waste Fund Net Results:
Fund: 215 - Measure C and J Fund
322- Fed Grant/Misc
323- State Grant/Misc
Expenditures
Division: 346- Waste Reduction Total:
Expenditures Total:
Refuse Management Fund Net Results:
Fund: 214 - Solid Waste Fund
344- Impact Fees
370- Interest and Investment Income
383- Reimbursements
Revenue Total:
Fund: 213 - Refuse Management Fund
323- State Grants
370- Interest and Investment Income
Revenue Total:
Projected
Year-End
First Quarter Financial Summary by Fund
City of Pinole, CA For FY2025/26 Period Ending: 9/30/25 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget
Proposed
Adjustments Amended Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances Total Percent
Used
- - - 556 556 556 0% -
- - - - 556 - 556 556 0% -
- - - - - 0% -
- - - - 556 556 556 0% -
- - -
Fund Balance July 1, 2025 56,831 56,831 56,831 56,831 56,831 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 56,831 56,831 56,831 57,387 56,831 - - - - - - 0% -
- - - 11,912 11,912 11,912 0% -
- - - - 11,912 - 11,912 11,912 0% -
100,000 100,000 100,000 - - 100,000 0% 100,000
1,236,000 1,236,000 1,236,000 9,391 9,391 1,226,609 1% 1,236,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 - - 1,100,000 0% 1,100,000 - - - - - - 0% -
2,436,000 2,436,000 - 2,436,000 9,391 - 9,391 2,426,609 0% 2,436,000 (2,436,000) (2,436,000) - (2,436,000) 2,521 - 2,521 2,438,521 0% (2,436,000) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 3,462,185 3,462,185 3,462,185 3,462,185 3,462,185 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 1,026,185 1,026,185 1,026,185 3,464,705 1,026,185 50,000 50,000 50,000 12,031 12,031 (37,969) 24% 50,000
- - - - - - 0 -
- - - 356 356 356 0% -
- - - - - - 0% -
5,000 5,000 5,000 - - (5,000) 0% 5,000
55,000 55,000 - 55,000 12,387 - 12,387 (42,613) 23% 55,000 57,693 57,693 57,693 14,574 14,574 43,119 25% 57,693
285,268 285,268 285,268 15,544 15,544 269,724 5% 285,268 342,961 342,961 - 342,961 30,118 - 30,118 312,843 9% 342,961 (287,961) (287,961) - (287,961) (17,731) (17,731) 270,230 6% (287,961) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 8,251,071 8,251,071 8,251,071 8,251,071 8,251,071 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 7,963,110 7,963,110 7,963,110 8,233,340 7,963,110 56,411 56,411 56,411 - - (56,411) 0% 56,411
7,500 7,500 7,500 - - (7,500) 0% 7,500
63,911 63,911 - 63,911 - - - (63,911) 0% 63,911
39,795 39,795 39,795 3,362 3,362 36,433 8% 39,795
45,380 45,380 45,380 1,174 1,174 44,206 3% 45,380
85,175 85,175 - 85,175 4,536 - 4,536 80,639 5% 85,175
(21,264) (21,264) - (21,264) (4,536) (4,536) 16,728 21% (21,264) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 99,053 99,053 99,053 99,053 99,053 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 77,789 77,789 77,789 94,517 77,789 15,000 15,000 15,000 - - (15,000) 0% 15,000
15,000 15,000 - 15,000 - - - (15,000) 0% 15,000
14,989 14,989 14,989 - - 14,989 0% 14,989
14,989 14,989 - 14,989 - - - 14,989 0% 14,989
11 11 - 11 - - (11) 0% 11
Fund Balance July 1, 2025 (983) (983) (983) (983) (983) Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 (972) (972) (972) (983) (972) Division: 345- Park Maintenance Total:
Expenditures Total:
Pinole Valley Caretaker Fund Net Results:
Lighting & Landscape Districts Net Results:
Fund: 317 - Pinole Valley Caretaker Fund
381- Rental Income
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Housing Land Held for Resale Net Results:
Fund: 310 - Lighting & Landscape Districts
321- Intergovernmental Taxes
383- Reimbursements
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Division: 347- Landscape & Lighting PVR North Total:
Division: 348- Landscape & Lighting PVR South Total:
Expenditures Total:
383- Reimbursements
384- Other Revenue
392- Sale of Property
393- Loan/Bond Proceeds
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Division: 461- Planning Total:
Division: 464- Housing Administration Total:
Expenditures Total:
Division: 642- Sewer Collections Total:
Expenditures Total:
Growth Impact Fund Net Results:
Fund: 285 - Housing Land Held for Resale
370- Interest and Investment Income
Fund: 276 - Growth Impact Fund
344- Impact Fees
370- Interest and Investment Income
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Division: 343- Facility Maintenance Total:
Division: 345- Park Maintenance Total:
Fund: 226 - CASp Certification and Training Fund
342- Other Fees
Revenue Total:
Expenditures Total:
CASp Certification and Training Fund Net Results:
Projected
Year-End
First Quarter Financial Summary by Fund
City of Pinole, CA For FY2025/26 Period Ending: 9/30/25 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget
Proposed
Adjustments Amended Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances Total Percent
Used
502,000 502,000 502,000 32 32 501,969 0% 502,000
- - - - - - 0% -
502,000 502,000 - 502,000 32 - 32 501,969 0% 502,000
(502,000) (502,000) - (502,000) (32) (32) 70,000 0% (502,000) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 541,649 541,649 541,649 541,649 541,649 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 39,649 39,649 39,649 541,618 39,649 41,394 41,394 41,394 - - (41,394) 0% 41,394
- - - - - - 0% -
1,643,889 1,643,889 1,643,889 - - (1,643,889) 0% 1,643,889 - - - 216 216 216 0% -
- - - - - - 0% -
1,685,283 1,685,283 - 1,685,283 216 - 216 (1,685,067) 0% 1,685,283 - - - - - - 0% -
1,685,283 1,685,283 - 1,685,283 216 216 (1,685,067) 0% 1,685,283 2,907,583 2,907,583 2,907,583 31 372,306 372,338 2,535,245 13% 2,907,583 2,907,583 2,907,583 - 2,907,583 31 372,306 372,338 2,535,245 13% 2,907,583 (1,222,300) (1,222,300) - (1,222,300) 185 (372,306) (372,122) 850,178 30% (1,222,300) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 2,377,545 2,377,545 2,377,545 2,377,545 2,377,545 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 1,155,245 1,155,245 1,155,245 2,377,730 1,155,245 - - - - - - 0% -
- - - - - - - - 0% -
- - - - - - 0% -
- - - - - - - - 0% -
560,960 560,960 560,960 - - 560,960 0% 560,960
560,960 560,960 - 560,960 - - - 560,960 0% 560,960
(560,960) (560,960) - (560,960) - - - 560,960 0% (560,960) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 1,253,071 1,253,071 1,253,071 1,253,071 1,253,071 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 692,111 692,111 692,111 1,253,071 692,111 12,735,506 12,735,506 12,735,506 629,774 629,774 (12,105,732) 5% 12,735,506 300,000 300,000 300,000 68,260 68,260 (231,740) 23% 300,000 - - - - - - 0% -
- - - - - - 0% -
- - - - - - 0% -
13,035,506 13,035,506 - 13,035,506 698,033 - 698,033 (12,337,473) 5% 13,035,506 - - - 4,547 4,547 (4,547) 0% -
12,349,900 12,349,900 12,349,900 1,215,551 120,148 1,335,698 11,014,202 11% 12,349,900 24,183,004 24,183,004 24,183,004 1,443,374 1,359,314 2,802,688 21,380,316 12% 24,183,004 85,000 85,000 85,000 - - 85,000 0% 85,000
1,611,192 1,611,192 1,611,192 449,747 449,747 1,161,445 28% 1,611,192 38,229,096 38,229,096 - 38,229,096 3,113,219 1,479,461 4,592,680 33,636,416 12% 38,229,096 (25,193,590) (25,193,590) - (25,193,590) (2,415,186) (1,479,461) (3,894,647) 21,298,943 15% (25,193,590) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 24,440,176 24,440,176 24,440,176 24,440,176 24,440,176 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 (753,414) (753,414) (753,414) 22,024,991 (753,414) Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Division: 117- General Government Total:
Division: 641- Sewer Treatment Plant/Shared Total:
Division: 642- Sewer Collections Total:
Division: 643- Sewer Projects/Shared Total:
Division: 644- WPCP Equipment/Debt Service Total:
Expenditures Total:
Sewer Enterprise Fund Net Results:
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Expenditures Total:
Arterial Streets Rehabilitation Fund Net Results:
Fund: 500 - Sewer Enterprise Fund
363- Sewer Enterprise Charges
370- Interest and Investment Income
383- Reimbursements
384- Other Revenue
392- Proceeds from Sale of Property
Fund: 377 - Arterial Streets Rehabilitation Fund
322- Federal Grants
Revenue Total:
Operating transfers in Total:
Sources Total:
Expenditures
Expenditures
Division: 342- Road Maintenance Total:
Expenditures Total:
City Street Improvements Net Results:
Fund: 325 - City Street Improvements
322- Federal Grants
323- State Grants
324- Other Grants
332- Permits
383- Reimbursements
Revenue Total:
Operating transfers in Total:
Sources Total:
Fund: 324 - Public Facilities Fund
Expenditures
Division: 343- Facility Maintenance Total:
Division: 345- Park Maintenance Total:
Expenditures Total:
Public Facilities Fund Net Results:
Projected
Year-End
First Quarter Financial Summary by Fund
City of Pinole, CA For FY2025/26 Period Ending: 9/30/25 Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Original
Budget Revised Budget
Proposed
Adjustments Amended Budget YTD Actual Encumbrances Total Percent
Used
26,486 26,486 26,486 3,028 3,028 (23,458) 11% 26,486
159,840 159,840 159,840 7,668 7,668 (152,172) 5% 159,840 9,000 9,000 9,000 - - (9,000) 0% 9,000
90,500 90,500 90,500 - - (90,500) 0% 90,500
285,826 285,826 - 285,826 10,696 - 10,696 (275,130) 4% 285,826 367,262 367,262 367,262 - - (367,262) 0% 367,262
653,088 653,088 - 653,088 10,696 - 10,696 (642,392) 2% 653,088 -
653,088 653,088 653,088 149,038 149,038 504,049 23% 653,088 653,088 653,088 - 653,088 149,038 - 149,038 504,049 23% 653,088 0 0 - 0 (138,343) - (138,343) (138,343) -69171325% 0
Fund Balance July 1, 2025 (682) (682) (682) (682) (682) Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 (682) (682) (682) (139,025) (682) - - - - - - - 0% -
- - - - - - - - 0% -
1,434,778 1,434,778 1,434,778 314,010 139,997 454,007 980,772 32% 1,434,778 1,434,778 1,434,778 - 1,434,778 314,010 139,997 454,007 (980,772) 32% 1,434,778 (1,434,779) (1,434,779) (1,434,779) (314,010) (314,010) 1,120,769 22% (1,434,779) (0) (0) - (0) 0 139,997 139,997 139,997 -199995857% (0) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 64,910 64,910 64,910 64,910 64,910 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 64,910 64,910 64,910 64,910 64,910 600,000 600,000 600,000 521,282 521,282 (78,718) 87% 600,000 399- Transfer In Total: 2,400,000 2,400,000 2,400,000 - 2,400,000 0% 2,400,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 - 3,000,000 521,282 - 521,282 (2,478,718) 17% 3,000,000 65,000 65,000 65,000 16,107 16,107 48,893 25% 65,000
3,235,445 3,235,445 3,235,445 - - 3,235,445 0% 3,235,445 3,300,445 3,300,445 - 3,300,445 16,107 16,107 (3,284,338) 0% 3,300,445 (300,445) (300,445) - (300,445) 505,175 505,175 805,620 -168% (300,445) Fund Balance July 1, 2025 12,442,949 12,442,949 12,442,949 12,442,949 12,442,949 Estimated Fund Balance June 30, 2026 12,142,504 12,142,504 12,142,504 12,948,125 12,142,504 Expenditures Total:
Pension Fund Net Results:
Expenditures Total:
Indirect cost allocations Total:
Information Systems Net Results:
Fund: 700 - Pension Fund
370- Interest and Investment Income
Revenue Total:
Expenditures
Division: 115- Finance Total:
Transfers Out Total:
Expenditures Total:
Cable Access TV Net Results:
Fund: 525 - Information Systems
393- Debt Proceeds
Sources Total:
Expenditures
Division: 118- Information Systems Total:
314- Franchise Taxes
365- Cable TV Charges
366- Other Charges
384- Other Revenue
Revenue Total:
Operating transfers in Total:
Sources Total
Expenditures
Division: 119- Cable Access TV Total:
Fund: 505 - Cable Access TV
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.D.
DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 2025
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Markisha Guillory, Finance Director, 510-724-9823, [email protected] SUBJECT: FY 2025/26 FIRST QUARTER INVESTMENT REPORT
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommend that the City Council receive the Quarterly Investment Report for the first quarter (ending September 30, 2025).
BACKGROUND
The City of Pinole Investment Policy requires that a Quarterly Investment Report be submitted to the City Council. The City’s investments, as shown in the attached Investment Report for the quarter ending September 30, 2025, conform to the City’s Investment Policy as well as all applicable State and federal requirements, including California Government Code Section 53646.
The funds that the City invests, and which are reported in the Quarterly Investment Report, are comprised of cash and investment balances that are held across all City funds. The cash and investment balances across all City funds are “pooled” for investment purposes, with the exception of the assets of the General Reserve, which is discussed further below. Cash is invested in accordance with the City’s Investment Policy. Interest earnings on investments are allocated to the various funds based on the cash and investment balances of those funds.
The City also maintains a Section 115 Pension Trust that was established for the purpose of setting aside resources to offset anticipated increases in future City pension costs. The cash and investments in the trust are designated as restricted fund balance in the City’s General Fund. These funds are invested according to the policy objectives and guidelines of the City’s Pension Investment Policy.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
Investment Policy
All investments held at September 30, 2025 conform to the City’s Investment Policy and all applicable State and federal requirements. The City’s investment objectives, in order of priority, are safety, which is investing in the highest quality securities; liquidity, which is the ability to convert the investment to cash as necessary to meet cash flow requirements; and yield, which is earning a higher return.
Investment Strategy
The City utilizes a passive investment management approach by buying and holding securities until maturity. Earnings on investments held until maturity typically fluctuate with market conditions and are considered “unrealized” prior to maturity. The City expects to yield a gain on all investments at maturity. A “laddered maturity” investment strategy is applied to the longterm portion of the City’s investment portfolio. A laddered portfolio is structured with securities that have different maturity dates. As securities are called or mature, proceeds are reinvested in a new security with another long term at the end of the ladder. Laddering helps to minimize interest-rate risk, increase liquidity, and diversify credit risk.
Staff continue to monitor rates of return on City funds invested and make investments to best achieve the objectives laid out in the Investment Policy.
First Quarter Investment Summary
As of September 30, 2025, total cash and investments decreased by $9,163,671 from the previous quarter, from $52,913,728 to $43,750,057. Typically, the City experiences swings in cash inflow and outflow due to the seasonality of large receipts, such as property taxes, and large disbursements, like debt service that is paid semiannually. The City will have sufficient cash flow to meet the next six months of estimated expenditures.
Investment Instruments
The Finance Director, in consultation with the City Treasurer, selects the instruments in which to invest the City’s funds, in order to best meet the objectives laid out in the City’s Investment Policy. The balances held in different investment instruments at September 30, 2025 are noted in Attachment A. The bulk of the City’s investment funds are invested in the State of California’s Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), because of the safety and liquidity of that investment.
Funds in the City’s General Reserve are maintained in an account that is separate from the rest of the pooled funds. This enables the Finance Director to implement a directed investment plan for the General Reserve funds. The City’s practice has been to invest these funds in instruments with longer duration, thereby yielding greater investment earnings.
Investment Yield and Duration
The weighted average yield of the City’s investment portfolio for the quarter ended September 30, 2025 is summarized in Attachment A. The total investment portfolio yielded 3.982% for the first quarter (July-September 2025), slightly down from the 4.227% yielded in the previous quarter (April-June 2025).
For the first quarter, LAIF earned an average annual yield of 4.212%, down from an average annual yield of 4.269% for the fourth quarter.
The General Reserve, which holds the longer-term investments, earned an average annual yield of 3.619%, slightly down from the 3.880% average annual yield in the fourth quarter. Two certificates of deposit matured and were redeemed for cash: Farmers Insurance Group and Liberty Federal Credit Union Evansville. No new investment instruments were purchased
during the first quarter.
Section 115 Trust
The Section 115 Trust is comprised of a diversified portfolio of investments consistent with the Trust’s objectives and liquidity requirements. The funds are invested on behalf of the City by Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS). The portfolio summary for the quarter ending September 30, 2025 is included in Attachment B to this report.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact as a result of receiving the First Quarter Investment Report.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Investment Report-Quarter Ending September 30, 2025
B. Pension Trust Investment Report-Quarter Ending September 30, 2025
CITY OF PINOLE
INVESTMENT REPORT SEPTEMBER 2025
PORTFOLIO SUMMARY
Weighted
Days to Average
Investments Par Value Market Value Book Value % of Portfolio Maturity Yield Maturity Investment Pool - LAIF 20,249,906 20,288,979 20,288,979 49.10% 1 4.212 0 Investment Pool - CalTrust 3,675,279 3,675,279 3,675,279 8.89% 1 3.800 0 Money Market Savings 7,357,887 7,357,887 7,357,887 17.81% 1 4.000 0 Mutual Funds 8,512,054 8,512,054 8,512,054 20.60% 1 3.724 0 Certificates of Deposit 497,000 500,998 500,998 1.21% 276 4.860 2 Medium-Term Corporate Notes 1,000,000 983,830 983,830 2.38% 346 2.080 8 Federal Agency Securities - - - 0.00% 0 0.000 0
Subtotal Investments $ 41,292,125 $ 41,319,027 $ 41,319,027 100.00% 125 3.982 2 Average Years to Maturity: 0.3
Cash
Mechanics Bank - Vendor Checking * 1,314,034 1,314,034 1,314,034 1 BMO - Payroll Checking * 644,461 644,461 644,461 1
BMO - Checking (Credit Card Clearing) * 472,535 472,535 472,535 1 Subtotal Cash 2,431,030 2,431,030 2,431,030 1
Total Cash and Investments $ 43,723,155 $ 43,750,057 $ 43,750,057 *Not included in yield calculations
The above investments are consistent with the City's Investment Policy and allowable under current legislation of the State of California. Investments were selected using safety, liquidity and yield as the criteria. The source of the market values for the investments are provided by US Bank in accordance with the California Government Code requirement. The City has sufficient cash flow to cover anticipated expenditures through the next six months.
Investment Pool
58% Money Market savings
18%
Mutual Funds
21%
Certificates of Deposit
1%
Medium-Term
Corporate Notes
2%
Federal Agency
Securities
0%
CITY OF PINOLE - INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO
JANUARY 2022
-
5 10
15 20
25 30
35 40
45 0-3 mo 4-6 mo 7-12 mo 1-2 yr 2-3 yr 3-4 yr 5 yr +
Millions
MATURITY DISTRIBUTION
58%
18%
21%
1%
2%
0%
$0 $10,000,000 $20,000,000 $30,000,000 $40,000,000
Investment Pool
Money Market savings
Mutual Funds
Certificates of Deposit
Medium-Term Corporate Notes
Federal Agency Securities
CITY OF PINOLE - INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO
SEPTEMBER 2025
CITY OF PINOLE
INVESTMENT REPORT SEPTEMBER 2025
PORTFOLIO DETAILS
Type /
Account
Number CUSIP Issuer Manager GL Acct # Par Value Market Value Book Value Rate Yield Days to
Maturity
S&P
Rating
Maturity
Date
Weighted
Average
Maturity
Investment Pool
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) LAIF 999-10201 20,249,906 20,288,979 20,288,979 4.212 4.212 1 N/A 0 CalTrust - Short Term Fund (City) CalTrust 999-10202 28,183 28,183 28,183 3.940 3.940 1 N/A 0 CalTrust - Medium Term Fund (City) CalTrust 999-10203 3,647,095 3,647,095 3,647,095 3.660 3.660 1 N/A 0 23,925,184 23,964,258 23,964,258 3.937 4.128 1 0
Money Market Savings
Mechanics Bank City 999-10102 5,759,984 5,759,984 5,759,984 4.270 4.270 1 N/A 0 Mechanics Bank City 500-10311 1,135,684 1,135,684 1,135,684 4.260 4.260 1 N/A 0 Mechanics Bank City 999-10108 354,404 354,404 354,404 4.260 4.260 1 N/A 0 BMO City 999-10104 107,815 107,815 107,815 0.010 0.010 1 N/A 0 7,357,887 7,357,887 7,357,887 3.200 4.000 1 0
Mutual Funds
19-516680 U.S. Bank US Bank 150-10110 28,861 28,861 28,861 1.980 1.980 1 N/A 0 19-516680 31846V203 1st American Government Obligation Fund US Bank 150-10110 8,483,193 8,483,193 8,483,193 3.730 3.730 1 N/A 0 8,512,054 8,512,054 8,512,054 2.855 3.724 1 0
Certificates of Deposit
19-516680 01025RAG4 Alabama Cr Un US Bank 150-10110 248,000 250,108 250,108 5.000 4.960 265 N/A 6/22/2026 2 19-516680 910286GR8 United Fid Bk FSB Evansville I US Bank 150-10110 249,000 250,890 250,890 4.800 4.760 287 N/A 7/14/2026 2 497,000 500,998 500,998 4.900 4.860 276 2
Medium-Term Corporate Notes
19-516679 037833DN7 Apple Inc. US Bank 150-10110 1,000,000 983,830 983,830 2.050 2.080 346 AA+ 9/11/2026 8 1,000,000 983,830 983,830 2.050 2.080 346 8
Federal Agency Securities
- - - 0.000 0.000 - 0
$ 41,292,125 $ 41,319,027 $ 41,319,027 3.388 3.982 125 2 Average Years : 0.3
Investments Market Value Book Value % of Market Yield
Cash and Equivalents 406,305 406,305 3.14% 3.540
U.S. Government Issues 3,618,473 3,728,223 27.95% 4.050 Corporate Issues 2,133,111 2,115,926 16.47% 5.130
Foreign Issues 118,392 115,693 0.91% 5.400
Municipal Issues - - 0.00% -
Mutual Funds-Equity 6,377,939 5,632,575 49.26% 1.510
Mutual Funds-Fixed Income 254,954 250,806 1.97% 6.360
Total Assets 12,909,173 12,249,527 99.70% 3.010
Accrued Income 38,930 38,930 0.30%
Grand Total $ 12,948,103 $ 12,288,456 100%
CITY OF PINOLE
INVESTMENT REPORT SEPTEMBER 2025
SECTION 115 TRUST PORTFOLIO SUMMARY
49.26%
27.95%
16.47%
1.97%
3.14%
0.91%
0.30%
0.00%
$0 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 Mutual Funds-Equity
U.S. Government Issues
Corporate Issues
Mutual Funds-Fixed Income
Cash and Equivalents
Foreign Issues
Accrued Income
Municipal Issues
Portfolio Summary
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.E.
DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 2025
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Kelcey Young, City Manager, 5107248933, [email protected] SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2025/26 1ST QUARTER STRATEGIC PLAN STATUS REPORT
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Council receive the report on the strategic plan.
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.
In August 2020, the City created the Strategic Plan Implementation Action Plan (IAP), which identified the timeframe on which each Strategic Plan strategy would be implemented. The City Council revisited the IAP in January 2021 and approved an updated version, which specified completion dates for each of the strategies. During the January 2021 discussion of the IAP, staff recommended a quarterly report on the status of the implementation of the Strategic Plan strategies, akin to the quarterly reports that staff provides to the Council on the City budget and City investments. Council agreed to this recommendation. The City Council updated two Strategic Plan strategies and added a new strategy in April 2023, as part of a special strategic planning Council meeting.
There is currently an RFP under development for a consultant to facilitate an update for the strategic plan.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
You will find a table, as an attachment, listing the four goals and 23 strategies contained within the Strategic Plan, along with the start and completion dates for each agreed upon in the January 2021 IAP. Each strategy has been coded with a green, yellow, or red dot to indicate whether the City is on track to achieve the beginning and completion dates specified in the January 2021 IAP. Green indicates that the City is on track to achieve both the beginning and completion dates; yellow indicates that the City is on track to achieve either the beginning or completion date; and red indicates that the City is not on track to achieve either the beginning or completion date. Note that “Year 1” is FY 2020-21. The City has completed fourteen of the strategies and is currently on track to achieve the beginning and completion dates of many of the remaining strategies.
There are four remaining strategies that are expected to be completed by the end of the calendar year. It should be noted that due to the type of work of seven of the strategies, they will need to continue to be ongoing in order to continue to be successful. These strategies will continue to cost staff time and resources for the foreseeable future.
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact
ATTACHMENTS
A. _Strategic Plan FY 25-26 Q1 Final
Strategic Plan Update
Goal and Strategy Year to
Begin
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Year to
Complete
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Current
Status
Notes on Status
Goal 1: Safe and
Resilient Pinole
Strategy 1. Conduct a
citywide asset condition
assessment.
Year 1 Year 5
In Progress
The City is in the midst of
multiple asset condition
assessments and master
plans, which are reflected
in the Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP).
At the end of Year 5, the
City will have current
assessments for all major
capital assets.
Strategy 2. Update the
emergency preparedness
and response plan
(including results of the
facilities and equipment
assessment).
Year 1 Year 1
In Progress
Staff presented a draft
updated Emergency
Operations Plan (EOP) to
the City Council in August
2022. A draft is currently
being reviewed by the
County, and a
subcommittee has been
established to review the
drat. This is tentatively
scheduled for Council
approval in the beginning
of 2026.
Strategy 3. Explore
restoring the community
emergency response
team (CERT) program
and conducting annual
tabletop exercises and
community drills.
Year 3 Year 3
Complete
CCCFPD began
providing emergency
medical and fire response
service in Pinole in March
2023. CCCFPD does not
operate CERT programs.
The Pinole Police
Department intends to restart the CERT program
Specialist to head up
program
Strategy 4. Review,
prioritize, and implement
as appropriate the 2019
fire service study
recommendations.
Year 1 Year 2
Complete
City staff presented its
assessment of the fire
study and its
recommendations
regarding next steps to
bolster fire service in April
2021. City Council
approved staff’s
recommendations. As a
result, the City pursued
the option of contracted
fire services. The City
City Council Report
July 15, 2025 2
Goal and Strategy Year to
Begin
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Year to
Complete
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Current
Status
Notes on Status
and Contra Costa County
Fire Protection District
(“ConFire”) negotiated
and entered into a service
agreement for ConFire to
provide fire protection
services to Pinole
residents, which included
re-opening the second
fire station (Station 74).
The City’s Fire
Department transitioned
to ConFire effective
March 1, 2023.
Goal 2: Financially
Stable Pinole
Strategy 1. Develop a
long-term financial plan
(LTFP) and use it to
guide budget and
financial decisions
(including policies
regarding reserves and
management of
liabilities).
Year 1 Year 1
Complete
The City adopted its
inaugural LTFP in June
2021 and updated it in
subsequent years. The
City also maintains a 20-
year financial forecast
that is updated at least
annually.
Strategy 2. Conduct a
comprehensive fee study
to ensure cost recovery of
current and potential
service fees. (Evaluate
implementing an online
payment platform.)
Year 1 Year 2
Complete
The City completed a
comprehensive fee study
and cost allocation plan in
June 2022, which Council
approved. Staff
completed a fee study
and recommended
updates to development
impact fees in January
2025. City staff has
implemented options for
online payments for
certain services, including
building permits and
business licenses.
Strategy 3. Establish a
program to evaluate grant
opportunities and
capacity.
Year 2 Year 2
Complete
City staff has hired
Townsend, a grant
research, writing, and
management consulting
firm which has provided a
framework to evaluate
and pursue appropriate
grant opportunities.
Strategy 4. Explore an
array of revenue
Year 2 Year 3
Complete
Staff has supported the
City Council in exploring
various revenue
City Council Report
July 15, 2025 3
Goal and Strategy Year to
Begin
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Year to
Complete
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Current
Status
Notes on Status
generation opportunities
to recover costs.
generation opportunities,
most significantly when
the City Council received
the strategic financial
planning report, which
provided several
revenue-generating
options for Council’s
consideration. The City
decided to place an
additional half-cent sales
tax measure on the ballot
for the November 2024
municipal election. The
voters passed Measure I,
which is expected to
generate an additional
$2.5 million in the City’s
General Fund. Staff
continues to explore
additional revenuegenerating options.
Strategy 5. Develop a
disciplined approach to
funding infrastructure
maintenance and
improvements.
Year 1 Year 5
On-going
This is an ongoing effort
in which staff is currently
engaged, and which
involves the asset
condition assessments,
master plans, and annual
capital planning process.
Goal 3: Vibrant and
Beautiful Pinole
Strategy 1. Update the
General Plan and Three
Corridors Specific Plan.
Year 1 Year 4
On-going
Updates to the General
Plan Housing and Health
& Safety Elements in
addition to a new
Environmental Justice
Element are underway,
Staff will consider the
need to update other
aspects of the General
Plan and the Three
Corridors Specific Plan
Environmental Impact
Report so that highdensity residential
projects could utilize the
EIR for project-specific
environmental
clearances, which would
encourage streamlining
the rehabilitation and rePage 108 of 178
City Council Report
July 15, 2025 4
Goal and Strategy Year to
Begin
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Year to
Complete
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Current
Status
Notes on Status
use of undeveloped or
under-developed
properties.
Strategy 2.
Develop/create a
comprehensive strategy
to encourage streamlining
the rehabilitation and reuse of undeveloped or
under-developed
properties.
Year 4 Year 4
On-going
This process is currently
underway and is an
ongoing process.
Strategy 3. Partner with
regional for- and nonprofit housing
organizations to provide
an array of housing
options consistent with
community income levels.
Year 1 Year 1
Complete
The City has partnered
with nonprofit housing
organizations to explore
and develop affordable
housing projects,
particularly the non-profit
Satellite Affordable
Housing Associates
(SAHA) project at 811
San Pablo Avenue, which
is providing 33 units of
very-low and low income
housing for veterans.
Staff also collaborated
with a for-profit housing
developer to quickly
entitle and permit a 179-
unit, 100% affordable
senior housing project at
600 Roble Avenue called
Vista Woods. Lastly, the
City negotiated a suite of
community benefits with a
for-profit housing
developer building 154
condominiums that
included a set-aside for
eight deed-restricted low
income for-sale units.
Although this is an
ongoing effort, it was
scheduled as a one-year
project in the IAP, and is
therefore marked as
complete.
City Council Report
July 15, 2025 5
Goal and Strategy Year to
Begin
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Year to
Complete
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Current
Status
Notes on Status
Strategy 4. Develop a
comprehensive economic
development strategy that
includes a focus on
downtown redevelopment
to activate the core of the
community as a
destination for the region
(including gateway and
wayfinding signage as
well as branding).
Year 1 Year 2
Complete
The City Council adopted
the Pinole Economic
Development Strategy
(EDS) in October 2022.
Strategy 5. Partner
regionally to improve and
enhance transportation
circulation,
including public transit,
cars, bikes, and
pedestrians, guided by
the downtown Pedestrian
Safety Plan, Active
Transportation Plan, and
other adopted plans.
Year 2 Year 4
On-going
The City is engaged in
several collaborations
with other jurisdictions
and agencies to enhance
transportation. The City
Council appropriated
funding to create an
Active Transportation
Plan; the City received
funding to collaborate
with the County on an
Appian Way complete
streets project; and the
City is requesting that
new development
projects have facilities to
promote transit.
Strategy 6. Conduct a
review and update of the
City’s code enforcement
and property
maintenance programs
with a focus on increased
beautification efforts and
investment in community
ecological and
cultural amenities,
business districts, and
nuisance abatement.
Year 1 Year 1
On-going
This is an ongoing effort.
City staff is continually
updating code
enforcement policies and
procedures.
Goal 4. High
Performance Pinole
City Council Report
July 15, 2025 6
Goal and Strategy Year to
Begin
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Year to
Complete
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Current
Status
Notes on Status
Strategy 1. Develop an
employee attraction,
retention, and
development plan. a.
Analyze the City’s
classification and
compensation system
and update as needed.
Year 1 Year 2
Complete
Staff completed an
employee attraction,
retention, and
development plan (Talent
Management Plan) in
June 2022. City staff
continuously updates the
classification system and
seeks Council approval of
appropriate
compensation changes.
Strategy 2. Conduct a
citywide organization
review to optimize
efficiencies.
Year 1 Year 1
Complete
The City completed a
citywide organizational
review (assessment) in
March 2021.
Strategy 3. Review
citywide implementation
of best practices and
improve processes.
Year 2 Year 5
On-going
This is an ongoing effort
in which staff is currently
engaged. City staff have
made many process
improvements since the
adoption of the Strategic
Plan. Among the many
process improvements,
the City has launched a
24/7 permitting system, a
new website, a Pinolespecific app for event and
news alerts, and new enewsletters.
Strategy 4. Develop a
strategic communication
plan (i.e., public
information officer,
messaging, marketing,
technical
implementation).
Year 1 Year 2
Complete
The City Council adopted
the City of Pinole
Communication and
Engagement Plan in
October 2022.
Strategy 5. Develop a
public engagement plan.
a. Develop policies
and practices that provide
a framework for diverse
community members to
connect, interact, and
proactively participate.
b. Explore
opportunities for
meaningful youth
participation in city and
community life.
c. Develop a robust
Year 1 Year 2
On-going
The City Council adopted
the City of Pinole
Communication and
Engagement Plan, which
addresses public
engagement, in October
2022. The City has
implemented practices
which have increased
community engagement.
The City has finalized
Volunteer policies and
procedures, implemented
a new volunteer program,
City Council Report
July 15, 2025 7
Goal and Strategy Year to
Begin
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Year to
Complete
Strategy
(January
2021 IAP)
Current
Status
Notes on Status
volunteer and internship
program.
and started two youth
internship programs.
Citizens Academy will
start in August
Strategy 6. Develop a
comprehensive
information technology
Strategic Plan.
Year 1 Year 1
Complete
City staff completed a
comprehensive IT Plan in
June 2022.
Strategy 7. Develop an
interagency legislative
advocacy program.
Year 2 Year 2
In-Progress
City staff expects to
complete this project in
Calendar Year 2025. City
staff is reviewing sample
Legislative Platforms, and
will bring potential
frameworks to Council in
the near future
Strategy 8. Explore the
use of the Government
Access Channel/PCTV to
implement the strategic
communication plan.
Year 4 Year 4
In-Progress
PCTV has contributed to
many new City
communication and
engagement efforts,
including producing The
Beat of Pinole monthly
mayor’s video; producing
other informational videos
for the public; and
producing videos of
numerous community
events. The PCTV
strategy has been
completed and is now
being implemented
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.F.
DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 2025
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Heba El-Guindy, Public Works Director, [email protected] SUBJECT: RECEIVE UPDATE ON CAPITAL PROJECTS, INSPECTION AND
PERMITTING, AND MAINTENANCE
RECOMMENDATION
Receive update on capital projects progress, conducted inspections and issued permits, and performed maintenance operations.
BACKGROUND
An update on key capital projects and maintenance activities was provided to the City Council on July 15, 2025, for the fourth quarter of Fiscal Year (FY) 2024/25. To establish continuation in reporting, this new update is being provided for the months of July, August, September and October of 2025. The update covers capital projects, permits review, and maintenance operations.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
Capital Projects:
Progress on key capital projects includes the following:
• In response to the bidding process of the City of Pinole FY 2024/25 Sidewalk Rehabilitation Program (Project No. RO2402), the Public Works (PW) Department received a total of nine (9) bids that ranged in costs from $111,200.00 to $348,317.70.
Following a thorough review of completeness and compliance with bid requirements, the lowest responsive and responsible bid for Spektren Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $111,200.00 was selected. Since the last update to the City Council on July 15th, 2025, the Project scope was expanded to utilize the full budgeted funding of $150,000 funded by Measure S. Planned work was recently completed on Friday, November 7th, including improvements to curb ramps and pavement conditions in the Downtown area on San Pablo Avenue and Fernandez Avenue. Remaining Punch List items will be completed by this Friday, November 14th. It should be noted that the upcoming City of Pinole FY 2025/26 Sidewalk Rehabilitation Program will soon be posted for seeking bids, and it focuses on locations on Pinole Valley Road and Shea Drive to support the Pavement Rehabilitation Program for same fiscal year.
• Police Department Building Roof Replacement. This work is being pursued under the Citywide Roof Repairs CIP Project (FA1702). A request for bids was initiated on August 28, 2025. In response, the PW Department received eight (8) bids that range between $453,200 and $965,888. A draft agreement with a selected consultant is currently planned for the City Council consideration and approval on December 2nd, 2025. Work to be performed in December/January subject to weather permitting. • Youth Center Building HVAC System: This work is being carried out on an urgent basis due to the failed heating and air-conditioning in a number of offices on the first floor of the building (dedicated to the use of the Community Services Department), and the difficulty controlling temperature and high level of humidity impacting PCTV and equipment on the second floor. Due to the limited funding, only three of the seven HVAC units are being replaced to address the failed components. Following a comprehensive review, a quote received by City Mechanical (the on-call maintenance contractor) on September 24, 2025, in total amount of $72,795.00. An agreement was prepared and executed, and work is currently underway and is expected to be completed by Friday, November 21st weather permit.
• Upgrade of City Pools (FA2502): This is an ongoing project that aims at gradually upgrading the various equipment associated with the pools. Regular use of the pools recently ceased for the winter. This opportunity is being used for plumbing improvements including replacement of the showers and corroded discharge pipes in addition to replacement of the filters and other upgrades that can be accommodated within the remaining budgeted funds for FY 2025/26. Selected improvements and associated costs are planned to be brought for the City Council consideration and approval on December 2nd, 2025.
• Pinole Valley Park – East (PA1901): Currently under review for the addition of prefabricated restrooms along with associated foundation and utility connections (water, sewer and electricity). Funds to remain of the FY 2025/26 Project budget will be used to add benches for visitors, and to upgrade the irrigation system to the extent possible. • Dog Park Upgrade (FA2501): The PW Maintenance Operations team removed a crowded tree, as well as removed a stump (in the small dog area) and a leaning branch (in the large dog area). The team also painted the restrooms, replaced a rotted wall, and cleaned and treated the roof for moth. The restrooms’ gutters have been removed and will soon be replaced. The Dog Park sign has been replaced, and the team also painted the waste receptacle, doggy bags post, and the flyers board. Planning is underway to add dog play areas and upgrade the landscaping following a community
meeting to be led by the Community Services Department.
• Pinon Trunk Sewer Capacity Phase 2 Project (SS2401): On June 25, 2024, the City Council awarded the construction contract to K.J. Woods Construction, Inc. The Notice to Proceed was issued on October 14, 2024, and the work has since been progressing and is now scheduled for completion (to complete punch list items and pavement repairs) by the end of November 2025. Due to multiple breakages of the water line along Orleans Drive, PW staff coordinated with the EBMUD team. EBMUD agreed to add replacement of the water line along Orleans Drive to the west of Tennent Avenue to their workplan, for design during calendar year 2026 and constructed in 2027. This is in addition to replacement of the water line along Zoe Court also scheduled for construction in 2027. Consequently, pavement rehabilitation of full width of the Project segment of Orleans Drive will follow replacement of the water line in 2027. • Roble Avenue Storm Drain Improvement Project (SW2001): The Roble Avenue Drain Improvement Project is expected to exceed the retrofit requirements of the Municipal Regional Storm Water of 1.16 acres and establish road improvements including the provision of a sidewalk. A contract for the environmental review and design of the Project was approved by the City Council on June 3rd, 2025. Work has been progressing since with regular coordination with the consultants’ team, and concept design alternatives are currently under review.
• Active Transportation Plan (RO2106): On March 7, 2023, the City Council awarded a contract to GHD, Inc. to develop the City’s Active Transportation Plan (ATP) with the objectives to identify deficiencies and improvements that would increase walking, cycling, and connectivity to public transit. GHD produced a draft ATP report which was presented to the Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Committee (TAPS) on January 8, 2025.
Input from the TAPS, City staff and the community are being incorporated into the ATP.
Due to the significant revisions and additions needed, an amendment to the GHD contract was approved by the City Council on June 17, 2025, that increased the budget by a not-to-exceed amount of $30,000 to be paid at the satisfactory completion of the plan and extended the contract term to December 31, 2025. The finalized ATP report will be presented to the City Council for consideration and approval. • Storm Drain Master Plan (IN1703): On August 15, 2023, the City Council awarded a contract to West Yost Associates (West Yost) to develop the City’s Storm Drain Master Plan. This Project is intended to identify, analyze and prioritize the capital improvement needs of the City’s storm water management system to reduce flood risks, enhance public safety and protect City assets. Findings and recommendations developed during preparation of the Storm Drain Master Plan will be used by staff to develop or update CIP projects, and the final Plan will be presented to City Council. Staff have been in regular coordination with the Consultant’s team. Based on the site inspections and
modeling needs, the Consultant proposed an increase in scope and budget that are being brought for the City Council consideration and approval on December 2nd, 2025. • Reporting to the Water Board and grant funded research. Field visits were conducted in coordination and with the presence of representatives of the Water Board. The annual reporting on the stormwater system including the existing trash capture devices in relation to the requirements was submitted. Currently grant funded research is underway to assess effectiveness of the trash capture devices. Staff are also assessing the potential for grant funding to invest in larger devices at outfall locations to meet 100% compliance requirements (currently at 80%).
• Tennent Avenue Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements and Bay Trail Gap Closure (RO1902). This project is being tackled this fiscal year rather than next year as originally planned in the CIP in order to avoid jeopardizing the awarded One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) funds. The Project will close a gap in the Bay Trail, linking the communities of Hercules, Pinole, and unincorporated Contra Costa County. The trail begins at the City of Pinole’s Wastewater Treatment Plant at the terminus of Tennent Avenue and extends across the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks then travels along Railroad Avenue to connect with the existing Bay Trail segment along the Pinole Creek. Responsibility for improvements is divided between the City of Pinole and UPRR. The City will construct hardscape elements including the concrete sidewalk, asphalt pavement, striping, signing, and fencing. UPRR will install grade crossing panels, traffic control devices, wiring, and associated appurtenances. The PW Department is regularly coordinating with Caltrans, UPRR and the consultants’ team, with the Project design and right-of-way phase nearing completion prior to pursuing construction in 2026.
• Delores Court Stormwater Pipe Replacement. This Project is being performed under the CIP Stormwater Upgrade & Trash Capture Project (SW2501). A Request for Bids (RFB) was initiated on Thursday November 6th to replace the stormwater pipe that runs from Delores Court through the public easement within the front and backyards of residence # 2341 Delores Court (about 90 linear feet). Bids are due by Thursday December 4th. Based on outcome of the bidding process, staff will seek future input and approval by the City Council prior to proceeding with the Project construction. It should be noted that this Project has a relatively timeframe schedule given the fact that the existing pipe collapsed and is expected to continue to cause maintenance issues this winter. The remaining section of the existing pipe/culvert that travels through the embankment between the backyard fence and the creek, is planned to be replaced in FY 2026/27 given the required permits and environmental protection process. • San Pablo Avenue Bridge Replacement (RO1710): Age and condition assessment of
the San Pablo Avenue bridge supports replacement. In February 2020, the City awarded a contract to a consultants’ team to conduct the Preliminary Engineering (PE) and advance the project. Work on the project was resumed this year, and the environmental review is scheduled for completion by April 2026 (NEPA by December 31, 2025, and CEQA by April 30, 2026), with the project design commencing in 2026.
This Project is receiving Highway Bridge Program (HPB), Strategic Management Planning Program (STMP), and Transportation Land-Use Connections (TLC) grant funds. Through coordination with Caltrans, the City received an early release of the HBP grant funds to support the PE work. In addition, staff coordinated with the West County Transportation Commission team and changes were approved by the WCCTC Board on May 23, 2025, which extended the term of the STMP grant agreement by an additional four years and allowed flexibility in the use of the grant funds. Consequently, a fourth amendment to agreement with Consor North America, Inc. was approved by the City Council on July 1, 2025, thereby increasing the consultant’s compensation by a not-to-exceed amount of $199,300 (funded by HBP grant fund) for completing the project’s environmental review and approvals. Consor’s detailed design scope and associated costs are currently under development for future consideration by the City Council. In addition, a sixth amendment to agreement with Gray-Bowen-Scott was approved by the City Council on July 15, 2025, thereby increasing the consultant’s compensation by a not-to-exceed amount of $350,005 (to be funded by STMP grant fund) and extending the agreement to June 30, 2027, to provide project management support services through completion of the PE (environmental and design) phase.
Inspections and Permits:
• Month of July: 220 inspections were performed, 54 permits (1 encroachment, 29 sewer lateral including 11 video review, 2 transportation, 1 grading, and 21 utility encroachment) were issued, and $49,655.20 permit fees were collected. • Month of August: 173 inspections were performed, 37 permits (3 encroachment, 24 sewer laterals including 13 video review, 1 transportation, 1 grading, and 8 utility encroachment) were issued, and $49,026.70 permit fees were collected. • Month of September: 180 inspections were performed, 32 permits (1 encroachment, 20 sewer laterals including 7 video review, 1 transportation, and 10 utility encroachment) were issued, and $29,222.60 permit fees were collected. • Month of October: 145 inspections were performed, 53 permits (40 sewer lateral including 20 video review, and 13 utility encroachment) were issued, and $69,719.00 permit fees were collected.
Maintenance Operations:
• Months of July through October: Completion of 1397 service requests and repairs including 72 stormwater (catch basins, storm drain, and sweeping), 21 wastewater (sewer main, sewer overflow, and video capture), 33 signs (new installation and repairs), 255 roads (potholes, traffic signals, streetlights, vegetation management, trees trimming, red curb, graffiti removal, and pavement markings), 845 parks (vegetation management, trees trimming and stump grinding, fields maintenance, gopher control, irrigation, debris removal, restrooms, special events, hanging of banners, water fountain
repairs, play structure maintenance, and graffiti removal), 40 illegal dumping, 5 emergency calls, 4 fleet, and 122 facilities (roofing, lights, alarms repair, gates repair, furniture assembly/repair and moving assistance, pest control, elevators repair, plumbing, drinking fountains repair, pools repair, irrigation, trees trimming, debris removal, appliances repair, HVAC repair and/or replacement, TV installation, painting, signs repair and replacement, windows repair, and doors and locks).
It should be noted that the Maintenance Operations team performed potholing on segments of the following roads: Ramona Street, Estates Avenue, Faria Avenue, Tara Hills Drive, Henry Avenue, San Pablo Avenue, Wilde Court, Wright Avenue, Shea Drive, Sarah Drive, Carmelita Way, Kildare Way, Kilkenny Way, Pinole Valley Road, Emma Drive, Peach Street, Hoke Drive, Plum Street, Pine Avenue, Marionola Way, Barkley Court, Brazil Court, Avis Way, Willow Street, Simas Avenue, Tamalpais Drive, Faria Avenue, Shawn Drive, Appian Way, Pinole Shores Drive, Victor Street, Doidge Avenue, Barkley Court, Potrero Court, Chapparal Court, Alice Way, and Moraga Drive.
Improvements to pavement markings and red curbing were performed at various locations including: City Hall Parking Lot, Tennent Avenue Parking Lot, San Pablo Avenue, Del Monte Way, Tennent Avenue, Ramona Street, Alvarez Avenue, Roble Avenue, and Orleans Drive.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to reporting on projects and operational updates.
ATTACHMENTS
None
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 11.A.
DATE: NOVEMBER 18, 2025
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Lilly Whalen, Community Development Director, 510-724-9832, [email protected]
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL HEALTH AND
SAFETY RENTAL INSPECTION ORDINANCE (PINOLE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 8.30) AND ADOPTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS
RECOMMENDATION
1. Receive an update from the City’s Housing Fellow on progress related to improvements to the Residential Health and Safety Rental Inspection Program (the Program);
2. Adopt a Resolution, approving the Administrative Regulations implementing PMC Chapter 8.30 following the public hearing; and
3. Direct staff to (a) prepare a Class and Compensation Study for a full-time Residential Health and Safety Inspector, and (b) conduct a fee study to support full cost recovery and return with recommended fee adjustments.
BACKGROUND
September 16, 2025, Council Discussion
On September 16, 2025, the City Council received an update from the City’s Housing fellow regarding improvements to the Residential Health and Safety Rental Inspection Program and staff’s intent to enter into a contract with OpportunitySpace, Inc. (dba “Tolemi”) to provide a proactive rental inventory and inspection software platform.
City Council’s direction at the meeting guided staff to proceed with:
• Implementation of a new software platform to support an online, public-facing rental inventory and inspection system.
• Development of Administrative Regulations pursuant to Pinole Municipal Code (PMC)
8.30.170 to operationalize the Program.
• Continuation of stakeholder engagement to inform program design. • Preparation of a fee and staffing analysis to achieve full cost recovery and restore a dedicated rental housing inspector.
City Council also expressed interest in incorporating decarbonization data and tenant demographic data collection.
These improvements will be funded in part by the Partnership for the Bay’s Future (PBF) Policy Fund Grant, which supports the City’s Housing implementation goals, including the redesign and relaunch of the Program.
Residential Health and Safety Rental Inspection Program The Residential Health and Safety Rental Inspection Program (the “Program”) was established in 2006 to protect public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the proper maintenance of rental housing. The Program is intended to identify and correct substandard or non-compliant housing conditions and to prevent deterioration and blight that can harm property values and quality of life in Pinole (PMC Section 8.30.020).
The Program requires all residential rental property owners— including single-family homes, multi-family units, apartment buildings and hotel/motels— to:
1. Maintain a valid business license each year,
2. Allow the City to inspect the unit once every three years for compliance with applicable City ordinances and housing laws, and
3. Correct any violations identified during inspections.
The overall goal is to support neighborhood stability by addressing blight, maintaining property values, and ensuring tenants have safe housing.
When the Program was first established, it was managed by a dedicated City Rental Housing Inspector. Following the Great Recession, the Program faced ongoing challenges due to limited staffing and the lack of a reliable system to track properties and inspections. For many years, compliance was handled inconsistently through Code Enforcement complaints, business license renewals, or individual inquiries. Program records remain scattered across spreadsheets and Word documents, with only some more recent data tied to the City’s business license system.
Staff have also explored whether the City’s eTRAKiT system—currently used for Building, Planning, Code Enforcement, Public Works, and Finance—could serve as a rental inventory platform. After a thorough review, it was determined that eTRAKiT cannot support the Program’s needs for scheduling, payment, compliance documentation, or public transparency.
In 2023, the Community Development Department partnered with the Finance Department to encourage more property owners — particularly those not inspected within the last three years — to come into compliance. Contract staff were brought on to support this effort. Without a dedicated rental tracking system, staff created a temporary patchwork process using Microsoft Bookings for inspection scheduling, Stripe for payment processing, and the City’s permit system to issue business licenses, track inspection results and verify compliance.
While this temporary process allowed the City to resume some inspections with contracted staff, feedback from staff and participants has shown the temporary system is difficult to use, inefficient, and not suited to the Program’s long-term needs. It allows the City to confirm only basic habitability compliance and does not provide meaningful information about the broader condition or public welfare impacts of the City’s rental housing stock. Data must still be entered manually, stored in spreadsheets, and is not transparent to the public. In addition, there are no tools or metrics in place to report on broader rental market trends or analytics. Finally, the Program does not have dedicated staff to manage it and without consistent staffing it cannot be effectively administered.
Administrative Regulations Seeking Adoption
In October 2025, the City executed a contract with Tolemi to develop a rental inventory and inspection software platform to relaunch the Program as a full cost-recovery model. The goal is to create a system that improves the experience for both the community and staff while also providing stronger data and analytics tools to inform policymakers, the City Council, and the public.
The existing Residential Health and Safety Inspection Ordinance contains PMC Section
8.30.170, which allows for the development of administrative regulations relating to the implementation and enforcement of the Ordinance:
8.30.170 ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS.
The Building Official is authorized and directed to promulgate administrative regulations pertaining to the implementation and enforcement of this chapter. Such administrative regulations shall not take effect unless and until they are approved by a resolution duly adopted by the City Council following a public hearing thereon.
The City Attorney’s Office has determined that the Building Official may issue administrative regulations for the program—subject to Council approval by resolution after a public hearing— to transition from a single triennial inspection fee to three annual payments, require annual renewal of owner enrollment with updated housing and occupancy information, move to a standardized digital enrollment system with in-person support available, and establish an online public-facing rental inventory platform that links inspection status and business license renewal. The determination also supports directing staff to prepare a class and compensation study for a full-time Residential Health and Safety Inspector, conduct a fee study to establish a cost-recovery inspection fee, and authorize conditional 2026 rental business license renewals that require system enrollment and compliance by applicable 2026 deadlines, while allowing already compliant properties to renew without reinspection but with required enrollment by year-end 2026.
It is anticipated that enhancements to the administrative regulations will be presented to council in January 2026 in order to successfully launch the Program. These are anticipated to include:
• Updating data points for collection, pending continued engagement and feedback from stakeholders;
• Establishing a self-certified inspection option for qualifying landlords at the discretion of the Building Inspector, pending continued engagement with stakeholders; and • Establishing a one-time discounted enrollment fee for property owners who enroll by a specified date to encourage early participation and support timely adoption of the new platform.
At the time, staff will bring forward a fee study to establish a new enrollment and inspection fee for the Program that will support full cost recovery of the Program, including personnel and software.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
Online Platform Development
Following Council direction, staff executed an agreement with Tolemi under the City Manager’s signing authority. CDD determined that Tolemi was the only viable provider due to its patented property data integration tools, user-friendly platform, and dedicated support model for both staff and the public.
The City and Tolemi are now actively building out the online public-facing rental inventory and inspection booking platforms which will:
• Enable enrollment and annual renewals;
• Facilitate inspection scheduling, fee payment, and compliance tracking; • Provide transparent, spatially enabled data about the City’s rental housing stock; • Develop beta testing and data integration, with public launch targeted by April 2026.
The goal of the Program update is to make participation straightforward, cost-effective, and minimally disruptive for property owners and tenants, while improving the quality of data available to policymakers and strengthening shared accountability for maintaining safe and healthy housing. The City plans to increase enrollment through a user-friendly software platform that streamlines inspection scheduling, data collection and fee payment.
Staff has engaged in extensive outreach to neighboring municipalities with similar programs, gathering insights on a wide range of strategies, goals, and stages of development— from long-standing programs in place for decades to those still in first year of implementation. This effort included direct correspondence with the cities of Stockton, Concord, Antioch, East Palo Alto, Salinas, San Francisco, Monterey, Half Moon Bay, Berkeley, Hayward, and San Jose.
The City also reviewed programs in Antioch, Palo Alto, Oakland, Mountain View, Richmond, Santa Monica, Los Angeles, Beverly Hills, Pasadena, and West Hollywood. This outreach provided valuable feedback that has shaped the program design the City plans to present for stakeholder input.
The City’s research has informed the proposed administrative regulations (see Attachment B) to support the smooth implementation of the updated Program. Overall, outreach and program analysis consistently underscored that ease-of-use, enrollment support, and cost transparency are essential to the successful implementation and long-term operation of these programs.
Community and Stakeholder Informed Data Collection
Data commonly gathered for rental inventory programs include, but are not limited to: property and unit details (e.g., year built, date of purchase, number of units, square footage, bedrooms and bathrooms), rental information (e.g., current monthly rent, utilities included, additional fees such as parking), occupancy status, number of occupants, subsidy program enrollment, beneficial ownership disclosure, both owner and property management information. Any data gathered may, but is not required to, be incorporated into the public-facing website.
The City is currently engaging with stakeholders to best inform the materials collected. This includes property owners, managers, tenants, advocates, and regional partners that can help inform the program’s operational details. Feedback will focus on platform usability, data transparency, and rental operator support during enrollment. Early 2026, City Staff intend to bring a public demonstration, refined platform features, and any recommended amendments to the Administrative Regulations based on stakeholder feedback.
Tenant Inventory
At the September 16, 2025 Council meeting, the City Council expressed interest in exploring whether tenant demographic data could be collected as part of the rental inventory. However, preliminary feedback from tenant engagement indicates discomfort with the City collecting this type of information. This aligns with guidance from tenant advocates and other jurisdictions operating similar programs.
Property owners and managers are prohibited under fair housing law from collecting demographic data, as doing so could lead to discriminatory practices. Advocacy organizations have also cautioned municipalities against collecting such data due to its sensitive and weaponizable nature. This is especially relevant for minority and mixed-status community households; given the current political climate, these communities may be significantly underrepresented in an opt-in tenant inventory, resulting in incomplete or skewed data.
While the City has obtained a quote from Tolemi for the development of a tenant inventory, research has lead City Staff to strongly recommend against pursuing this avenue as in addition to apprehension from tenant stakeholders, advocates, and neighboring municipalities; and the likelihood of the inventory gathering incomplete or unrepresentative data; the tenant inventory’s cost will either negatively impact the Program’s cost recovery, or create additional burden on rental property operators.
The City intends to use existing geospatial demographic data such as Census Tracts to inform equity-oriented policies moving forward. This is the metric used by advocacy organizations, neighboring municipalities, Contra Costa County programs, and State and Federal programs.
Administrative Regulations for Council Adoption
Pursuant to PMC 8.30.170 the Chief Building Official has developed Administrative
Regulations to guide the implementation of the ordinance.
Key provisions include:
• Transition from a single triennial inspection fee payment to three equal annual payments while maintaining the existing three-year inspection cycle, allowing owners to spread costs evenly over time; and
• Require annual renewal of owner enrollment and submission of updated basic housing and occupancy information to ensure accurate scheduling, support proactive compliance monitoring, and maintain up-to-date data necessary to protect public health and safety; and
• Shift to a standardized digital enrollment process, eliminating paper forms to reduce staff workload and data errors, while providing dedicated in-person support hours to ensure all property owners have access to assistance; and • Establish an online, public-facing rental inventory platform that links inspection status and business license renewal to support transparency and ongoing compliance with minimum health and safety standards; and
• Direct staff to prepare a class and compensation study for a full-time Residential Health and Safety Inspector position to manage the Program and conduct inspections of substandard housing pursuant to Assembly Bill 548 and Senate Bill 1415; and • Direct staff to prepare a fee study to develop an updated inspection fee that will support full cost recovery for the program.
In addition, the regulations authorize conditional 2025 rental business license renewals, requiring all property owners to enroll in the new inspection system and obtain a valid Certificate of Compliance (CoC) by their applicable 2026 deadline. Properties that already hold a current CoC (expiring 2027–2029) may renew without reinspection but must enroll and begin annual fee payments by December 31, 2026. Properties with a CoC expiring in 2026 must enroll, pay annual fees, and obtain their new CoC by their existing expiration date.
Properties with CoCs expiring in 2025 must enroll and pay annual fees by June 2026 and schedule an inspection within 90 days of enrollment. Properties with expired or no CoC on file must enroll and pay annual fees by April 2026 and schedule an inspection within 90 days of enrollment. See Figure 1.
The Administrative Regulations formalize the operational framework of the updated program and are proposed for adoption by resolution (see Attachment A).
Figure 1: Business license renewal cadence for 2026
Program Timeline
Following Public Hearing and Council Approval, the next steps for the Program will include continued community and stakeholder engagement, continued program development design refinements based on Council and stakeholder input, and development and testing of a beta site. In early 2026, CDD intends to bring forward additional administrative regulation modifications for City Council approval. These modifications will help ensure smooth and successful enrollment timeline for the Program’s operation.
Months Activities
November-December
• Beta site development
• Stakeholder engagement
• Public outreach
January-March
• Continued Public Outreach
• Assistance office hours
• Early enrollment
• Conditional Business License issuance
April-June
• Early enrollment deadline.
• Assistance office hours
• Data synthesis/analysis
July-August
• First quarterly data report
• Focus group follow up
August-December
• Contract re-evaluation
• Informed recommendations.
FISCAL IMPACT
Adopting the Administrative Regulations does not immediately impact the General Fund. Initial setup costs—including software configuration and staff time—are already covered through existing budgets and the Partnership for the Bay’s Future (PBF) Policy Fund Grant, which has also graciously funded the one-time $8,000 platform setup cost. The ongoing annual cost for the Tolemi platform is $39,000.
A mid-year budget adjustment will incorporate the new Housing Inspector position and updated fees to ensure the program is fully self-supporting. The forthcoming fee study will recommend inspection fees that cover ongoing staffing, technology, and enforcement needs. Staff will return to City Council in early 2026 with proposed fee adjustments and the full-time Housing Inspector position to ensure full cost recovery and no net impact to the General Fund.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Administrative Regulations
C. Residential Health and Safety Rental Inspection Program Update
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE, COUNTY OF
CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING RESIDENTIAL HEALTH
AND SAFETY ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, the Residential Health and Safety Rental Inspection Program (the “Program”) was established in 2006 to protect public health, safety, and welfare by identifying and correcting substandard and legally non-compliant rental housing conditions, thereby preventing deterioration and blight that could adversely affect neighborhood stability, property values, and quality of life in the City; and WHEREAS, the Program requires residential rental property owners, including owners of single-family homes, multi-family units, apartment buildings, and hotel/motel units, to maintain a valid business license, allow the City to inspect such units at least once every three years, and correct any identified violations to ensure habitability and compliance with applicable laws; and
WHEREAS, Pinole Municipal Code (PMC) Section 8.30.170 authorizes the Building Official to promulgate administrative regulations pertaining to the implementation and enforcement of the Program, provided such regulations are approved by the City Council following a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Program was historically managed by a dedicated full-time Rental Housing Inspector, but staffing reductions during the Great Recession resulted in fragmented administration, limited data collection, and inconsistent compliance monitoring; and
WHEREAS, implementation of a standardized digital enrollment, scheduling, data management, and compliance platform is necessary to restore program effectiveness, ensure transparency, streamline participation for property owners, and maintain accurate rental housing data; and
WHEREAS, the Administrative Regulations contained in Exhibit A establish:
• Transition from a single triennial inspection fee to equal annual payments while maintaining the existing three-year inspection cycle; • Requirement for annual renewal of owner enrollment with updated basic housing and occupancy information to support accurate scheduling and proactive enforcement;
• Standardized digital enrollment and compliance management with dedicated in-person support to ensure equitable access; and
• Establishment of an online public-facing rental inventory platform that links inspection and business license compliance; and
WHEREAS, the City Attorney has determined that these provisions fall within the scope of authority granted under PMC Section 8.30.170; and WHEREAS, the City Council has also directed staff to prepare (a) a Class and Compensation Study for a full-time Residential Health and Safety Inspector position, and (b) a fee study to support full cost recovery for ongoing operation of the Program, including staffing, software, and enforcement; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pinole as follows:
1. The Administrative Regulations for the Residential Health and Safety Rental Inspection Program, attached hereto as Exhibit A, are hereby approved and adopted.
2. Staff is hereby directed to proceed with preparation of:
a. A Class and Compensation Study to establish a full-time Residential Health and Safety Inspector; and
b. A fee study to establish updated enrollment and inspection fees to support full cost recovery, to be brought to the City Council for consideration at a future meeting.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 18th day of November, 2025 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
I, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on this 18th day of November, 2025 .
______________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
Administrative Regulations Implementing the
Residential Health and Safety Rental Inspection Ordinance (PMC Section 8.30) Adopted by City Council Resolution No. ______
Pursuant to PMC Section 8.30.170, the Building Official hereby issues the following Administrative Regulations to implement and enforce PMC Section 8.30 (the “Ordinance”).
Capitalized terms have the meanings set forth in PMC Section 8.30.030. These regulations were adopted by the City Council following a duly noticed public hearing on November 18, 2025, by Resolution No. ______, and are effective January 1, 2026.
1. Inventory Enrollment. Each Owner carrying on the business of operating Rental Units (PMC Section 8.30.045) shall, for each Rental Property (PMC Section
8.30.055), complete and submit true and correct inventory and inspection enrollment information for all eligible Rental Units (PMC Section 8.30.040) through the City’s approved platform on or before December 31 of each calendar year.
Owners must update enrollment information within 30 days of any material change.
An Owner claiming “Unit Unavailable for Rent” status shall file the signed statement described in PMC Section 8.30.030(K) through the platform.
2. Business License. One business license is required per Rental Property (PMC Section 8.30.055). Owners must comply with Title 5 business license requirements (PMC Section 8.30.050). Consistent with PMC Section 8.30.060, issuance or renewal of a business license requires a valid Certificate of Compliance (CoC) for each Rental Unit at the property, except as provided in the transition schedule in Regulation #9.
3. Inspection Compliance. Owners shall cooperate with the City to ensure periodic inspections once every three (3) years (PMC Section 8.30.090) and any initial inspection following a complete application (PMC Section 8.30.070). Scheduling is through the City’s platform. The City will provide at least 30 days’ written notice of inspection (PMC Section 8.30.110). Cancellations made with less than 48 hours’ notice are subject to the fee in PMC Section 8.30.115. If consent to inspect is withheld, entry will be sought only as permitted by PMC Section 8.30.120.
4. Deficiencies. Units with deficiencies (PMC Section 8.30.150) are subject to reinspection(s) per PMC Section 8.30.100. All deficiencies must be cured within sixty (60) days unless a different period is authorized by the Building Official under PMC Section 8.30.140. Re-inspection fees apply per the Master Fee Schedule. Continued non-compliance is subject to the remedies in PMC Section 8.30.160.
5. Copy of Enrollment to Tenant. Within five (5) business days of submitting unitspecific enrollment information through the City’s approved platform, the Owner shall provide each affected Occupant with a copy (digital or hard copy) of the enrollment information related to that unit. If a balcony inspection is required pursuant to PMC Section 8.30.070, and the Owner receives a balcony inspection report prepared by a licensed general contractor, structural pest control licensee, licensed architect, or licensed engineer, the Owner shall provide each affected
Occupant with a copy (digital or hard copy) of that report within five (5) business days of the Owner’s receipt of the report. Inspection reports submitted to the City for purposes of obtaining a Certificate of Compliance are included in the Certificate of Compliance record pursuant to PMC Section 8.30.130 and are City records. Such records may be made available upon request in accordance with the California Public Records Act and applicable privacy laws.
6. Public Transparency. To support the purpose of PMC Section 8.30.020 and the periodic reporting obligations under PMC Section 8.30.210, the City may publish non-confidential, program-related information, including aggregated or deidentified enrollment and inspection data, on the City’s website or provide such data upon request. Inspection reports, Certificates of Compliance, and related documents maintained as part of the City’s official program records may be made available in accordance with the California Public Records Act and applicable privacy laws.
7. Annual Fee Collection. Program fees, including business license, enrollment, inspection, re-inspection, and cancellation fees, shall be paid in accordance with the City’s Master Fee Schedule and PMC Sections 8.30.050 and 8.30.075. Payment of fees is required at the time of annual enrollment and prior to any inspection.
Failure to pay required program fees constitutes a violation of PMC Section
8.30.045 and may be subject to penalties as authorized in PMC Sections 8.30.190 and Chapter 8.25. Inspection fees shall be billed and collected in three equal annual amounts aligned with the three-year inspection cycle, unless modified by a duly adopted City Master Fee Schedule.
8. Program Administration and Designation of Residential Health and Safety Inspector.
Pursuant to PMC Sections 8.30.090 and 8.30.170, the Building Official may designate Community Development Department staff, including a Residential Health and Safety Inspector, to administer this Program, conduct inspections, issue notices of deficiencies, coordinate re-inspections, verify compliance with Certificates of Compliance requirements, and support enforcement of applicable laws. The Residential Health and Safety Inspector may also conduct inspections of substandard housing conditions consistent with state law, including Assembly Bill 548 and Senate Bill 1415, and applicable sections of the Pinole Municipal Code.
9. Temporary Transition Schedule for 2026–2027 Implementation (Category-Based Compliance Requirements). To support system launch and phased implementation, Owners shall comply with enrollment, fee payment, and inspection milestones based on the status of their existing Certificates of Compliance (“CoC”), as shown below:
a. Category 1 — CoC Expires in 2027–2029 (Current and Valid CoC) • May renew 2026 business license without additional inspection in 2026. • Must enroll in the new system and pay all required annual program fees no later than December 31, 2026.
• The next periodic inspection shall occur on the standard three-year cycle pursuant to PMC Section 8.30.090.
b. Category 2 — CoC Expires in 2026
• May renew 2026 business license.
• Must enroll in the new system, pay required annual fees, and obtain a new CoC by the expiration date of the existing CoC (month-specific timing to be reflected in system reminders).
• Failure to obtain the CoC by expiration will result in the property being treated as non-compliant under PMC Sections 8.30.045 and 8.30.160. c. Category 3 — CoC Expires in 2025
• May renew 2026 business license.
• Must enroll and pay required annual fees by June 30, 2026. • Must schedule an inspection within 90 days of enrollment and obtain a CoC no later than December 31, 2026.
d. Category 4 — CoC Expired in 2024 or Earlier, or No CoC on File • May renew 2026 business license.
• Must enroll and pay required annual fees by April 30, 2026. • Must schedule an inspection within 90 days of enrollment and obtain a CoC no later than September 30, 2026.
10.Business License Renewal and Effective Enforcement. Issuance of business licenses for calendar year 2027 is contingent upon:
• Enrollment in the system;
• Payment of all required program fees; and
• Obtaining a valid Certificate of Compliance under PMC Sections 8.30.060 and
8.30.090.
Properties that do not meet applicable deadlines will be subject to the penalties and correction requirements of PMC Sections 8.30.045, 8.30.150, 8.30.155, 8.30.160, and Chapter 8.25.
Residential Health and Safety
Rental Inspection Program Update
baysfuture.org
Implementation of improved
inventory and inspection platform
Progress Update
Proposed Administrative Regulations
Continued Engagement and Research
2026 Business License Renewals
Program Timeline
January Administrative Regulations
Agenda
Overview/Refresher
● Developer contracted,
program in development
● Next Step: Approve
Administrative Regulations
by Council Resolution
(Attachments A and B)
● Launched Community
Input Campaign: Survey,
and tabling. Hosting input
sessions early 2026
● Next Steps: Build out
policy recommendations
● Bay Area Housing
Finance Authority (BAHFA)
Technical Assistance Grant
Awarded!
● Next Steps: Create bond
documents to present to
council for approval
8 Month Update
3 Home Restoration
Program Policy Handbook Rental Inventory
baysfuture.org
Program Timeline
Residential
Health and
Safety Rental
Inspection
Program
Launched
2006
Finance
Department
begins
encouraging
compliance
using limited
resources
2024
PBF Grant
program begins
Rental Inventory
Program Design
update
2025
CDD Tenant
Protections
Presentation:
Council stresses
value of increased
rental data gathering
2023
Update of Rental
Programs
incorporated into
Partnership for the
Bay’s Future (PBF)
Grant Application
2024
Intended
Revamp
Launch
2026
Inspection
Program
partially
digitized using
limited
resources
2022
Housing
Recession
2008
Enrollment requirements: Current Practices
Maintain a valid business license each year Inspection and information gathering occurs every three years
Allow the City to inspect the unit once every
three years for compliance with applicable
City ordinances and housing laws
Fees are collected at the time of inspection
booking
Correct any violations identified during
inspection, apply for Certificate of
Compliance every three years, and pay fees
Reactive compliance enforcement and
limited tracking through Code Enforcement
and Finance Department
Existing Protocols
Program Scope: All residential property owners – including single-family homes, multi-family units, apartment buildings, and hotel/motels
Lack of public
transparency
Limited data
collection
Temporary,
limited
software
Difficult
inspection
booking system
for public and
staff
Inconsistent,
reactive
enforcement
Residential Health and Safety
Rental Inspection Program
Update
Lack of data
analytics
Easy-to-use System
Informed Policy Design
Proactive Enforcement
Program &
Software
Revamp
Not able to be
proactive
Limited data
collection
Public Transparency
Increase enrollment: Increase enrollment through a user-friendly interface that will also streamline existing processes for property owners and city staff alike.
Program Goals:make participation as convenient, cost-effective, and noninvasive as possible while delivering impactful data to policymakers, decision makers, and the public
Inform Policy: Gather data that will better inform city policies, including determining how to most effectively use existing Housing Successor Fund
Protect Community: Provide public transparency and
avenues of input/feedback on housing stock.
Track and mitigate evictions, habitability shortcomings, and rental misconduct.
Track and Mitigate Evictions
• Current eviction data
tracking is isolated to
Sheriff Lockout data
• Not all eviction proceedings
make it all the way to the
Sheriff lockout phase
• Lockout data does not
track demographics, reason
for eviction, or soft
evictions - all of which will
help develop effective
mitigation strategies.
Identify and Incorporate
Noncompliant Properties
• 300-400 rental units
(roughly 20% of stock) are
currently not enrolled in
program
• Identify and engage
noncompliant units in order
to increase enrollment, and
better local residents.
Why do we want this?
Market Safeguards
• Prevent speculative market
practices from negatively
impacting local housing
market
• Ensure market changes
benefit Pinole’s community
rather than displace it
• Better understand the
City’s rental housing stock
to allow for more precise
approach to housing policy