Pinole City Council
February 3, 2026

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

PINOLE CITY COUNCIL

MEETING AGENDA
February 3, 2026
5:00 PM
Attend in Person: PINOLE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 2131 PEAR STREET 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 - February 3, 2026

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.pinole.gov.

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 Deputy City Clerk, Roxane Stone at (510) 724-8937 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 - February 3, 2026

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 REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54956.8
Property: Assessor’s Parcel Number: 401-230-016
Agency negotiators: Community Development Director, Lilly Whalen; City Attorney, Eric Casher
Negotiating parties: Patrick Donovan, Project Manager, On Air Communications Inc.

Authorized Agent of Crown Castle
B. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: City Attorney Eric Casher, Human Resources Director, Stacy Shell
Unrepresented employee: Interim City Manager
C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(4): Initiation of Litigation
Number of Potential Cases: One

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

City Council
Agenda - February 3, 2026

1. Announcements
B. Mayoral & Council Appointments
C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
E. City Manager Report / Department Staff
F. City Attorney Report

8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMUNITY EVENTS
A. Proclamations

1. Black History Month
B. Presentations

1. The State of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the City of Pinole — Communications Director, Fiona Epps

2. 360 Public Assistance Portal (Citizen Request Portal) — Acting City Manager, Chief Melissa Klawuhn and Communications Director, Fiona Epps

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 January 20, 2026 and the Minutes of the Special City Council Meeting on January 27, 2026.

B. Receive the January 17, 2026 – January 30, 2026, List of Warrants in the Amount of $957,782.07 and the January 30, 2026, Payroll in the Amount of $535,819.62.

C. Adopt a Resolution to Surplus Vehicles from the Police Department. Action: Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Justin Rogers)
D. Fiscal Year (FY) 2026/27 Budget Development Process and Timeline Action: Receipt a Report (Markisha Guillory)
E. Approve The Municipal Pooling Authority Joint Exercise Of Powers Agreement (JPA) For Providing Property, Workers' Compensation, Public Liability And Other Insurance Coverages To The City Of Pinole Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Stacy Shell)

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

City Council
Agenda - February 3, 2026

communication on the record prior to the start of the Public Hearing.

A. Resolution Calling For Special Election And Submitting Question Regarding Office Of Elected Mayor To Voters Action: Adopt a Resolution Calling For Special Election And Submitting Question Regarding Office Of Elected Mayor To Voters (Eric Casher) B. Conduct Public Hearing And Adopt A Resolution Confirming The Community Services Master Fee Schedule Action: Continue to February 17, 2026 (Andrea Dwyer)

11. OLD BUSINESS
A. None

12. NEW BUSINESS
A. None

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 February 17, 2026 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. _______________________
Roxane Stone, CMC
Deputy City Clerk
POSTED: Thursday, January 29, 2026 at 3:40 pm

February 3, 2026
Presentation by Fiona Epps, Communications Director, City of Pinole

THE STATE OF ARTIFICIAL

INTELLIGENCE (AI) IN THE

CITY OF PINOLE

Background, Ethics, Policy, Communication, Current State, and Future in the City of Pinole.

AI OVERVIEW

WHAT IS “AI”?
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a software system capable of performing tasks that typically require human intelligence, such as pattern recognition, decision-making, or language understanding, often using algorithms and neural networks to compute.
• Machine Learning (ML) — A subset of AI where systems learn from data sets to identify patterns, make decisions, and predict outcomes.
• Generative AI (GenAI) — A type of AI that creates new content such as text, images, videos, or sounds.
• Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) — The concept of an AI system that has the capability to perform any intellectual task that a human being can do.
3

AI IS LIKE A SMART COMPUTER HELPER
It can help us look at information, learn from it,
and then make predictions or give advice to help
people make decisions. AI uses things it sees or
hears (and other data) to understand the world,
creates patterns from that information, and then
makes suggestions.
4

BACKGROUND
Federal & State AI Frameworks: The U.S. and California
are actively developing policies for safe and responsible AI use. Governor Newsom’s Sept. 2023 order focuses on
ethical, economic, and policy impacts within state
operations. President Trump’s Dec. 2025 executive order directs federal agencies to preempt or challenge state AI laws that conflict with the federal standard.

California AI Accountability Act (SB 896): Requires state agencies to assess generative AI risks and benefits,
disclose its use in communications, and evaluate
automated decision-making systems for potential harm.
5

BACKGROUND
City of Pinole’s Approach: Due to evolving
regulations and municipal complexity, the City
monitors federal and state efforts before
implementing detailed AI policies.

Generative AI Opportunities & Risks: Tools like
ChatGPT surged to mass adoption in under a year,
offering efficiency gains but also posing risks such
as bias, privacy breaches, and cybersecurity threats
(e.g., phishing, fake news).
6

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
General Ethics*
• Algorithmic Bias
• Fairness – addresses the potential for AI
systems to discriminate based on a certain
group’s characteristics
• Accountability
• Transparency
• Privacy and Data Protection
• Regulation – developing governance
frameworks
*based on UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Ethics
of Artificial Intelligence.

The City of Pinole’s Guiding
Principles
1) Human-centered design
2) Privacy & Security
3) Accuracy – reviewing AI output for validity and
that it is free from bias
4) Transparency
5) Equity
6) Accountability
7) Responsible Use
8) Workforce Empowerment
9) Public Purpose
7

AI POLICY*
Purpose
The City of Pinole AI policy establishes a
comprehensive, yet flexible, governance structure for
Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems used by, or on behalf of, the City of Pinole. This policy enables the City of Pinole to use AI systems responsibly for the benefit of the community while safeguarding against potential
harms.
*The City of Pinole AI Policy is in draft mode.
8

AI POLICY
• AI Policy
• Quick Reference Guide for Responsible AI
Usage
• Terms and Definitions
• AI FactSheet for Vendors
• AI Requirements for Vendors
• AI Incident Response Plan
9

AI POLICY
Key Objectives
• Provides clear guidance
• Ensures adherence to Guiding Principles (our values)
• Defines roles and responsibilities
• Establishes risk assessment procedures
• Alignment of data privacy and security standards
• Lists prohibited uses of AI systems
• Defines how AI systems can be used
10

AI POLICY
When purchasing, configuring, developing, operating,
or maintaining AI systems, the City of Pinole will:
1) Uphold the Guiding Principles
2) Conduct an AI Review to assess potential risk
3) Obtain technical documentation about AI systems
4) Require vendors to comply with the City’s AI Policy
5) Follow an Incident Response Plan in the event of a
security incident involving AI systems
6) Do not use AI for Prohibited Uses
11

AI POLICY
User-specific Rules
• Usage of Generative AI may be subject to Public
Records Act
• Do not use personal accounts for Generative AI
usage
• Read and understand the Terms & Conditions
• Opt-out of data collection when possible
12

AI POLICY
User-specific Rules (continued)
• Verify the copyright of AI-generated content
• Be mindful of content ownership
• Cite the use of Generative AI for substantial
content
• Review, revise, and fact check AI-generated
content
13

14 When engaging in HighRisk Generative AI Use
Cases:
• Review tone and language in
AI output
• Confirm verifiable sources for
facts and figures in AI output
• Do not input
private/sensitive data into
Generative AI systems

AI POLICY
Prohibited Uses
• Real-time and covert biometric
identification
• Emotion analysis, or the use of
computer vision techniques to classify
human facial and body movements into
certain emotions or sentiment
• Fully automated decisions that do not
require any meaningful human oversight
but substantially impact individuals
• Social scoring, or the use of AI systems
to track and classify individuals based on
their behaviors, socioeconomic status, or
personal characteristics
• Cognitive behavioral manipulation of
people or specific vulnerable groups
15

DEPARTMENT USAGE OF AI
16 APPROVED AI APPLICATIONS
Microsoft Copilot
RingCentral
Public Input
ArcGIS
Canva
Peach Safety
Ubiquiti
• Marketing and program ideas
• Report writing and presentations
• Survey question development
• Research and note taking
• Social media captions
• Report summaries
• Data analysis; identifying themes
• Graphic design
• Camera systems

WHAT’S NEXT WITH AI?

TRAINING &

COMMUNICATION
• Foundations of AI
• Biannual staff training & review
• Internal communication about AI
Policy; Quick Reference Guide
• AI Vendor notification (RFP and
contracts)
• IT webpage
18

AI AND THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
(IT) PLAN
19

NEXT STEPS
Final Review
• Meet and confer
Implementation
• Training and communication (internal and
external)
Monitoring
• Quarterly revision of the AI Policy
• Monitor state and federal policies
• GovAI Coalition activities
20

Questions?

THANK YOU

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

MINUTES
January 20, 2026

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 Pro Tem Murphy called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 5:05 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
Anthony Tave, Mayor*
Devin Murphy, Mayor Pro Tem
Norma Martinez-Rubin, Council Member**
Maureen Toms, Council Member
Cameron Sasai, Council Member
*Arrived at 5:52 p.m.
**Attending Remotely
B. STAFF PRESENT
Melissa Klawuhn, Acting City Manager/Police Chief
Eric Casher, City Attorney
Andrea Dwyer, Community Services Director
Lilly Whalen, Community Development Director
Heba El-Guindy, Public Works Director
Markisha Guillory, Finance Director
David Hanham, Planning Manager
Roxane Stone, Deputy City Clerk

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Deputy City Clerk Roxane Stone announced the agenda had been posted on January 16, 2026 at 11:10 a.m. with all legally required written notices. A correction memo had been prepared for Item 10B and written comments had also 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: None

5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION:

None

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.

Ann Moriarty explained she was present on behalf of the pollinators important to the City of Pinole, both native pollinators (bumble bees and humming birds) and non-native pollinators (honey bees).

To address the decline of native pollinators, the City of Pinole would collaborate with the Pinole Garden Club and Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed on the Pinole Pollinator Pathway Project.

The first native pollinator garden installation on City grounds was scheduled for February 7, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. at Fernandez Park, and she hoped everyone would attend. She thanked the Community Services Director and Recreation Supervisor for their support for the project.

With respect to honey bees, Ms. Moriarty noted backyard beekeepers had been at the forefront of the establishment of a healthy population of honey bee hives, which were also important in pollination; however, the Pinole Municipal Code (PMC) effectively blocked most Pinole residents from keeping bees. As such, the PMC was in urgent need of an update. While she had reached out to staff a year ago and again in mid-2025, she learned there was no staff capacity to address this update. A group of local beekeepers had also sent the City Council and staff communication with more complete details and references. She hoped there could be progress on this issue so that Pinole could be an environmental beacon in Contra Costa County. The group also submitted various models and examples from other Bay Area cities to support the discussion. She asked the City Council to agendize a request for staff to address this update to reflect current best beekeeping regulations by transitioning to a nuisance mitigation model or at the very least consider updating the PMC so it would not block Pinole citizens from keeping bees. She was happy to work with the City Council and staff on this matter.

Margaret Gelhaus referenced the proposal for a ballot initiative for an Elected Mayor. She suggested whether in favor of an Elected Mayor or not, it was irresponsible for the City Council to spend $25,000 on a Special Election, particularly given the City was having trouble balancing the budget.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Jane Kaasa, agreed with the comments from the previous speaker. She loved the City of Pinole; however, there was a lot the City needed to do without incurring and spending unnecessary funds, such as for an Elected Mayor given the City’s small size. She asked whether an Elected Mayor would save the City money and accomplish things that would pay for the salary of the position.

She suggested this was something that would drain the City financially and there was the possibility of imposing additional taxes on citizens. She hoped this matter would not be placed on a future ballot.

Jennifer Horne also commented on the proposal for a ballot initiative to change the City’s governing structure from a Rotating Mayor to an Elected Mayor. She questioned the need for the change and read the meeting minutes from the December 2, 2025 City Council meeting when the issue had been agendized, and referenced the many comments made by then Council member Murphy, who supported putting this measure on the ballot. Council member Murphy suggested placing the item on the ballot would increase civic engagement, but she found there was plenty of civic engagement. Council member Murphy suggested the City’s current system was archaic and other cities’ systems had moved away from a Rotating Mayor, but calling something archaic was not in and of itself a problem; the question was whether the existing system still functioned.

Council member Murphy stated Pinole citizens would have a direct role in choosing their Mayor rather than being subject to an internal Council decision determining who the Mayor would be, and she stated Pinole residents and taxpayers already had a role in choosing the next Mayor.

Over the past 100-years at least when citizens voted for a particular City Council member, they were also voting for that person as Mayor.

Council member Murphy suggested an Elected Mayor would be a clear mandate and it would have clear legitimacy as the chief spokesperson for the City and provide greater transparency to help residents understand who was responsible for the results.

Ms. Horn asked if there had been any questions about the legitimacy of any Rotating Mayor serving as the spokesperson for the City. She also found after living with the current governing structure for years that Pinole residents already understood who was responsible for the results.

Council member Murphy also suggested the change would provide direct and powerful accountability by enabling voters to remove the Mayor. She pointed out there was already accountability since voters could choose to vote not to continue a particular Council member in their post, which eliminated that individual as a possible Mayor. She added that Council member Murphy had also suggested the current system was the same process that had been done over and over again for the past 100-years and this proposal would change the City, but she questioned that and did not understand that statement.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy provided an overview of the rules for public comment under Citizens to be Heard and for items not on the agenda, the process to speak to individual agenda items, with another opportunity for public comment at the end of the agenda with a second Citizens to be Heard for those who had not yet had the opportunity to provide comments to the City Council.

Mark Zimmerman also spoke to the proposed ballot initiative for an Elected Mayor, as initiated by the City Council on December 2, 2025. It had been asserted the ballot measure was a ballot of democracy, but he suggested it was not. It was about taking action on a proposal by one Council member and not by the citizens of Pinole.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Mr. Zimmerman suggested if one was truly interested in the democratic process, polling would be done before the City spent funds on a ballot measure, but that option had been nixed in order to rush to make the deadline for the June 2026 ballot. He suggested the City Council was doing the opposite of a democratic process, having endorsed the measure without community involvement.

He suggested the current Mayoral rotation system allowed for diversity and equity of representation on the City Council and thereby the community. By limiting the Mayor’s individual authority and duration of service, the current system diffused political power across the entire City Council making it harder for special interests to insert influence over a single individual and he cited the federal government as an example. The proposal for an Elected Mayor, would allow a long-term Mayor to have influence over City priorities for years, whereas the current system promoted a dynamic City Council and fostered a more collaborative team-oriented City Council environment. The current system was not archaic, as asserted by a Council member.

Mr. Zimmerman reported that 75 percent of cities in Contra Costa County had a Rotating Mayor system and it worked well. Five cities had an Elected Mayor, but those cities were two to six times larger in size than Pinole. He stated this was a case of misplaced priorities and rather there should be a focus on the vacant City Manager position, resolution of the Pinole Police Department (PPD) contract and a focus on fiscal responsibility. The proposed ballot measure would cost the City approximately $25,000 in addition to staff time, consultants and legal experts and a new Mayor would likely want a Mayor’s salary, pension and travel budget competitive with other Elected Mayors. There may also be a need to fill a vacant position on the City Council, with additional costs. While three Council members supported this proposal, he suggested this was poor judgement, there was a lack of citizen input and a strong indication of misplaced priorities.

He asked the City Council not to proceed with the Elected Mayor ballot measure.

Debbie Long suggested an elected Council member served all the people properly and effectively and having an Elected Mayor would give the perception that one person had more power than the other Council members. This concern had been raised during the December 2, 2025 City Council meeting, when a Council member stated that the Mayor would be responsible for making decisions on public housing, transportation and the like. That alone would have the Mayor as one person held responsible directly to the people, which sounded like a power grab. Another argument was that an Elected Mayor would strengthen leadership, although an Elected Mayor as argued by the same Council member would have the opposite effect.

Ms. Long suggested an Elected Mayor process was trying to delete leadership roles from the rest of the City Council who Pinole citizens had already elected to serve some of those roles for the entire community. An Elected Mayor may actually dilute representation and if an Elected Mayor was elected with 36 percent of the vote, as an example, that person was not really representing the entire community and that was not democracy in play. She found this proposal would silence the majority of the community, which was why the beauty of a five-person City Council structure most fairly represented democracy and since there were more people to share the number of votes and represent the overall population. It was also suggested that a Rotating Mayor structure was archaic, which she suggested was a new buzz word, whereas two thirds of the cities in the State of California had Rotating Mayors and those with Elected Mayors had vastly larger populations than the City of Pinole. For the new cry of democracy, she emphasized there was no need for a King of the City of Pinole.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Cathy McFarland, commented that two major items residents wanted was safety and good roads, although time and time again they were being ignored with promises unfilled and the City Council was too busy being self-serving such as wanting an Elected Mayor, rather than the current protocol that was working well. She also found the constant City Council vote of 3-2 on many items had given residents a loss of confidence in who was representing citizens. Possibly it was time for Council members to be recalled. She added there had been another month without an approved contract for the PPD, Measure I had been approved in November 2024 and put into place on April 1, 2025, with nine months of increased sales tax revenue but still nothing for the PPD. Possibly it was time for the Closed Sessions on these items to be made public to allow the public to see who was actually working for the City.

Ms. McFarland added after reviewing the City’s impacts fees and seeing what the City wanted to fund in upcoming years, she found it had shown Council members were not working for the residents of Pinole once again. Additionally, the State’s pro-housing agenda did not protect the community. As an example, senior housing had been recently built in Pinole with little parking and there were issues in surrounding areas including issues with respect to safety. She understood the City now wanted $390,000 from residents of those neighborhoods to correct the problem. The City also had two large pro-housing projects with the same blueprints located on Appian Way and Fitzgerald Drive, and a storm drain project that was to be completed prior to the senior housing development cost had escalated beyond the original estimated amount from $700,000 to approximately $750,000. After talking with a Department Head, she understood there were issues with the senior housing development that had increased the estimate. The City’s lack of oversight and rushing into the pro-housing agenda significantly cost the City. She asked the City to tell the State to stay out of Pinole and stop putting the financial risk on residents.

Ms. McFarland further commented that the City was migrating towards the State’s cleaner environment and expressed concern the City was going down a rabbit hole due to the State’s agenda, with unrealistic goals for all-electric development as an example. On another issue, when reviewing the top 25 incomes for Pinole, she noted that gas stations provided the greatest tax revenue.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy acknowledged Ms. McFarland had provided written comments as well.

Janet Wilks also spoke to the topic of an Elected Mayor and suggested the move to circumvent the input of Pinole residents was a clear attempt to consolidate executive power, which was seen daily in the news and which had political ambition written all over it. The Council passed on the opportunity to poll residents on their opinion whether an Elected Mayor should be placed on the ballot, with the City Council deciding to spend $25,000 to put the question on the ballot without so much as a by your leave to Pinole residents. The City Council also decided to place the question on the June versus November ballot, with the decision precluding polling. She pointed out the turnout for June elections was abysmal and exactly what some were counting on.

Ms. Wilks asked of the budget impacts if Pinole were to move to an Elected Mayor structure since every time a sitting Council member won a Mayoral position, it would force either a Special Election with associated costs, or allow the City Council to circumvent Pinole voters and appoint a Council member to fill the position, which to her spoke to consolidation of power.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Ms. Wilks asked about the fully loaded costs for a Special Election, the compensation package proposed to be offered to an Elected Mayor, and who among the City Council planned to run for the position and whether they were the same people rushing this through. She asked if this scheme was the reason the City had lost two City Managers in such a short period of time, whether the past two City Managers had been a threat to City Council power, how much it cost residents of Pinole to drive out two qualified City Managers, the amount of their severance packages, the cost for another third City Manager recruitment process and what other budget priorities would be sidelined to meet the Mayor’s compensation package or whether the City Council proposed another tax increase. She also asked why Council and staff time was being spent on this issue when there were other more pressing issues that needed attention, such as roads, the PPD contract, Measure I funding, public safety and hiring another City Manager. She further asked whether the City Council had any intention of engaging with Pinole residents on the question of going to the ballot for consolidation of executive power in an Elected Mayor position and challenged the City Council to respond to her comments.

Kent Moriarty commented on the likely results of an Elected Mayor and consolidating more power in one person. He suggested residents would see the Mayor position used as a tool for personal ambition, would see more of an individual taking credit for the work of others, would see continued increases in City funds being allocated for the City Council as they had seen the City Council do approving increases in salary and travel allowances and would see an additional Mayor’s salary.

They could also see continued and increased conflicts between the Mayor and staff, and he too referenced the fact two City Managers had been let go, which had cost taxpayers and would continue to cost the City hundreds of thousands of dollars. If the City Council wanted to spend its time, effort and money on a ballot measure, he suggested pursuing something that benefitted the City as a whole.

Jason Littlefield described the differences between a Strong Mayor, Weak Mayor and City Council-City Manager structure, which the City currently had and which was not archaic, but very common and successful in many places, but much depended on the members of the City Council.

He too referenced the meeting minutes from the December 2, 2025 City Council meeting when the topic of an Elected Mayor had been discussed, and when a statement had been made that an Elected Mayor would provide greater transparency, help residents understand exactly who was responsible for results and if the Mayor failed to deliver, the voters, not the City Council, would have the power to remove that individual at the next election. He suggested that sounded like a Strong Mayor attribute. Although it was also stated this change would not change the City Council – City Manager form of government, he found that to be a contradictory statement since there could not be a Mayor who took accountability and not change the form of City government/ management. He added it had also been suggested the intent was to create the office of an Elected Mayor to not be a Strong Mayor, which was the intent, and continuing to reference the meeting minutes, referenced the statement that was something Pinole voters would have to decide.

Marcia Joswick, speaking to the same topic, opposed the idea of an Elected Mayor in Pinole since cities the size of Pinole did not require an Elected Mayor, the associated costs of an Elected Mayor would be substantial now and in the future, and the City did not need a Special Election in June 2026 at a cost of over $25,000. She opposed her taxes being used wastefully and she asked City Council members to stop this nonsense before another penny was spent.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Margaret Young also opposed a full time Elected Mayor and agreed with the prior speaker’s comments, who were people she knew. She suggested this was a very poor choice for the City since it would cost taxpayers, was unnecessary, the current Mayoral rotation worked well and did not cost taxpayers money, and with more important uses for City dollars such as a new City Manager, schools, road repair or any other issues previous speakers mentioned.

Peter Murray commented he had spoken to the topic of an Elected Mayor before and suggested it was a bad idea and a waste of time. He would like to see the City Council think of this situation as an individual seat, not as a group thing, and consider how this would affect the City Council in the future. If an Elected Mayor was allowed, it would likely diminish the position of other Council members since an Elected Mayor, depending on personality, may step up and lead the conversation, and assume authority and final decision making. He had seen this happen in the past, information that should get to the entire City Council did not happen because the Mayor decided they had to peruse information to ensure it fit his/her agenda, and this was a likely scenario for an Elected Mayor. He asked whether this was what the City Council really wanted to do, who was being appeased and who wanted to find their seat in a diminished capacity, whereas the current system allowed the City Council to have an equal say and the public knew they could approach any Council member and get questions answered. If that was not the case, there was only one person they could go to and there could be issues with special cliques and being influenced, sometimes to the detriment of others.

Susan Wallace, a new resident to Pinole, loved the community and when she learned there was a proposal to change the City Council to an Elected Mayor position, she was alarmed. She asked about the budget impacts of an Elected Mayor and expressed concern there was currently no City Manager. She found the decision had been made with haste and encouraged the City Council to take a poll of the citizens of Pinole.

Nadine Robbins-Laurent, a member of the Board of Directors, Pinole Artisans, thanked the City of Pinole for those who played a part in the Art Exhibit that everyone walked through as they entered the Council Chambers, with the art to be displayed through the end of February 2026.

Pinole Artisans was an organization that had been in existence for 21-years and was a 501(c)(3) non-profit. There was more information available at pinoleartisans.org. Pinole Artisans held monthly meetings, and she hoped they would be held in the City at some point since they had trouble locating a space they could afford. Artists were invited to come in and discuss themselves and their work, and she welcomed everyone to attend one of their monthly meetings. She also thanked City staff, especially Prajwol Bhandari for his help getting the exhibit going and former City Manager Kelcey Young for her collaboration.

Peter Herman also spoke to the proposal for an Elected Mayor and commented he did not have a lot to add to the reasons to oppose the initiative. His main concern was that there was little time to further develop the pros and cons of an Elected Mayor. If he were to offer the benefit of the doubt for this initiative, there could be some benefits to this type of model, but he asked that the proponents of the initiative clarify the additional benefits that were more concrete in nature that could be foreseen since the benefits laid out had been rebutted to some degree during the meeting and it would be appropriate to hear more proposals on what specifically was intended to be accomplished if this initiative were implemented.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

If this was something proponents felt strongly about, Mr. Herman asked for some additional research to determine what it was they were attempting to accomplish that would be appealing to citizens and to the City Council. He was not convinced yet and suggested they needed time to consider if this was the right thing to do. He supported the comments that others had made, that perhaps this was not the time since the City had many other priorities that were very important.

At this time, he was opposed, and suggested this should be considered in the future with a better case presented.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy reported many of the items discussed would be on a future agenda and he encouraged the public to keep an eye out for future City Council meetings.

7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Mayor Report

1. Announcements
Mayor Tave apologized for being late having come from work. He otherwise had no report.

B. Mayoral & Council Appointments: None
C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
Council member Sasai reported the West Contra Costa Transportation Commission (WCCTC) would meet on January 23, 2026 at the City of El Cerrito, City Hall at 8:00 a.m. and would hear a presentation on The Hercules Hub, a vacant parcel by the waterfront in the City of Hercules, among other regular business items. As the current Chair of WCCTC, he also agendized a discussion about surveillance and reported on a meeting with Senator Jesse Arreguín about the need for surveillance and how it could help public safety, particularly due to speed cameras.

Across the state it was illegal to have speed cameras in municipalities with the exception of a few major cities, such as the cities of San Francisco and Oakland, which were part of a pilot project.

He had discussed carve out legislation with Senator Arrequín in Contra Costa and Alameda Counties and he looked forward to a discussion with WCCTC and sending a letter to state legislators to allow for that type of new surveillance. He also reported he spent a great deal of time supporting educators and students, having participated on the picket line with teachers and education staff who held a strike in December 2025, for a fair contract with the West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD).

Council member Toms reported she and the Mayor Pro Tem attended a meeting with Assemblymember Buffy Wicks who provided a review of her legislative priorities. At that time, she spoke to Assemblymember Wicks about the ongoing problems on the on- and off-ramps that crossed over Pinole Creek, where there were no trash captures. The same issue had been raised with Senator Arreguín. There was no trash capture fencing in the area that prevented trash from the freeway from flowing freely into the creek, although the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) requirements were to prevent that from happening, which issue she found to be a high priority. She would continue to highlight the issue with electeds since this was a Caltrans responsibility.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Council member Toms also attended the Contra Costa Mayors Conference in the City of Pittsburg, at which time there had been a presentation on a recycling program in Central Contra Costa County, and an announcement that retired City of Richmond Police Chief Bisa French would be taking on the Executive Director position at the Family Justice Center. She had also attended the Bay Front Chamber of Commerce meeting, with upcoming programs sponsored by the Chamber including the West Contra Costa Career Fair on February 18, 2026; City of Hercules Lunar New Year Parade and Festival on March 1, 2026; and State of the Cities Breakfast, with the Mayors of Pinole, Hercules and the Supervisor who covered the Rodeo area on March 12, 2026.

Council member Toms also planned to attend the January 23, 2026 League of California Cities Policy Committee for Housing, Community and Economic Development to review legislation, and reiterated the Pollinator Garden event sponsored by the Pinole Garden Club and Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed on February 7, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. at Fernandez Park.

Council member Martinez-Rubin reported she met with the City Clerk and the Deputy City Clerk as part of the City Council Procedures Subcommittee, where an update on the subcommittee discussions and review of procedures was provided, including an overview from the City Clerk on Senate Bill (SB) 707, which updated the Brown Act for 2026, and modernized open meeting laws which she highlighted in-depth. The next subcommittee meeting had been scheduled for March 18, 2026.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy reported he attended the Finance Subcommittee meeting and detailed the discussions for expanding community opportunities for the budget process. He thanked staff for starting the budget process earlier, particularly thanking the Finance Department, and also thanked staff for the launch of the Budget Dashboard tool. He also attended a Marin Clean Energy (MCE) Executive Board meeting and provided an update on the approval of a Standing Committee and members, and while not a member of the Standing Committee, he would continue to provide strong financial oversight as a full Board member, through his role on the Executive Committee, and as the Chair of the Technical Committee. He provided an overview of the role of MCE, reported the City of Pinole had received funds in the past from MCE for certain programs and infrastructure, and emphasized the importance at the regional level to continue to maintain that fiscal responsibility and technical accountability.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy added with respect to the WCCUSD, one of his priorities had been to work on education and literacy initiatives. He looked forward to working with Friends of Pinole Library to expand literacy efforts and support additional educational opportunities, especially while the Pinole Library was closed for a period of reconstruction. He encouraged anyone interested in supporting literacy, tutoring and enrichment programs to reach out to him via email, telephone or at City Hall, to allow them to continue to strengthen the community together. He also planned to continue his quarterly tours of WCCUSD school sites.

D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
Council member Toms requested a future agenda item to include a memorandum from the Community Development Department with a report on the PMC for expanding bee hives, pollinators and honey bees in residential areas and what that would involve.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Mayor Tave suggested a memorandum be presented to the City Council, and then go back to the Municipal Code Ad-Hoc Subcommittee to review the ordinance with a recommendation to the full City Council.

Council member Toms agreed.

Council member Sasai pointed out the Municipal Code Ad-Hoc Subcommittee was no longer meeting.

City Attorney Eric Casher confirmed the Municipal Code Update Ad-Hoc Subcommittee no longer convened but if there was an interest bringing the item forward, it could be brought back as a Council level workshop and the memorandum could serve as the staff report. The City Council could provide direction on the types of regulations it would like to see in the ordinance. The City Council could also appoint a subcommittee to take on this one particular ordinance and allow staff to work with the subcommittee before bringing back recommendations to the full City Council.

Mayor Tave recalled the City Council had considered updates to the PMC regarding roosters and chickens, and a particular number a resident could have on-site, which was why he thought this topic could go through the Municipal Code Ad-Hoc Subcommittee. He asked if Council member Toms wanted to see it go through a subcommittee or whether a memorandum would suffice.

Council member Toms suggested starting with a memorandum and learning the staff capacity and what would be involved and possibly provide copies of the materials Ms. Moriarty had provided to staff. After the memorandum was presented, she suggested the City Council could consider a request for a future agenda item.

Council member Martinez-Rubin offered a motion, seconded by Council member Toms, that staff bring to the City Council an update of the Pinole Municipal Code relative to apiaries and bees to reflect current beekeeping practices and regulations that supported agricultural sustainability, while also protecting the health, safety and general well-being of the Pinole community, and in so doing allow the City Council and the public to consider regulations associated with that.

City Attorney Casher commented that the direction sounded like a workshop item that staff would bring the information forward at a future City Council meeting, and receive direction from the City Council on what it wanted to see in an ordinance, if at all.

On the discussion, Council member Martinez-Rubin wanted an update to the PMC, with references available from nearby cities that could serve as potential models and rely on the City Attorney’s expertise on updating the PMC, along with internal discussions between the City Attorney and staff on issues related to regulations.

City Attorney Casher explained that he could present the current PMC, how the issue was currently being regulated and examples from other cities that had incorporated regulations related to beekeeping and offer those examples as options. The City Council could then provide direction whether or not to make any updates to the PMC.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Council member Sasai supported the motion but emphasized there were benefits to having the Municipal Code Ad-Hoc Subcommittee discuss the issue and return to the City Council with a staff report and recommendations.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy fully supported agendizing the item and for Council members MartinezRubin and Toms to take the lead. He understood there was some urgency around the item and perhaps it should get on the agenda as soon as possible.

ACTION: Motion by Council members Martinez-Rubin/Toms to direct staff to bring to the City Council an update of the Pinole Municipal Code relative to apiaries and bees to reflect current beekeeping practices and regulations that support agricultural sustainability, while also protecting the health, safety and general well-being of the Pinole community, and in so doing allow the City Council and the public to consider regulations associated with that.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Tave, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
E. City Manager Report / Department Staff
Acting City Manager/Police Chief Melissa Klawuhn provided an update on the Art Reception at City Hall held prior to the City Council meeting and hosted by Pinole Artisans. She thanked Pinole Artisans for the exhibit which had been on display for the past couple of months and for hosting the Art Reception. She also reported the City had received 20 proposals from the City Manager Executive Search services, and the City Council Subcommittee identified three top firms for the City Council to interview at an upcoming date.

Acting City Manager/Police Chief Klawuhn reported the Police Unity Tour, a 300-mile ride to honor fallen law enforcement officers, would include the participation of retired Acting Chief Matt Avery who would be riding in honor of fallen officers, including three officers who had made the ultimate sacrifice serving the Pinole community.

Officers included Constable Arthur McDonald, whose end of watch was in 1929; Officer John Sellers, whose end of watch was in 1972; and Officer Floyd “Bernie” Schwartz whose end of watch was in 1980.

Acting City Manager/Police Chief Klawuhn also reported the Road Repair and Rehabilitation Town Hall would be held on January 22, 2026 in the Council Chambers from 5:30 to 7:30 p.m., and would include a presentation on upcoming road improvements and maintenance efforts with City staff to be present to share an overview of planned projects, funding, timelines and a brief Q&A session. Anyone may participate through Zoom and livestream, which would include multilingual translation and closed captioning. She also announced she would be moving City Manager Office hours to Wednesdays from 3:00 to 4:00 p.m. starting January 21, 2026, and that schedule would continue for subsequent weeks.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

F. City Attorney Report
City Attorney Casher provided an update on SB 707, which required City staff to provide the City Council and City Committee/Commission members copies of the Brown Act. He confirmed copies would be provided to the City Council and all City Committee/Commission members.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED (Items 7A through 7F)
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMUNITY EVENTS
A. Proclamations

1. Recognizing Police Officer of the Year
The City Council read into the record a proclamation recognizing Andre Roberts as the City of Pinole Police Officer of the Year.

Pinole Police Officer Andre Roberts thanked the City Council for its leadership and members of the PPD and his partner for their support. He looked forward to serving the City of Pinole for years to come.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

2. Recognizing Firefighter of the Year
The City Council read into the record a proclamation recognizing Captain Brian George as the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) Firefighter of the Year.

CCCFPD Captain Brian George thanked the City Council for the recognition and also thanked Officer Roberts. He commented that the members of Fire Stations 73 and 74 could also be standing in this position to receive recognition for doing a great job including other members of the CCCFPD. He was happy to receive the recognition on their behalf. He was also pleased to be put in the position of having great mentors and people who could continue to make the CCCFPD better.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

B. Presentations

1. Glow Pinole Presentation – Community Services Director, Andrea Dwyer Community Services Director Andrea Dwyer provided an overview of Glow Pinole 2025, the second year for the holiday decorating contest, and reported there had been over 5,300 views of the community map and for this year community members were allowed to vote for the winners. 2025 Category winners included:

Residents: Category
Stephen Tilton Holiday Showstopper
Angelina Gutierrez Best Theme Display
Johanna Jimenez Glow and Go

Businesses:

The Treasure Hunt Shop Winter Wonderland Window
Derek McKindles
Mike’s Appliances Glow Getter
Mike Murphy
House of Lilith Hair Designers Dazzling Display
Angel Schneider
Certificates would be presented to all winners.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy thanked the Community Services Director for the program, the opportunity for residents and businesses to dazzle for the holidays and setting the mood for cheer in the community. He thanked the Community Services Director and her team for the various City programs and efforts to make new holiday traditions.

Council member Toms thanked staff for developing the program, congratulated the winners, commented she also participated and recognized the work of everyone who had participated.

Mayor Tave also thanked staff and found the program to be a hit. He commented that Glow Pinole was catching on in the community, had encouraged him to decorate more, and he asked staff to keep up the great work and effort.

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.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

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 December 16, 2025 and the Special City Council Meeting of January 13, 2026.

B. Receive the December 13, 2025 – January 16, 2026, List of Warrants in the Amount of $1,194,412.47, the December 19, 2025 Payroll in the Amount of $583,493.46, the January 2, 2026 Payroll in the Amount of $596,329.70, and the January 16, 2026 Payroll in the Amount of $663,767.06.

C. 2026 Regular City Council Meeting Schedule. Action: Approve the 2026 Schedule of Regular City Council Meetings by Minute Order (Roxane Stone).

D. Approve the 2026 Council Committee Assignment List. Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Roxane Stone)
E. Approval of Resolution Allowing the Submittal of a Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2026/27 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding.

Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Heba El-Guindy) Mayor Pro Tem Murphy asked that Item 9E be pulled for discussion.

Council member Martinez-Rubin asked that Item 9D be pulled for discussion.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafal Menis, speaking to Item 9C, commented on the challenges for people to get to the City Council Chambers by 5:00 p.m. on Tuesdays. He asked whether it would be possible for the City Council to consider an adjustment as part its 2026 Regular City Council Meeting Schedule, to change the start time of City Council meetings from 5:00 to 5:30 or 6:00 p.m., so that the meetings could be readily accessible to the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
For Item 9E, Mayor Pro Tem Murphy highlighted the item and stated while it had been posted on the Consent Calendar, it was a big item. He thanked the Public Works Director and her team for prioritizing the submittal request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for the allocation of Fiscal Year 2026/27 Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding. While a lot of people were excited about new developments on San Pablo Avenue, there were also concerns with pedestrian and bicycle safety. He explained the resolution would ensure roads were safe and repaved and offered a creative approach for new funding for roads. He urged staff to continue to push the City Council’s priorities.

ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Murphy/Council member Sasai to approve Consent Calendar Items 9A, 9B and 9E, as shown.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Tave, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
For Item 9D, Council member Martinez-Rubin referenced Page 63 of 516 of the agenda packet, and noted the 2026 Council Committee Assignments for the West Contra Costa Integrated Waste Management Authority (WCCIWMA/”RecycleMore”) had shown Mayor Pro Tem Murphy as the delegate with the Mayor as the alternate, and with the group meeting the second Thursday of the month at 6:15 p.m. There was a conflict since the Mayor Pro Tem had also been shown as the alternate for the Western Contra Costa Transit Authority (WCCTA/”WestCat”), which also met on the second Thursday of each month at 6:30 p.m. While the Mayor Pro Tem had been shown as the alternate position, one could not be in the same place at the same time. She asked whether the Mayor Pro Tem would agree to Council member Toms serving as the alternate to WestCat due to that conflict, and if the appointed delegates were to need an alternate, there would actually be a representative from the City of Pinole present at the meetings.

Council member Toms was willing to serve as the alternate to WestCat.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy supported the item per the staff recommendation and as the Committee Assignments had been previously discussed.

Council member Martinez-Rubin reiterated her concern with the potential for a conflict.

Council member Toms emphasized the importance of the City having representation at the various bodies and she too shared the concern being raised by Council member Martinez-Rubin.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy commented that traditionally this was the time for individuals to assess their own availability. He emphasized he had been pretty great at ensuring Pinole had representation on the committees he served, and he brought back information to the City Council time and again. In terms of his timing and availability, those were not questions that needed to be asked, but they had been asked, and he had been generous in saying the 2026 Council Committee Assignment List was okay, as shown.

Council member Toms clarified her concern was not with the Mayor Pro Tem’s availability, but the availability of the alternate to step up and cover RecycleMore, if needed.

Council member Sasai commented on the alternate structure for the Council Committee Assignmnts, and asked whether it would be possible to have two representatives and two alternates from the City Council on those Boards, and whether that had been done in the past.

City Attorney Casher explained there was nothing to prohibit that practice. It would just require a level of coordination between the alternates to decide who would cover and that would not be a Brown Act issue.

Council member Sasai asked if the Committee Assignment List could be amended to allow for two alternates, and Deputy City Clerk Stone confirmed that was possible.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Council member Sasai suggested that change could be considered in the future and he would like to discuss the logistics about that. He mentioned it because the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) had two representatives and two alternate positions.

For Item 9C and whether the start time for City Council meetings should be changed, Mayor Tave acknowledged 5:00 p.m. was a difficult start time. He personally recommended a change to 5:30 or 6:00 p.m. He also reported he had spoken with the Acting City Manager about allowing for a break for dinner, or some type of break before rolling into the City Council meetings.

Council member Sasai agreed a 5:00 p.m. start time was challenging for those who worked, although a later start time may result in completing fewer agenda items, coupled with a very long Closed Session where the City Council may have to consider extensions to the meeting length.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy was open to either suggestion and commented the City Council had discussed this topic in the past. He also understood a change in the meeting date would require an amendment to the PMC. He preferred a start time of 5:00 p.m., which had been discussed as a way to ensure there was enough time to complete the agenda and with the aim to end meetings at an appropriate time. He suggested the City Council was doing great thus far, but also understood the challenges for some who had 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. jobs.

Council member Martinez-Rubin suggested a start time of 5:30 p.m. was reasonable but with that later start time, the City Council must also acknowledge the need to be more efficient with the amount of time for discussions. Perhaps this was where the Procedure Subcommittee could offer recommendations on the changes to be made with regard to efficiency, to ensure items to be covered in 30-minutes or less were actually covered and the number of items on the agenda to be coordinated with the City Manager. She suggested a start time of 5:30 p.m. could result in the same adjournment times as if starting at 5:00 p.m. if the Council conscientiously limited discussions without minimizing the significance of comments about any particular item.

Mayor Tave agreed with the need to be more efficient as the City Council set up the Committee Assignments, which was forthcoming. He asked the City Attorney about the procedure to change the meeting start time to 5:30 or 6:00 p.m.

City Attorney Casher confirmed the PMC would have to be amended. This part of the PMC had been amended in June 2023 and a change to the PMC would require a first read of that chapter of the PMC to reset the meeting start time from 5:00 to 5:30 or 6:00 p.m., and would involve a second read as would a typical ordinance. The change would go into effect 30-days after the second read. This could be brought to the City Council for the first and second meetings of February and the change could go into effect at the end of March 2026, and with the first City Council meeting in April with a new start time. The City Council may still approve Item 9C and staff would return with an amendment to the PMC and also look at the Council Procedures, which may also require amendment to reflect a time change. He recommended approving Item 9C, as is, and then there could be a separate motion to amend the meeting start time to the time the City Council decided and provide direction to staff to bring back an ordinance to effect that time change.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

For Brown Act purposes, City Attorney Casher recommended the City Council take separate actions on Items 9C and 9D, and any direction to staff to amend the PMC to change the meeting start time.

ACTION: Motion by Mayor Tave/Mayor Pro Tem Murphy to approve Item 9D, as is.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Tave, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Mayor Tave offered a motion, seconded by Council member Sasai to approve Item 9C and amend the PMC to change the City Council meetings to a 5:30 p.m. start time.

Council member Sasai supported the motion but would like the City Council, including himself, to be mindful of the time when commenting on particular items, while still getting points across, and he did not want the change to result in shortened agendas. If there were issues with the change, it could be discussed in the future.

ACTION: Motion by Mayor Tave/Council member Sasai to approve Item 9C and amend the Pinole Municipal Code to change the City Council meetings to a 5:30 p.m. start time.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Tave, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Conduct a Public Hearing, Tabulate Ballots, and Consider Adoption of a Resolution Confirming Assessments for the Appian Village Residential Lighting Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2026/27. Action: Adopt Resolution Confirming Assessments for the Appian Village Residential Lighting Assessment District (Lilly Whalen, David Hanham)
Planning Manager David Hanham presented the staff report dated January 20, 2026, and recommended the City Council conduct a public hearing, receive and tabulate Proposition 218 ballots, and, if a majority of weighted ballots were submitted in favor of the proposed assessment, adopt a resolution confirming assessments for the Appian Village Residential Lighting Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2026/27.

Responding to questions from the City Council, Mr. Hanham and Public Works Director Heba ElGuindy clarified:

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

• The Appian Village Lighting Assessment District was designed to fund the ongoing operation, maintenance, and servicing of public streetlighting, traffic signal equipment and associated utilities located within the public right-of-way (ROW) along Appian Way and Canyon Drive, with the landscaping within the subdivision to be privately maintained and not included in the District. If new improvements raised the costs, the City also had the ability to adjust the levy to accommodate the new costs to finalize the improvement. (Mayor Pro Tem Murphy)
• The Appian Village Residential Project installed new streetlights along the frontage of the roadway on Appian Way as well as on Canyon Drive. Since the streetlights were on the back of the sidewalk, it was unlikely they could be hit from passing vehicle traffic on Pinole Valley Road. Streetlights that had been impacted by vehicles along Pinole Valley Road in the past were located in the center median. The developer also replaced the traffic signals at the intersection of Mann Drive and Appian Way and implemented some upgrades at the signal at Canyon Drive and Appian Way. The calculation of the share of the individual parcels took into account the maintenance activities as well some funding for the capital replacement over time. Given the devices were newer, it would take some time for replacement and the calculations had included some reserves. Clarified the annual Engineer’s Reports from the Assessment District would be provided, and the assessment would be increased based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI). (Mayor Pro Tem Murphy)
• Lighting that was currently down on Appian Way and down toward San Pablo Avenue was not part of the Development Agreement (DA) for the Appian Village development, and had not been integrated into the Assessment District, but the City Council had approved Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) projects for streetlighting upgrades, with each streetlight on average costing around $15,000. Within Pinole Valley Road, the streetlights were different and with an average cost of $20,000. Depending on the location, staff was planning to progress with replacements and the addition of streetlights in addition to working with PG&E to upgrade some of its lighting. (Mayor Pro Tem Murphy)

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Mr. Hanham announced the results of the balloting and reported at this time he had only one ballot, and while signed, the ballot had not been checked yes or no and there was no representative from the developer present to provide clarification.

City Attorney Casher reported staff had been in contact with the property owner/developer who was very much in support of the Appian Village Residential Lighting Assessment District. He suggested that was an error on their part not checking the box, and suggested they could move forward assuming they were supportive, and staff could confirm that was their intent, unless staff was able to contact the applicant via email. The item could be postponed until after the remaining agenda items.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Community Development Director Lilly Whalen confirmed the developer/applicant had been very supportive of the Proposition 218 process and she would do her best to reach the developer/applicant. The City Council could proceed on the assumption the developer/applicant was supportive and if for some reason that was not the case, the item could be brought back at the next City Council meeting.

Council member Toms clarified this was a condition of approval for the project to annex into the Landscape and Lighting District, and if this was not approved, it would simply delay the filing of the Final Map and ability for the developer/applicant to sell condos. The developer/applicant had every incentive to vote in the affirmative, but because there was nothing on record or in writing, she recommended the item be continued until that information was available to avoid conflicts.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy agreed and suggested continuing the item until there was some resolution from the developer/applicant.

City Attorney Casher agreed the City Council may continue the item to allow staff to reach the developer/applicant, and after the conclusion of Item 12A, the item could be reconsidered for approval. As to whether the developer/applicant should appear on Zoom, he asked the Community Development Director to see if that could be done. Part of the reason he suggested moving forward was that the developer/applicant had been adamant the item be approved since the sale of the units would be delayed without that approval.

ACTION: Motion by Mayor Tave/Council member Martinez-Rubin to move item 10A to be heard after Item 12A.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Tave, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
B. Adoption of the Safety Element and Health and Environmental Justice Element.

Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (David Hanham) Planning Manager Hanham reported Noelle Anderson, Michael Baker International (MBI), would provide a presentation on the Safety Element and Health and Environmental Justice and Health Elements, and also reported the City Council had been provided a correction memo dated January 20, 2026 in response to comments from the City Council on the draft documents.

Noelle Anderson, Project Manager, Michael Baker International (MBI) provided an extensive PowerPoint presentation on the Safety Element Update and Environmental Justice and Health Elements, which included an overview of the work program history; Safety and Environmental Justice Elements statutory requirements and General Plan Element contents. She also highlighted key updates to the Safety and Environmental Justice Elements; additional hazards, goals, policies and actions covered in the Safety Element Update; and key topics, impacted community identification, impacted communities’ population data and the goals, policies and actions in the Environmental Justice Element.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Both elements reflected feedback provided during the public outreach process and comments provided from a public workshop held in August 2025, which were also highlighted.

Ms. Anderson also appreciated the comments provided by the City Council with the responses provided in the January 20, 2026 correction memo.

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy thanked staff for putting the information together given the regulatory changes in the landscape over the last couple of years and for the January 20 correction memo that was provided with recommended revisions to the Draft Safety Element. He asked for clarification of the neighborhoods that had fewer than two points of egress, particularly the area of Galbreth Road where the City had worked in 2023 to open the area up for emergency operations; however, changes had been reflected in the January 20 correction memo and he asked for clarification as to what was being reflected.

Ms. Anderson explained she had spoken with the Community Development Director and the attempt they were trying to make with the redlines, as shown in the January 20 correction memo, was to reflect that a gate existed on Galbreth Road but the road itself was not a formal paved road. This was sufficient for access purposes, but could be improved to be safer and more viable in an emergency scenario.

Mr. Hanham added there was an easement on the Galbreth Road property for the access road to go through but it was not improved and was something to consider in the future, if the City wanted to improve to a road status. The area was currently grass and dirt between the two fences on Galbreth and Rancho Roads.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy clarified the Galbreth Road side of the road was located in the City of Pinole, whereas the South Rancho Road was not within the City’s boundaries, and Mr. Hanham explained the City boundary was close, right on the boundary, not really the City’s and there was a need to coordinate with the County to get the other side improved. Galbreth and North Roads were within the City limits but the property in between was not in the City limits.

Community Development Director Whalen confirmed the unimproved egress road was located in unincorporated Contra Costa County and was the reason it was not appropriate for the City of Pinole to take the lead on creating an improved road in the County’s jurisdiction. Action SE 1.9.10 of the Safety Element had been refashioned to coordinate with the County.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy was motivated to support the document but the way that Action SE 1.9.10 read, it was if the City was doing the action and taking the action to deal with South Rancho Road.

He wanted to ensure that what staff was saying today was reflected in the modified change. He referenced the north-west side of Pinole, with two to three hundred households, and he wanted to be clear in the language and be clear to Galbreth Road residents that residents had an evacuation route on the map.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Mr. Hanham clarified the route under discussion was not a major roadway and something that would be considered in an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). The Fire Department would consider whether to open that route in the event of an emergency. The Safety Element was showing the major evacuation routes from the City, with other evacuation routes that people were aware in other parts of the City to be opened during an emergency, depending on the location of the emergency. The Safety Element identified the major evacuation routes, north, south, east and west with the knowledge that there would be evacuation routes that could be opened, and with residents directed to major evacuation routes first.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy commented even with the recommended modification to Action SE

1.9.10, staff would not suggest the route on Galbreth Road be identified as an evacuation route.

Mr. Hanham reiterated Galbreth Road could be an evacuation route, but it was not a major thoroughfare, just a way to get out of the community. The City had to control its access, and if and when the County stepped up and improved it to a full-blown road with access, the language in Action SE 1.9.10 of the Safety Element states: Coordination with the County to evaluate the feasibility of constructing an emergency access and egress road connecting Galbreth Road to South Rancho Road. Ensue the existing fire access gate remains accessible and operable by emergency responders. Additionally, assess the potential for converting this access route into a permanent public roadway.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy commented one of the issues that had come up over the years about fire safety and during conversations with residents and electeds, was the need for more evacuation routes, which was a qualitative statement. He asked about the number of evacuation routes the City should increase given the map had shown the east side of Pinole with fewer numbers of two points of egress. He wanted to know the quantification of some of the tasks and what it would look like for the City to reach a metric around evacuation routes in those areas.

Ms. Anderson explained the quantification had been established by the state and establishing those residential areas with less than two points of egress, with two points of egress the standard for new development. It did not mean the City needed to bulldoze everything and build a secondary evacuation route, but was assessed from a land use perspective. The information could be used by Fire and Police when directing evacuations and if there was danger in one of the zones, residents should be notified as early as possible and coordination needed to happen based on the known number of points of egress. As part of yearly coordination with residents, the City needed to be aware of the limited egress should it receive evacuation notices, which was something residents needed to heed seriously since it would take residents longer to evacuate and residents needed to follow City direction at that time.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy thanked everyone for the hard work defining the City. He looked forward to the completion and adoption of the EOP which would fall in line with the Safety Element and the timing of this effort with the EOP. He suggested it would be cleaner for the City Council to wait another meeting to adopt the Safety Element with the proposed changes in the correction memo. He asked if the item could return to the City Council on consent with the modified changes since they were not part of the original staff report.

Mr. Hanham confirmed the correction memo changes were not part of the original packet. He suggested staff could return after implementing all of the changes in the document.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Mr. Hanham clarified changes proposed by the Planning Commission had been included in the document. The only changes not inserted into the document were those changes requested by the City Council, as reflected in the January 20, 2026 correction memo.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy suggested it would offer an opportunity to be concise to include all of the information together in one package if the item were returned and he highlighted the comments in the correction memo. It would also allow staff the opportunity to incorporate any other comments provided by the City Council at this meeting.

Community Development Director Whalen clarified that if the item returned to a future City Council meeting as a public hearing discussion or presentation, a budget amendment would be required with the consultant because the item was out of budget. She had no concern if the item came back on consent.

Council member Toms asked if the City Council offered a motion to adopt the documents, with the modifications in the correction memo, then staff would make the modifications before a final was posted as part of the General Plan. Since many members of the City Council provided their comments in writing, staff could respond in writing. She suggested the correction memo worked.

Mayor Tave reopened the public hearing.

Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

The public hearing was again closed.

ACTION: Motion by Council members Toms/Martinez-Rubin to adopt a resolution to approve the Updated Safety Element and new Health and Environmental Justice Element, for the City of Pinole, General Plan and a Notice of Exemption, subject to the modifications identified in the January 20, 2026 memo from staff to the City Council.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Tave, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None

11. OLD BUSINESS: None

12. NEW BUSINESS
A. Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025. Action: Receive and Accept the Report (Markisha Guillory)
Finance Director Markisha presented the January 20, 2026 staff report and introduced Mark Hu, The Pun Group, to provide a PowerPoint presentation. She also took the opportunity to express her appreciation to Finance Department staff including Senior Accountant Maria Mata and Account Specialist Anthony Colden.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Mark Hun, Auditor/Assurance Services Manager, The Pun Group, provided a PowerPoint presentation that included an overview of required communications, management responsibilities and auditor responsibilities in accordance with professional standards. He highlighted the City’s Government-wide Condensed Statement of Net Position for the period of June 30, 2025 and 2024; Government-wide Summary and Statement of Activities for the years ended June 30, 2025 and 2024; General Fund Condensed Balance Sheet, June 30, 2025 and 2024; General Fund, Condensed Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance, for the years ended June 30, 2025 and 2024; Restatement of Beginning Net Position and Fund Balance – Government-Wide Statements for the year ended June 30, 2024; and the audit results. He advised that unmodified opinions had been issued to all opinion units, the financial statements were fairly presented in all material respects, accounting policies had been consistently applied, estimates used were reasonable and the disclosures properly reflected in the financial statements. No communicating internal control related matters had been identified in the audit.

In terms of 2006 Measure S Fund and 2014 Measure S Fund, Mr. Hun stated no unmodified opinions had been issued, and no findings for internal control over financial reporting of compliance found. In terms of the 2024 Measure I Fund, no unmodified opinions issued, no findings for internal control over financial reporting of compliance found. There had also been no disagreements with management, no material weaknesses or significant deficiencies identified in internal control over financing reporting or compliance, no accounting issues where there was question on authoritative guidance noted and no inappropriate activities noted.

Mr. Hun acknowledged a typographical error in the PowerPoint presentation and commented the reference to the City of Fairfield should read City of Pinole.

Finance Director Guillory recommended the City Council receive and accept the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025.

Responding to questions from the City Council, Mr. Hun and Finance Director Guillory clarified the following:
• Clarified Slide 13 of the PowerPoint presentation, Government-Wide, Condensed Statement of Net Position, June 30, 2025 and 2024, the net position represented the City could allocate funds when needed, with three categories identified as Net Investment and Capital Asset, Restricted and Unrestricted and with each category defined; and clarified Slide 15, General Fund, Condensed Balance Sheet, June 30 2025 and 2024, particularly the Deferred Inflows of Resources, as shown. (Mayor Pro Tem Murphy) • Acknowledged appreciation for all of the tables and useful information provided, with the report a wonderful reference, with appreciation for all of the information on fund balances over the years. (Martinez-Rubin)
• Clarified Slides 13 and 14, of the PowerPoint presentation and clarified the numbers shown for the Government-Wide Condensed Statement of Net Position June 30, 2025 and 2024, and Government-Wide Summary, Statement of Activities for the Years Ended June 30, 2025 and 2024. (Mayor Tave)

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Rafael Menis offered the following comments on Item 12A:
- Page 327 of 516 of the agenda packet, the total assets decreased but the depreciation increased and asked for clarification.
- Page 342 of 516 of the agenda packet, the liability for accounts payable in the General Fund as of June 30, 2025 was $1.262 million, and asked if that was typical or unusually high in that given period.
- Page 345 of 516 of the agenda packet, noted a moderately substantial decrease in other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) expenses and asked of the cause. - Page 350 of 516 of the agenda packet, there was an adjustment of $1 dollar for other receivables and asked the cause for the adjustment.
- Page 389 of 516 of the agenda packet, only one category out of the several listed had a real return rate above 6.90 percent, California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) expected rate of concern, and a point of concern for the future. - Page 391 of 516 of the agenda packet, asked if the measurement date was June 30, 2024 or June 30, 2025.
- Page 392 of 516 of the agenda packet, noted the expected increase in the deferred outflows of resources for both the Miscellaneous and Safety Plans for the year ending June 30, 2027, and asked for more detail.
- Page 392 of 516 of the agenda packet, noted the substantial increase in assumed expenses for OPEB and asked for the cause of the increase in OPEB expenditure assumptions.

Mr. Menis concluded his comments and stated he would provide the rest in writing.

Finance Director Guillory asked that she be able to get back to Mr. Menis with a response to his questions, in writing, which would allow her the opportunity to ensure responses were accurate.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy offered a motion, seconded by Mayor Tave to accept the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025.

On the motion, Mayor Tave asked that the reference to the City of Fairfield in the PowerPoint presentation be corrected to read City of Pinole.

Finance Director Guillory apologized for not catching the error when the document was printed, but commented the language in the PowerPoint presentation where the reference to the City of Fairfield was made, was standard and not specific.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Murphy/Mayor Tave to accept the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Tave, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
The City Council returned to Item 10A, Confirming Assessments for the Appian Village Residential Lighting Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2026/27, at this time.

City Attorney Casher reported a representative from the property owner was present online. He asked that the public hearing be reopened to allow clarification of the ballot submitted by the property owner. The public hearing could then be closed and a motion taken on the item.

Mayor Tave reopened the public hearing for Item 10A.

City Attorney Eric Casher reiterated a ballot had been timely submitted by the property owner, but when the ballot was opened there was an omission in the ballot, and a duly authorized representative of the property owner was now present on Zoom. He asked the speaker to state her title and confirm she was a duly authorized representative of the property owner.

Dana Tsubota, Chief Legal Officer, for the managing member of the property owner, identified herself as a duly authorized representative of the property owner and authorized to sign any ballots on behalf of the property owner, Civic Pinole LLC. When asked by the City Attorney, she confirmed the affirmative vote in support of the Assessment District.

Mayor Tave closed the public hearing.

ACTION: Motion by Council members Toms/Sasai that the City Council having tabulated the Proposition 218 ballots, and as confirmed, adopted a Resolution confirming assessments for the Appian Village Residential Lighting Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2026/27.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Tave, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None

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.

Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – January 20, 2026

Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.

Rafael Menis commented on the overall presence of COVID-19 in the community which continued to be at a low level pursuant to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data with a slight increase in a couple of sites in Alameda County that were High or Moderate, with all sites in Contra Costa County still in the Very Low category. There was also a slight decline on the national level. He encouraged people to get vaccinated or boosted and wear masks in crowded indoor areas.

Mr. Menis also commented there were parts of the country that were effectively being occupied by federal law enforcement forces acting in a questionably legal fashion, and he cited the actions of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in Minneapolis, Minnesota, acting to break into citizen and non-citizen homes without appropriate warrants, seizure of citizens and non-citizens, their detention and on occasion deportation in defiance of law along with the killing of Renee Nicole Good, by an ICE agent, which as of today the President of the United States acknowledged was a tragedy. He encouraged those concerned to reach out to representatives and Senators, to call for no increase in funding to DHS and ICE, and ideally to reform those agencies. He also invited everyone to join him at a protest on January 24, 2026 at the corner of Tennent and San Pablo Avenues from 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

Anthony Vossbrink, asked the Mayor, City Council and staff to address a concern that had been raised months ago regarding the attack of a couple at Bay Front Park, which area was highly trafficked for park use and recreation for pedestrians and bicyclists throughout Pinole and neighboring cities. He urged the City to do more to provide security in the park area. While two cameras had been installed, the City had yet to address new or updated signage or provide lights in and around the parking lot area. He suggested the use of solar lights and pointed out there would be no impacts to wildlife or people near the railroad tracks if additional lighting was installed.

Council member Sasai asked that the meeting adjourn in memory of Renee Nicole Good, who was murdered by ICE in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

14. ADJOURN to the Regular City Council Meeting of February 2, 2026 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz and Renee Nicole Good.

At 8:19 p.m., Mayor Pro Tem Tave adjourned to a Regular City Council Meeting on February 2, 2026 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz and Renee Nicole Good.

Submitted by:
_________________________________
Roxane Stone, CMC
Deputy City Clerk
Approved by City Council:

Pinole City Council Special Meeting
Minutes – January 27, 2026

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING

MINUTES
January 27, 2026

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 Tave called the Special 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
Anthony Tave, Mayor
Devin Murphy, Mayor Pro Tem
Norma Martinez-Rubin, Council Member*
Cameron Sasai, Council Member**
Maureen Toms, Council Member
*Attending Remotely
**Absent
B. STAFF PRESENT
Roxane Stone, Deputy City Clerk
Human Resources Director, Stacy Shell
Deputy City Clerk Roxane Stone announced the agenda had been posted and amended on January 23, 2026 at 9:10 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.

Pinole City Council Special Meeting
Minutes – January 27, 2026

4. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.

Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

5. 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. PUBLIC EMPLOYMEE APPOINTMENT
Gov. Code § 54956
Title: City Manager

6. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION

7. ADJOURN to Closed Sesson and to a Regular City Council Meeting of February 3, 2026 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.

At 6:10 p.m., Mayor Tave adjourned to Closed Session and to a Regular City Council Meeting on February 3, 2026 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.

Submitted by:
_________________________________
Roxane Stone, CMC
Deputy City Clerk
Approved by City Council:

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.C.

DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 2026
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Justin Rogers, Police Commander, 510-724-8946, [email protected] SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO SURPLUS VEHICLES FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the City adopt a resolution declaring certain Police Department vehicles listed on Attachment B as surplus to the City’s needs and authorizing their disposal in accordance with City policy and applicable law.

BACKGROUND
The City maintains a fleet and equipment lifecycle management program designed to support public safety operations while minimizing long-term maintenance costs and liability exposure.

As part of this ongoing review process, Police Department vehicles and equipment are evaluated based on age, mileage, maintenance history, reliability, and operational suitability.

The Police Department periodically reviews its fleet and equipment to ensure operational efficiency, fiscal responsibility, and public safety. Certain vehicles and equipment have reached the end of their useful service life, are obsolete, are no longer cost-effective to maintain, or have been replaced through approved replacement programs. Staff recommends declaring these assets surplus and authorizing their disposal.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The Police Department utilizes marked and unmarked vehicles and specialized equipment to provide police services throughout the city. The vehicles listed on Attachment B have exceeded their expected service life, experienced increased maintenance costs, or have been replaced through approved fleet replacement efforts. Some vehicles are no longer operationally viable and are suitable only for sale, auction, dismantlement, or recycling.

The equipment listed on Attachment B is obsolete, nonfunctional, or incompatible with current operational needs and is no longer used by Police Department staff.

Declaring these vehicles and equipment as surplus allows the City to reduce maintenance and storage costs, minimize liability exposure, and recover nominal revenue where possible. Prior to disposal, all City insignia, emergency equipment, radios, and other sensitive components will be removed in accordance with City policy.

FISCAL IMPACT

The proposed action will not result in a negative fiscal impact. Proceeds from the sale or disposal of surplus vehicles and equipment, if any, will be deposited into the appropriate Police Department vehicle or equipment replacement accounts. Additional cost savings may be realized through reduced maintenance, storage, and administrative expenses.

This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5), as it involves the disposition of surplus government property and does not result in a direct or indirect physical change to the environment.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Vehicle and Equipment Disposal list 2026

Attachment A
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE, COUNTY OF

CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DECLARING CERTAIN POLICE

VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT AS SURPLUS PROPERTY AND AUTHORIZING THEIR

DISPOSAL
WHEREAS, the City of Pinole owns certain police vehicles and equipment that are no longer required for municipal purposes; and
WHEREAS, the Pinole Police Department periodically reviews its fleet and equipment assets to ensure operational efficiency, fiscal responsibility, and public safety; and WHEREAS, the police vehicles identified on Attachment B have exceeded their useful service life, are obsolete, have become cost-inefficient to maintain, or have been replaced through approved replacement programs; and
WHEREAS, California law authorizes the City Council to declare personal property as surplus and approve its disposal in a manner that serves the public interest.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pinole as follows:

1. The City Council hereby declares the police vehicles and equipment listed on Attachment B as surplus to the City’s needs.

2. The City Council authorizes the City Manager or designee to dispose of the surplus vehicles and equipment through auction, sale, transfer, dismantlement, or recycling, in accordance with City policy and applicable law.

3. All proceeds received from the disposal of surplus vehicles and equipment, if any, shall be deposited into the appropriate Police Department vehicle or equipment replacement accounts.

4. Prior to disposal, all City insignia, emergency equipment, radios, and other sensitive components shall be removed from the vehicles and equipment.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pinole held on the ___ day of __________, 20__, by the following vote:

Attachment A
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ATTEST:

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted the _day of __________, 20__,
__________________________
Heather Bell-Spears
City Clerk

Attachment B
Vehicles
Unit Year Make Model Plate VIN
809* 2008 Ford Interceptor 1289886 2FAFP71V48X160149
842 2005 Chrysler Town & Country 1203767 2C4GP44R35R309307 857 2006 Dodge Charger 5MOZ689 2B3KA53H255170
807* 2015 Ford PI Taurus 1325722 1FAHP2MKXFG115152
2018 Fabrique Par RU2 Trailer 1R9BR101XH482166
821 2009 Harley Davidson FLHP 3000601 1HD1FHM1X9Y617729 *
Vehicle
number
has since
been
reissued.

Mileage
INOP
26964
INOP
80421
N/A
39210

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.D.

DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 2026
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Markisha Guillory, Finance Director, 510-724-9823, [email protected] SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2026/27 BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND

TIMELINE

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommend that the City Council receive a report on the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026/27 Operating and Capital Budget development process and timeline.

BACKGROUND
The City goes through an annual process of developing a budget for the upcoming fiscal year that covers July 1st through June 30th. The City’s budget development process is considered an “incremental” budget process, meaning that the budget for the upcoming year is developed based on the current year’s budget.

In preparation for the upcoming fiscal year, staff prepares a budget development schedule of key dates and activities that is used to guide the budget and long-term financial planning process.

City staff takes the following steps to ultimately create the Final Proposed budget:
• Finance Department uses the current budget, which incorporates any baseline mid-year changes approved by the City Council, as the starting point; • Finance Department creates a “baseline” budget by taking the ongoing revenues and expenditures included in the current budget and factoring in known or assumed changes to revenues and expenditures (i.e., forecasted changes to different revenue streams, general inflation, known changes to debt service, etc.); • Departments review and confirm the known and assumed changes incorporated into the baseline budget;
• Departments submit requests for changes to the baseline budget to address proposed special projects or increased service levels;
• Finance Department and City Manager consider department requests for changes to the baseline budget and prepare a Preliminary Proposed budget for the Finance Subcommittee’s consideration before presenting it to the full City Council for its consideration;
• Finance Department incorporates changes and prepares the Revised Proposed budget for the City Council’s consideration; and
• Finance Department and City Manager incorporate changes and submit the Final

Proposed Budget to the City Council for adoption.

The City also updates its Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) in tandem with the with the budget. Staff take similar steps above to create the Final Proposed CIP.

At its meeting on January 14, 2026, staff presented the proposed FY 2026/27 budget development process and timeline to the Finance Subcommittee. The Subcommittee accepted staff’s recommendation to submit the proposed schedule to the City Council. Please note that this year’s process will include monthly Finance Subcommittee meetings, which differs from past practice. These additional meetings are intended to give the Subcommittee opportunities to examine the budget more thoroughly and develop recommendations for City Council consideration.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
Staff has prepared the following schedule of key dates and actions for the development of the FY 2026/27 Operating and Capital Budget and the FY 2026/27 – FY 2030/31 Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan.

DATE ACTION/ACTIVITY
January 14, 2026 Finance Subcommittee Meeting
• Review and Direct: FY 2026/27 Budget Planning
• Review: Department Anticipated Opportunities and
Challenges for FY 2026/27
February 3, 2026 City Council Meeting (Regular)
• Receive a Report: FY 2026/27 Budget Development
Process and Timeline
February 11, 2026 Finance Subcommittee Meeting
• Review and Direct: Financial Policies
•Preliminary Long-Term Financial Forecast
• Review: Anticipated Opportunities and Challenges
February 17, 2026 City Council Meeting (Regular)
• Adopt: FY 2025/26 Mid-Year Budget (Second Quarter
Financial Report) including Proposed Amendments
• Receive a Report: FY 2025/26 Second Quarter Investment Report
February 19, 2026 FY 2026/27 Budget Kick-Off Meeting and Distribution of Budget Preparation Instructions
February 23 -
March 20, 2026
Department FY 2026/27 Budget Preparation
Deliverables Due to Finance by March 20, 2026:
• Budget Entry in ERP Pro 10 system
• Position Listing
• Department Narrative

• Request Forms
• Capital Improvement Budget
March 11, 2026 Finance Subcommittee Meeting
• Review: Revenue and Expenditure Budget Assumptions
and Revised Long-Term Financial Forecast
March - April 2026
FY 2026/27 Department Budget Review Meetings
April 7, 2026 City Council Meeting (Regular)
• Adopt: Master Fee Schedule
• Adopt: Financial Policies
April 15, 2026 Finance Subcommittee Meeting
• Department Budget Presentations
• Review and Direct: Preliminary Proposed FY 2026/27
Operating and Capital Budget; Presentation of Highlights of Baseline Budget Items and Council Member Requests for
Staff Analysis of Potential Additions/Deletions
• Review and Direct: Preliminary Proposed FY 2026/27 FiveYear Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) May 5, 2026 City Council Meeting (Regular)
• Review and Direct: Preliminary Proposed FY 2026/27
Operating and Capital Budget
• Review and Direct: Preliminary Proposed FY 2026/27 FiveYear CIP May 2026 Pinole/Hercules Wastewater Subcommittee Meeting • Review: Wastewater Enterprise FY 2026/27 Proposed
Budget
May 2026 Planning Commission Meeting
Review: Proposed FY 2026/27 Five-Year CIP
May 19, 2026 City Council Meeting (Regular)
• Receive a Report: FY 2025/26 Third Quarter Financial
Report
• Receive a Report: FY 2025/26 Third Quarter Investment Report
June 2, 2026 City Council Meeting (Regular)
• Review and Direct: Revised Proposed FY 2026/27
Operating and Capital Budget
• Review and Direct: Revised Proposed FY 2026/27 FiveYear CIP June 16, 2026 City Council Meeting (Regular)
Adopt:
• Final Proposed FY 2026/27 Operating and Capital Budget

• Final Proposed FY 2026/27 Five-Year CIP
• FY 2026/27 Appropriations Limit
June 30, 2026 City Council Meeting (Special, if necessary) Adopt:
• Revised Final Proposed FY 2026/27 Operating and Capital Budget
• Revised Final Proposed FY 2026/27 Five-Year Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP)
• FY 2026/27 Appropriations Limit
July 1, 2026 FY 2026/27 Operating and Capital Budget available

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

ATTACHMENTS
None

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.E.

DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 2026
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Stacy Shell, Human Resources Director, 510-741-3864, [email protected] SUBJECT: APPROVE THE MUNICIPAL POOLING AUTHORITY JOINT EXERCISE OF

POWERS AGREEMENT (JPA) FOR PROVIDING PROPERTY, WORKERS'

COMPENSATION, PUBLIC LIABILITY AND OTHER INSURANCE

COVERAGES TO THE CITY OF PINOLE

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the Municipal Pooling Authority Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement.

BACKGROUND
The City of Pinole is a member of the Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA), a Joint Exercise of Powers Authority (JPA). MPA provides member cities with administrative and self-insured coverage for liability, workers’ compensation, vehicle physical damage, short-term disability, and access to 14 other coverage programs. Membership requires each governing body to approve the JPA Agreement, which sets out MPA’s structure and authority. The JPA, last revised in 2005, has undergone comprehensive review and revision and is now presented to the Pinole City Council for adoption.

MPA was approved by the state as of July 1, 1977. It currently comprises 21 member municipalities, primarily located in Contra Costa County, with some in Santa Clara, San Joaquin, and San Mateo counties. MPA was formed primarily to reduce the rising costs of private insurance for liability and workers’ compensation. The founding members agreed to pool fiscal resources and share the cost of administering and litigating claims. This pooling of funds is allowed under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act, Government Code, Sections 6500- 6536. There are over 1800 JPAs in California providing agencies with pooled coverage for benefits, liability, workers' compensation, and other services. By pooling funds, MPA members share the risk and cost of claims, which helps stabilize individual members' exposure. The cost of claims is spread among all members. Pooling also brings economies of scale, providing members with access to additional insurance options that are only available through the pool.

This includes employers' liability, property, cyber, crime, and deadly weapons coverage. MPA provides valuable resources for training and education, including a comprehensive wellness program, ergonomics program, dental and vision plans, life insurance, and online training modules. Risk mitigation support includes mandatory safety training, inspection support to ensure regulatory compliance, and required employee certifications.

Participation in a JPA is invaluable for reducing claims exposure and cost. Members receive dividends in years when reserved funds have exceeded actual costs. These dividends aided

members during the COVID-19 revenue decline. MPA has also provided members with grants to meet safety needs within their cities.

MPA has a Board of Directors. Each member in the pool has a seat on the Board. The Board decides how claims are managed and what is covered by the pool. Through the Coverage and Governance Committee, the Board reviews the bylaws, the JPA Agreement, and program coverage details annually to determine coverage terms. The Joint Powers Authority Agreement is the required document that members’ governing bodies must approve to join any MPA program.

Below are the list of current members and their inception date as a member of MPA:

Member Date Joined
Antioch 5/2/1977
Brentwood 5/2/1977
Clayton 5/2/1977
Danville 2/1/1983
Gilroy 7/1/2015
El Cerrito 5/2/1977
Hercules 5/2/1977
Lafayette 5/2/1977
Manteca 1/1/1998
Martinez 5/2/1977
Moraga 5/2/1977
Mountain
House
7/1/2024
Oakley 7/1/2002
Orinda 7/1/1986
Pacifica 7/1/2006
Pinole 5/2/1977
Pittsburg 5/2/1977
Pleasant Hill 5/2/1977
San Pablo 5/2/1977
San Ramon 7/1/1986
Walnut Creek 5/2/1977

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
On February 27, 2025, the MPA Coverage and Governance Committee recommended JPA Agreement amendments to ensure alignment with other relevant documents and laws. The MPA Executive Committee approved these with revisions on March 26, 2025, and the Board of Directors gave final approval on April 10, 2025. Board-approved amendments were sent to all members for feedback, after which MPA Staff and Legal Counsel made further revisions based on input received. The MPA Board of Directors approved the final Amended/Restated JPA Agreement on January 13, 2026. The Amended/Restated JPA Agreement must now be approved by each member by resolution of the member’s governing body and signed by each member’s designee.

FISCAL IMPACT

There is no fiscal impact for this item.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. JPA Agreement with Letter Head

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE, COUNTY OF

CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE MUNICIPAL

POOLING AUTHORITY JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT (JPA) FOR

PROVIDING PROPERTY, WORKERS' COMPENSATION, PUBLIC LIABILITY AND

OTHER INSURANCE COVERAGES TO THE CITY OF PINOLE
WHEREAS, Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) was formed in 1977 by a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement.

WHEREAS, the City of Pinole is a Member Agency of MPA; and WHEREAS, there have been amendments to the Municipal Pooling Authority Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Municipal Pooling Authority Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A, has been amended to reflect these amendments; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is familiar with the contents thereof.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole does hereby resolve as follows:

That the adoption of the Municipal Pooling Authority Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for providing property, workers' compensation, public liability, and other insurance coverages is hereby approved, and the designated primary or alternate MPA Board member (Resolution No. 2022-08) is hereby authorized and directed to execute the same on behalf of the City.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 3rd day of February 2026 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 3rd day of February 2026.

______________________________________
Heather Bell-Spears, CMC
City Clerk

A p p r o v e d b y t h e B O D o n J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 2 6 , P a g e 1 | 10 Exhibit A

MUNICIPAL POOLING AUTHORITY

AMENDED AND RESTATED JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT This Amended and Restated Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (hereafter “Agreement”) is entered into by and among the public entities listed in Appendix A ( hereafter referred to as "Members").

RECITALS

1. The Members are public entities organized and operating under the laws of the State of California;

2. The following State laws, among others, authorize the Members to enter into this Agreement:
a. Labor Code Section 3700, allowing a public entity to fund its own workers' compensation claims;
b. Government Code Sections 989 and 990, permitting a local public entity to insure itself against liability and other losses;
c. Government Code Section 990.4, permitting a public entity to provide insurance and self-insurance in any desired combination.
d. Government Code Section 990.6, providing that the cost of insurance authorized under the related sections is a proper charge against the local public entity. e. Government Code Section 990.8, permitting two or more local public entities to enter into an agreement to jointly fund such expenditures under the authority of Government Code Sections 6500, et seq.; and
f. Government Code Sections 6500, et seq., permitting two or more l o c a l public entities to jointly exercise under an agreement any power which is common to each of them.

3. Each of the Members desires to enter into an agreement with each of the others for the purpose of insuring against various risks jointly, rather than individually.

4. Pursuant to Government Code Section 6508.1, the debts, liabilities, and obligations of MPA shall not constitute debts, liabilities, or obligations of the Members.

5. MPA was originally formed by a Joint Powers Agreement in 1977. Since that time, the Agreement has been amended several times, and Members have withdrawn from, and new Members have been added to MPA.

A p p r o v e d b y t h e B O D o n J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 2 6 , P a g e 2 | 10 Exhibit A
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual benefits, covenants and agreements set forth herein, the Members agree as follows:

SECTION 1
Authority and Purpose
This Agreement is made under the authority of California Government Code Sections 6500, et seq., between the Members. The purpose of this Agreement is to exercise jointly t h e powers common to each Member by managing risks and pooling or purchasing coverage for losses.

SECTION 2
Definitions
Unless the context otherwise requires:

1. "MPA" shall mean the public entity known as the Municipal Pooling Authority created by this Agreement.

2. "Board" shall mean the governing body of MPA.

3. "Chief Administrative Officer" shall mean the person appointed by the Board as the Chief Administrative Officer of MPA.

4. "Claim" shall mean a claim or demand made against a Member arising out of an occurrence that is covered or alleged to be covered by any Memoranda of Coverage issued by MPA or by a purchased policy of insurance.

5. "Member" shall mean any public entity listed in Appendix A to this Agreement.

6. "Memoranda of Coverage" shall mean documents issued by MPA specifying the type, terms, conditions, and limitations of coverage provided by MPA to each Member that participates in the program.

SECTION 3
Creation of MPA
A public entity, separate and apart from the parties hereto and known as the Municipal Pooling Authority, was previously created and is continued pursuant to Article 1, Chapter 5, Division 7, Title 1 of the California Government Code (commencing with Section 6500).

A p p r o v e d b y t h e B O D o n J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 2 6 , P a g e 3 | 10 Exhibit A
SECTION 4
TermsofAgreement
This Agreement is effective as of January 13, 2026, and continues until terminated as hereafter provided. The prior Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement is terminated upon the effective date hereof.

SECTION 5

1.1.1 GoverningBoard
MPA shall be governed by a Board composed of one individual representative from each Member, each serving in an individual capacity as a member of the Board. Each Member's governing body shall appoint to the Board either its Manager or Director, or the department head or staff person, responsible for its risk management function. Each Board member shall have one vote. Each Member shall appoint one Alternate to the Board. The Alternate shall have the same qualifications as the Board member. The Alternate may vote at any meeting of the Board at which the regular Board member is absent.

SECTION 6
Meetings and Committees
(a) Committees. The Board may establish an Executive Committee comprised of members of the Board and delegate to it any powers or functions not reserved to the entire Board or otherwise nondelegable. Other regular committees may be created by, or in accordance with, the procedures set forth in Bylaws adopted by the Board. Ad hoc committees may, from time to time, be established by the President of the Board to serve as temporary committees for a limited purpose. (b) Meetings. The Board shall hold at least one regular meeting each year. The Board shall fix the date upon which, and the hour and place at which, each regular meeting is to be held, and the Chief Administrative Officer shall notify each Member of that action. Other meetings of the Board and meetings of any duly established committees may be held in accordance with applicable law. All meetings of the Board and regular committees shall be held in a manner consistent with the Bylaws and in compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Sections 54950, et seq.). (c) Bylaws and Regulations. The Board may adopt Bylaws and regulations that are not inconsistent either with applicable law or with this Agreement. In the event the Bylaws or regulations are inconsistent with this Agreement, this Agreement shall control. The Chief Administrative Officer shall send to each Member all such Bylaws and regulations, and any amendments thereto, promptly after adoption by the Board.

SECTION 7

A p p r o v e d b y t h e B O D o n J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 2 6 , P a g e 4 | 10 Exhibit A

1.1.2 Officers
(a) The Board shall elect a President and Vice-President from among its members to perform the duties set forth in the Bylaws.
(b) The Chief Administrative Officer shall be the Secretary of MPA and shall be responsible for maintaining all records of MPA.
(c) The Board shall elect a Treasurer with the qualifications and to perform the duties set forth in the Bylaws.
(d) The Board may appoint such other officers, employ individuals, and contract with consultants and other professional persons or firms as it considers necessary to carry out the purposes of this Agreement.

SECTION 8
Powers of MPA
MPAshall have the powers and authority to exercise any powers common to its Members and is hereby authorized, in its own name,to do all acts necessary for the exercise of such common powers, including, but not limited to, each of the following:
(1) Make and enter into contracts;
(2) Incur debts, liabilities, and obligations, but no debt, liability, or obligation of MPA is a debt, liability, or obligation of any Member, pursuant to Government Code Section 6508.1; (3) Acquire, hold, or dispose of real and personal property; (4) Receive contributions and donations of property, funds, services, and other forms of assistance from any source;
(5) Sue and be sued in its own name;
(6) Employ agents and employees;
(7) Acquire, construct, manage, and maintain buildings; (8) Lease real or personal property, including that of a Member;

A p p r o v e d b y t h e B O D o n J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 2 6 , P a g e 5 | 10 Exhibit A
(9) Receive, collect, invest, and disburse monies; and
(10) Carry out other duties as required to accomplish other responsibilities as set forth in this Agreement.

These powers shall be exercised in the manner provided by law and as expressly set forth in this Agreement. Pursuant to Section 6509 of the California Government Code, the exercise of such powers shall be subject only to those restrictions upon the manner of exercising the powerswhich are imposed upon Members, such as the City of Pleasant Hill, in the exercise of similar powers.

SECTION 9
Fiscal Year
The "fiscal year" of MPA is the period from the first day of July of each year to and including the 30th day of June of the following year.

SECTION 10
Coverage Provided byMPA
Pursuant to the payment of contributions by each Member, MPA shall provide coverage pursuant to one or more Memoranda of Coverage and/or purchased policies of insurance under the programs selected by the Member.

SECTION 11

1.1.3 Establishment and Administration of Funds
The Board shall establish such funds as it deems necessary to conduct the business of MPA.

SECTION 12

1.1.4 Budget
MPA shall adopt an annual budget nolater than the first day of itsfiscal year.

SECTION 13

1.1.5 Member Contributions

A p p r o v e d b y t h e B O D o n J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 2 6 , P a g e 6 | 10 Exhibit A
The Chief Administrative Officer shall be responsible for calculating annually the amount of contributions to be charged for coverage selected by Members. The Board shall approve each charge before ittakes effect. Each Member, by the act of paying its contribution, accepts the coverage provided by MPA.

SECTION 14
Accounts and Records
The Chief Administrative Officer shall be responsible for establishing and maintaining the funds and accounts in accordance with acceptable accounting practices and maintaining such other records as the Board requires pursuantto the procedures setforth in the Bylaws. The ChiefAdministrativeOfficer shall have the custody of and be responsible for the disbursement of MPA funds as provided by accounting procedures developed in accordance with this Agreement and the Bylaws.

SECTION 15

1.1.6 Reserves
Separate reserves shall be maintained in the funds for each type of coverage.

SECTION 16

1.1.7 MPA Functions and Responsibilities
MPA shall provide comprehensive risk management services to its Members.

SECTION 17

1.1.8 Member Responsibilities
Each Member has responsibilities, including the following:
(1) Appoint its representative and alternate to the MPA Board in accordance with the applicable practices and procedures.
(2) Cooperate fully with MPA in the investigation, defense, and settlement of Claims, including compliance with any applicable Memoranda of Coverage.
(3) Comply with risk management recommendations, guidelines, and requirements established by MPA;

A p p r o v e d b y t h e B O D o n J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 2 6 , P a g e 7 | 10 Exhibit A
(4) Pay contributions and assessments approved by the Board when due. (5) Provide MPA with data and other information requested; and (6) Cooperate with and assist MPA and any insurer, adjuster, or legal counsel retained by MPA in matters related to this Agreement, any Bylaws adopted by the Board, and any other governing documents, policies, or procedures adopted by the Board.

SECTION 18
New Members
Upon the vote of two-thirds of all members of the Board, any other public entity in Contra Costa County or in the general geographic area reasonably serviceable from Contra Costa County may become a party to this Agreement upon execution of this Agreement, and shall forthwith pay to MPA its current contribution payment as determined in accordance herewith, as well as any fees and expenses set by the Board.

SECTION 19
Cancellation of Coverage ina Program or Programs
lf a Member fails to comply with this Agreement, any Bylaws adopted by the Board, or any procedures or policies established by the Board, the Board may, by a two-thirds vote of all members of the Board, refuse to provide coverage or may cancel any coverage being provided to that Member in any program(s).

SECTION 20
Termination of Agreement and Disposition of
AssetsUponTerminationofAgreement
This Agreement may be terminated upon the unanimous consent of all parties to it. Upon complete termination of this Agreement by all Members and the settlement of all liabilities and claims, including incurred but not reported claims, all property of MPA shall be divided among the Members in a ratio equal to that of the total amounts paid by the Members for the five (5) fiscal years preceding the year in which the Agreement is terminated.

SECTION 21
Withdrawal of aMember
A Member may withdraw as a Member and party to the Agreement, effective at the end of any fiscal year upon giving MPA six (6) months prior written notice of its intent to withdraw.

SECTION 22
Expulsion

A p p r o v e d b y t h e B O D o n J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 2 6 , P a g e 8 | 10 Exhibit A
The Board, by a three-fourths vote of all members of the Board, may expel any member for the reasons and under the procedures set forth in the Bylaws.

SECTION 23
Effect ofWithdrawal or Expulsion
The withdrawal or expulsion of any Member shall not terminate its responsibilities and obligations as set forth in MPA’s governing documents.

Upon withdrawal of a Member, that Member is entitled only to its pro rata share of the balance of the amount paid by it for the fiscal year in which withdrawal takes place. That Member shall not participate in or be entitled to any other funds, property, or other assets of MPA. Coverages under all pool coverage programs for the coverage periods in which that Member participated will remain in effect and continue until the conclusion of their respective program years.

SECTION 24
Liability and Indemnification
MPA shall defend and indemnify its Board members, officers, and employees to the same extent as any other public entity of the State of California is obliged to defend and indemnify its public employees pursuant to California Government Code Section 825, et seq., or other applicable provisions of law.

MPA may insure or self-insure itself to the extent deemed necessary by the Board against loss, liability and claims arising out of or connected to the conduct of MPA's activities.

SECTION 25
Assessment
Upon a two-thirds vote of all members of the Board, the Board shall have the authority to levy a cash assessment for any pooled coverage program if the Board finds that there are insufficient funds available to MPA to meetits legal obligations.

Any cost, including attorneys' fees, incurred by MPA in collecting any cash assessment shall be reimbursed by the Member against which such collection action has been taken.

Section 26
Dividends and Premium Rebates
Upon a two-thirds vote of all members of the Board, the Board shall have the authority to declare a dividend, rebate of excess contributions, and/or reduction of future contributions for any pooled coverage program if the Board finds there are excess reserves in the retention fund.

A p p r o v e d b y t h e B O D o n J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 2 6 , P a g e 9 | 10 Exhibit A
SECTION 27
Severability
lf any portion, term, condition or provision of this Agreement is determined by a court to be illegal or in conflict with a law of the State of California, or is otherwise rendered unenforceable or ineffectual, the validity of the remaining portions, terms, conditions, and provisions is not affected.

SECTION 28
Prohibition Against Assignment
No Member may assign a right, claim, or interest it may have under this Agreement. No creditor, assignee, or third party beneficiary of a Member has a right, claim, or title to any part, share, interest, fund, premium or asset of MPA.

SECTION 29
Amendment
This Agreement may be amended by Resolution of the governing bodies of two- thirds of the thenparticipating Members. Appendix A to this Agreement may be amended to correctly list current Members without separate action by the governing bodies of the Members or the Board, and provided any additional members execute the Agreement.

SECTION 30
Notices
Notices to Members under this Agreement shall be sufficient if delivered to the office of the Member. Notices to MPA shall be sufficient if delivered to the office of the Chief Administrative Officer.

A p p r o v e d b y t h e B O D o n J a n u a r y 1 3 , 2 0 2 6 , P a g e 10 | 10 Exhibit A
Member Date Joined
Antioch 5/2/1977
Brentwood 5/2/1977
Clayton 5/2/1977
Danville 2/1/1983
Gilroy 7/1/2015
El Cerrito 5/2/1977
Hercules 5/2/1977
Lafayette 5/2/1977
Manteca 1/1/1998
Martinez 5/2/1977
Moraga 5/2/1977
Mountain House 7/1/2024
Oakley 7/1/2002
Orinda 7/1/1986
Pacifica 7/1/2006
Pinole 5/2/1977
Pittsburg 5/2/1977
Pleasant Hill 5/2/1977
San Pablo 5/2/1977
San Ramon 7/1/1986
Walnut Creek 5/2/1977

MUNICIPAL POOLING AUTHORITY JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT Appendix A - List of MPA Members

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 10.A.

DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 2026
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Eric Casher, City Attorney, N/A, [email protected] SUBJECT: RESOLUTION CALLING FOR SPECIAL ELECTION AND SUBMITTING

QUESTION REGARDING OFFICE OF ELECTED MAYOR TO VOTERS

RECOMMENDATION
Consider Adopting a Resolution Calling For Special Election And Submitting Question Regarding Office Of Elected Mayor To Voters

BACKGROUND
At the December 2, 2025, regular meeting of the City Council, the City Council voted to direct staff to prepare the necessary materials to submit to the voters the question of whether the office of elected mayor shall be established pursuant to Elections Code Section 34900 in the City of Pinole.

The City of Pinole’s City Council is comprised of five (5) members elected at large to four-year terms. The position of Mayor is rotated amongst the City Council on a yearly basis. The Council has a long-standing tradition of prioritizing the council member who received the highest number of votes in the prior election to serve in the role of Mayor. The process for setting the Mayoral rotation schedule was adopted by City Council Resolution 2010-87 and is based on the number of votes received by each member in the prior election.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
Procedural Requirements
California Government Code Sections 34900 et seq. sets forth the requirements for establishing an elected Mayor. The Government Code Section 34900 provides that at any general municipal election, or a special election held for that purpose, the city council may submit to the electors the question of whether electors shall thereafter elect a mayor and four city council members and whether the mayor shall serve a two-year or four-year term. The provisions of Code Section 34901 control the form of the ballot measure. It states the question printed on the ballot should read:
“Shall the electors elect a mayor and four city council members?” “Shall the term of office of mayor be two years?”

“Shall the term of office of mayor be four years?”
The words “Yes” and “No” and “two years” and “four years” shall be printed on the ballots so that the voters may express their choice. The term of office of mayor shall be that preferred by a majority of those voting on the proposition.

The provisions of Code Section 34902 set forth procedures for designating a council seat as the mayor’s seat and filling of that seat by subsequent election. If a majority of the votes cast are in favor of an elective office, one seat on the council is designated as the office of the mayor at the next general municipal election held in the city, which would be the November 2026 election.

In order to initiate the process of placing the measure on the ballot, the City Council must adopt a resolution calling for a special election and for a measure to be added to the ballot. As previously directed by the City Council, this special election will be consolidated with the statewide primary election on June 2, 2026.

Submission of the ballot measure to the County must occur at least eighty-eight (88) days prior to the election, or March 6, 2026. The ballot measure would then be published and filed with the County.

Powers of Elected Mayor
An elected mayor is a member of the City Council and has all the powers and duties of a member of the City Council. For the most part, an elected mayor has the same powers as an appointed mayor. State law designates some additional powers of elected mayors in general law cities. Elected mayors typically receive a higher salary than members of the city council.

An appointed or “selected” mayor has powers and duties that include presiding at City Council meetings, administering oaths and affirmations and certifying affidavits and/or acknowledging documents which are executed by the City and required to be acknowledged, and directing a sufficient number of peace officers to attend public meetings at which in his or her opinion a breach of peace could occur.

The only additional power a general law elected mayor is afforded is the power to make appointments to boards, commissions, and committees, subject to the approval of the City Council. Furthermore, an elected mayor may collect a salary in addition to the salary established for council members if approved by the electorate or by ordinance adopted by the City Council.

An elected mayor differs from a “strong mayor”, which is established by a city charter and holds similar executive powers to a City Manager. Additionally, strong mayors typically hold veto power over ordinances and exercise control over budgets and appointments.

Neighboring Elected Mayors
The charter of the City of Richmond, California provides for an elected mayor, whose duties include making appointments and removals from all city boards and commissions subject to

council approval, preparing an annual budget for submission to the council, and publishing an annual report regarding the affairs of the city.

Additionally, the City of San Ramon has an elected mayor, who is compensated more than the rest of the council and afforded the same benefits as city employees.

The cities of Brentwood, Union City, Newark, and San Leandro also have elected mayors.

Salaries for the aforementioned mayors is as follows:

Richmond $6975 per month (approx. $4,000 more than
members of the council)
San Ramon $100 more per month than members of the
council
Brentwood $500 more per month than the members of the
council
Union City $2,937 per month (approx. $800 more than
members of the council)
Newark $3,179 (approx. $1700 more than members of
the council)
San Leandro Base salary is twice the amount paid to council members

FISCAL IMPACT
The estimated cost to place one ballot measure on the June 2, 2026 ballot is $37,236-$55,854.

Additional costs from staff time, consultants, and legal experts may be incurred during the process. However, the exact fiscal impact is unknown at this time.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON JUNE 2, 2026, SUBMITTING TO THE

QUALIFIED VOTERS OF THE CITY OF PINOLE A MEASURE ADDING CHAPTER 2.10 (OFFICE OF THE MAYOR) TO THE PINOLE MUNICIPAL CODE

TO ESTABLISH THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR AS AN ELECTED POSITION,

SETTING RULES FOR ARGUMENTS AND REBUTTALS FOR AND AGAINST

SAID MEASURE, REQUESTING THAT THE CONTRA COSTA BOARD OF

SUPERVISORS CONSENT TO THE CONSOLIDATION OF THIS ELECTION

WITH THE STATEWIDE PRIMARY ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE SAME

DATE, AND REQUESTING CERTAIN SERVICES OF THE REGISTRAR OF

VOTERS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WITH RESPECT TO THE

CONSOLIDATED SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION
WHEREAS, the City is currently, and has historically, conducted at-large elections, in which each of the five (5) Councilmembers are elected by the registered voters of the entire City; and
WHEREAS, the position of mayor rotates amongst the councilmembers on an annual basis; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pinole desires to propose an ordinance/measure (the “Measure”) which would add Chapter 2.10 to the Pinole Municipal Code in order to establish the office of the mayor as an elected position; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 34900 authorizes the City Council to submit to the electors of the City the electors shall thereafter elect a mayor and four city council members; and
WHEREAS, California Elections Code Section 9222 authorizes the City Council to submit the measure to the voters; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires that the proposed Measure be consolidated with the June 2, 2026 primary election, to be held on the same date, and that within the City, the polling places and election officers of the two elections be the same, and that the Contra Costa County Election Department canvass the returns of the primary election and that the election be held in all respects as if there were only one election; and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Elections Code sections 9285 and 9286, the City Council further desires to establish rules and regulations for the preparation and submittal and printing of arguments and rebuttals for and against the Measure described herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE,

CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Pinole finds and determines that the foregoing recitals are true and correct, and incorporated herein and by this reference made an operative part hereof.

SECTION 2. The City Council is authorized to present a measure to the voters for their consideration pursuant to Elections Code Section 9222 and Government Code Section 34900.

SECTION 3. The City Council of the City of Pinole, pursuant to its right and authority as contained in California Elections Code section 9222, California Government Code Section 34900, and any other laws applicable to general law cities, hereby orders the Measure to be submitted to the qualified voters of the City at the Special Municipal election to be held and consolidated with the Statewide Primary Election on Tuesday, June 2, 2026. The proposed Measure shall be in the form similar to the document attached hereto as Exhibit “A” to this Resolution and is incorporated by this reference as fully set forth herein.

SECTION 4. The City Council, pursuant to its right and authority, does hereby order that the ballot question for the Measure shall be presented and printed upon the ballot submitted to the qualified voters in the manner and form set forth in this Section 3. On the ballot to be submitted to the qualified voters at the Special Municipal election to be consolidated with the Statewide Primary Election on Tuesday, June 2, 2026, in addition to any other matter required by law, there shall be printed substantially the following questions:

YES
Shall the electors elect a mayor and four city council
members?
NO
YES
Shall the term of office of mayor be two years?
NO
YES
Shall the term of office of mayor be four years?
NO

SECTION 5. The full text of the proposed measure to be submitted to the voters is attached as Exhibit A (the “Measure”) hereto. If a simple majority of the qualified voters voting on the Measure vote in favor therefor, the Measure shall be deemed adopted and shall be in full force and effect ten (10) days after the date the vote is declared by the City Council of the City of Pinole. The City Council hereby approves the Measure, attached as Exhibit A, the form thereof, and its submission to the voters of Pinole at the June 2, 2026 election. The City Manager and City Attorney shall have the authority to make non-substantive changes as needed prior to submission to the County of Contra Costa.

SECTION 6. The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County is hereby requested to order the Contra Costa County Registrar of Voters to provide such services as may be necessary to properly and lawfully hold and conduct a Consolidated Special Municipal Election in the City on June 2, 2026, pursuant to this Resolution, including but not restricted to the providing and printing of ballots and polling place cards, election supplies, voting booths, flags, registration lists and any other materials and services required to lawfully conduct the election. The City recognizes that additional costs will be incurred by the County by reason of this Consolidated Special Municipal Election, and the City agrees to reimburse the County based on the County's established rates. This request is made pursuant to California Elections Code Sections 10002 and 10403.

SECTION 7. The City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to work with the Office of the Registrar of Voters as needed to properly and lawfully conduct the election. The ballots to be used in the election shall be in form and content as required by law. The Office of the Registrar of Voters is authorized to canvass the returns of the special municipal election. In all particulars not recited in this Resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections. The City Clerk is directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County and the Registrar of Voters of Contra Costa County.

SECTION 8. Unless otherwise specified in this Resolution, the Special Municipal Election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections.

SECTION 9.
(a) The last day for submission of primary arguments for or against the measure shall by 5:00 p.m. on March 18, 2026.
(b) The last day for submission of rebuttal argument for or against the measure shall be by 5:00 p.m. on March 23, 2026.
(c) Primary arguments shall not exceed three hundred (300) words in length and shall be signed by not more than five persons.
(d) Rebuttal arguments shall not exceed two hundred fifty words (250) and shall be signed by not more than five persons; those persons may be different than the persons who signed the primary arguments.
(e) Pursuant to California Elections Code Section 9282, the City Council hereby designates the Mayor to submit a written argument in favor of the proposed measure not to exceed three hundred (300) words, on behalf of the City Council. At the Mayor’s discretion, the argument may also be signed by additional signers from the community including bona fide associations, or by individual voters who are eligible to vote on the measure. In the event that an argument is filed against the measure, the

Mayor is also authorized to submit a rebuttal argument on behalf of the City Council, which may also be signed by additional signers from the community including bona fide associations or any individual voters who are eligible to vote on the measure, which may be different from those who signed the primary argument. (f) Pursuant to California Elections Code 9280, the City Council hereby directs the City Clerk to transmit a certified copy of the measure to the City Attorney. The City Attorney shall prepare an impartial analysis of the measure, not to exceed five hundred (500) words in length, showing the effect of the measure on the existing law and the operation of the measure, and file an impartial analysis with the City Clerk by March 18, 2026.
(g) Pursuant to California Elections Code Section 9285, when the City Clerk has selected the arguments for and against the measure, which will be printed and distributed to the voters, the City Clerk shall send copies of the argument in favor of the measure to the authors of the argument against, and copies of the argument against to the authors of the argument in favor. Rebuttal arguments shall be printed in the same manner as the primary arguments. Each rebuttal argument shall immediately follow the primary argument, which it seeks to rebut.

SECTION 10.
(a) The City Clerk is directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Elections Department. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to take all steps necessary to place the Measure on the ballot and to cause a synopsis of the Measure attached as Exhibit B to be published once in a newspaper of general circulation in accordance with California Elections Code Section 12111 and California Government Code Section 6061. A copy of the Measure shall be made available to any voter upon request. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to give further additional notice of the Measure in the time, form, and manner required by law. (b) In all particulars not recited in this Resolution, and except as provided for in Elections Code Sections 10403 and 10418, the election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections.

SECTION 11. The City Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk are authorized to make all approvals, expend funds, enter into any agreements, and take any and all actions necessary or appropriate to carry out and implement the terms of this Resolution and to administer the City’s obligations, responsibilities and duties to be performed herein.

SECTION 12. The jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Pinole have not changed since the last general municipal election.

SECTION 13. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the ballot measure relates to organizational and administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment, and therefore, is not a project within the meaning the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

SECTION 14. If any provision of this Resolution or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the Resolution which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and

to this end the provisions of this Resolution are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Resolution irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.

SECTION 15. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

The foregoing resolution was introduced at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pinole held on February 3, 2026, by , who moved its adoption, which motion was seconded by and carried by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

EXHIBIT A
ORDINANCE NO.2026-XX

AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF PINOLE, ADDING CHAPTER 2.10 TO THE PINOLE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH THE

OFFICE OF MAYOR AS AN ELECTED POSITION

NOW THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF PINOLE DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Subject to the approval of a majority of the voters of the City of Pinole at the scheduled election so designated by the City Council in a separate resolution placing the proposal on the ballot for such election, Chapter 2.10 of the Pinole Municipal Code is hereby added, and shall read as follows:

CHAPTER XX- OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
Section 1. The mayor shall be elected for a [two-year or four-year] term on the first Tuesday following the first Monday of each even-numbered year and shall be limited to such number of terms as are specified in the Municipal Code. The mayor shall be compensated at the rate of one hundred dollars more per month than the compensation set forth for councilmembers and be provided such health and welfare benefits as are provided for the employees of the city under Government Code Sections 53205 and 53205.1 in amounts not to exceed those provided to city employees.

Section 2. In even-numbered years, the city council shall meet at the regularly scheduled meeting next following the meeting at which the declaration of the election results was made pursuant to Section 10262 or 10263 of the Elections Code and choose one of its members as mayor pro tempore for a one-year term. In odd-numbered years, the city council shall at the first regularly scheduled meeting in November select one of its members as mayor pro tempore for a one-year term.

Section 3. The mayor shall preside at the meetings of the council. If he or she is absent or unable to act, the mayor pro tempore shall serve until the mayor returns or is able to act. The mayor pro tempore has all of the powers and duties of the mayor.

Section 4. The mayor may make or second any motion and present and discuss any matter as a member of the council.

Section 5. Pursuant to Government Code Section 3625(b), the mayor may request the Governor to proclaim a state of emergency within the jurisdictional boundaries of the city.

Section 6. If the city clerk is absent, the deputy city clerk shall act. If there is none, the mayor shall appoint one of the councilmembers as city clerk pro tempore.

Section 7. The mayor shall sign:

All warrants drawn on the city treasurer;
All written contracts and conveyances made or entered into by the city; All instruments requiring the city seal.

The city council may provide by ordinance that the instruments described above be signed by an officer other than the mayor.

Section 8. Upon being advised of a vacancy on a city commission or committee, the mayor, at the first regular meeting of the city council following such notification, shall direct the city manager to initiate action necessary to timely fill the vacancy by (1) advertising and posting notices announcing the vacancy and inviting qualified applicants to submit applications and (2) bringing the matter back to the city council for its selection of the commission or committee member.

Section 9. The mayor, with the consent of the city council, shall make all appointments to committees consisting solely of members of the city council and which are less than a quorum of the city council.

Section 10. The mayor, with the consent of the city council, shall make all appointments to area and statewide committees.

Section 11. The mayor shall perform such other duties as may be provided for by the laws of the state of California and this code.

Section 12. Effective Date. The ordinance codified in this Chapter became effective on _____, which was ten dates after the City Council declared the result of the election.

SECTION 2. Severability. If any portion of this Ordinance is declared invalid by a court law or other legal body with applicable authority, the invalidity shall not affect or prohibit the force and effect of any other provision or application of the Ordinance that is not deemed invalid. The voters of the City hereby declare that they would have circulated for qualification and/or voted for the adoption of this Section and each portion thereof, regardless of the fact any portion of the initiative may be subsequently deemed invalid.

SECTION 3. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the provisions of this Ordinance shall prevail over, and supersede, all other provisions of the Municipal Code and any ordinances, resolutions, or administrative policies of the City of Pinole which are in conflict with any provision of this Ordinance.

SECTION 4. This Section shall not be repealed or amended except by a measure approved by a majority of the electors voting on the issue at a General Municipal Election, or at a special election called for that purpose.

SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall take effect only if approved by a majority of the eligible voters of the City of Pinole voting at a Special Municipal Election to be held on June 2, 2026 and shall take effect ten (10) days after the City Council has certified the results of the Special Municipal Election by resolution.

SECTION 6. The Mayor is hereby authorized to attest to the adoption of this Ordinance by the people voting thereon on June 2, 2026 by signing where indicated below.

I hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the people of the City of Pinole on the XX day of June, 2026. _________________________
_________________, Mayor