Pleasanton City Council
May 5, 2026

CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, May 5, 2026
7:00 PM
City Council Chamber
200 Old Bernal Avenue
Pleasanton, CA 94566

The meeting will be held in-person, broadcast live on Channel 29 and streamed live for viewing at the following links TV30 https://www.tri-valleytv.org, the City's website in the Meetings portal (a red dot will indicate a live meeting) https://www.cityofpleasantonca.gov/, and the City's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/TheCityofPleasanton.

Public participation: It is requested that members of the public wishing to address the City Council submit a speaker card. When public comment is opened on an agenda item, individuals may speak once per agenda item.

To submit written public comment regarding an open session item on this meeting agenda visit https://forms.cityofpleasantonca.gov/f/writtenpubliccomment. Comments will be accepted by the City Clerk’s Office until 12:00 p.m. on the day of the Council meeting.

In Person at Council Chamber:
• Submit a physical speaker card to the City Clerk at the meeting. When your name is called, please provide comment at the podium.

CALL TO ORDER
• Welcome and Pledge of Allegiance - Cm. Nibert
• Roll Call
Resolution No. 2026-026
Ordinance No. 2306

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION

AGENDA AMENDMENTS

CONSENT CALENDAR
Items listed on the consent calendar are considered routine in nature and may be enacted by one motion. If discussion is required, that particular item will be removed from the consent calendar and will be considered separately.

City Council

1. Ratify Commission and Committee appointments
City Manager

2. Approve meeting minutes of March 31, 2026

3. Receive a report on the March 17, 2026 Strategic Plan Workshop outcomes,

City Council Agenda Page 2 of 3 May 5, 2026

updated City Council priorities for FY 2026/27, and priority projects Community and Economic Development

4. Adopt Ordinance No. 2305 an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pleasanton repealing and replacing chapter 18.110 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code concerning personal wireless service facilities
Fire

5. Adopt a resolution approving the Second Amendment to the Emergency Medical Services First Responder Advanced Life Support (FRALS) Agreement between the City and the County of Alameda
Library and Recreation

6. Adopt a resolution authorizing the submittal of an application to the Alameda County Transportation Commission for Measure BB Funds for the Pleasanton Rides Door-to-Door senior transportation program
Police

7. Adopt Ordinance No. 2304 amending Ordinance No. 2238 to amend the Pleasanton Police Department's Military Equipment Use Policy to add equipment to the Policy's Military Equipment Inventory
Public Works

8. Adopt Resolutions preliminarily approving Engineer’s Reports and ordering Proposition 218 Assessment Ballot Proceedings for the Ponderosa-Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026-1 and Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026-2; and setting July 21, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. for the public hearing

MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

9. Oath of Office for new Commission and Committee members

10. Public Comment regarding items not listed on the agenda – Speakers are limited to 3 minutes.

PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS
If necessary to ensure completion of the following items, the Mayor may alter time limits.

11. Introduction of proposed Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Pleasanton and the Pleasanton Police Officers' Association with term ending May 31, 2029

City Council Agenda Page 3 of 3 May 5, 2026

12. Receive an update on the Police Department's operations, services and activities

MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL

COUNCIL REPORTS
Brief reports on conferences, seminars, and meetings attended by the Council

CITY MANAGER UPDATES

ADJOURNMENT

Notice
Under Government Code §54957.5, any writings/documents regarding an open session item on this agenda and items received by the City Clerk’s Office by 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting provided to a majority of the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet will be available for public inspection on the City’s website https://www.cityofpleasantonca.gov/ and also at the Pleasanton Library located at 400 Old Bernal Ave., Pleasanton, CA 94566.

There is a 90-day limit for the filing of a challenge in the Superior Court to certain City administrative decisions and orders, which require a hearing by law, the receipt of evidence, and the exercise of discretion. The 90-day limit begins on the date the decision is final (Code of Civil Procedure § 1094.6). Further, if you challenge an action taken by the City Council in court, you may be limited, by California law, including but not limited to Government Code §65009, to raising only those issues you or someone else raised in the public hearing, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council prior to or at the public hearing. The City Council may be requested to reconsider a decision if the request is made prior to the next City Council meeting, regardless of whether it is a regular or special meeting.

Accessible Public Meetings
The City of Pleasanton can provide special assistance for persons with disabilities to participate in public meetings. To make a request for a disability-related modification or accommodation (e.g., an assistive listening device), please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 123 Main Street, Pleasanton, CA 94566 or (925) 931-5027 at the earliest possible time. If you need translation or interpretation assistance, please provide at least two working days’ notice prior to the meeting date.

Item #1

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

May 5, 2026
City Council

TITLE: RATIFY COMMISSION AND COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS

SUMMARY
The City solicited applications to fill vacancies for expiring committee and commission terms in February and March 2026. Applications were received and screened for eligibility, and interviews were held. The Mayor makes a selection for each appointment, which are listed in Attachment 1.

RECOMMENDATION
Ratify Commission and Committee appointments.

BACKGROUND
In accordance with commission/committee appointment policies, the City solicits applications from interested Pleasanton residents to serve on the City's standing commissions and committees. Generally, recruitment is conducted in the spring and fall of each year.

DISCUSSION
The following commissions and committees are included in the recommendation for appointment: the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Committee; the Energy and Environment Commission; the Library Commission; and the Parks and Recreation Commission.

The appointments for ratification are listed in Attachment 1. Adult members are eligible to serve a four-year term, and youth members are eligible to serve a two-year term.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
The City encourages all eligible and interested community members to participate in committees and commissions, with the intent of including diverse voices from throughout the Pleasanton community. The recruitment process is structured to optimize opportunities for participation.

OUTREACH
Recruitment was open for 30 days in accordance with City policy. The recruitment was advertised on the City's website, social media accounts, and in the e-newsletter.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the ONE Pleasanton Citywide strategic plan strategy of Optimizing Our Organization, Strategy 4 - Evaluate the organization’s structure of community engagement opportunities, such as commissions and committees, to improve information sharing, optimize staff efficiency, and provide greater service to the community.

1 of 1

Spring 2026 Appointments

APPOINTMENT TERM
Bicycle Pedestrian and Trails Committee
Regular Member – Nathan Harold 5/1/2026 – 4/30/2030

Energy and Environment Commission

Regular Member – Josh Chanin
Alternate Member at large (Adult) – Jennifer Miller
Youth Member – Michael Demczuk
5/1/2026 – 4/30/2030
5/1/2026 – 4/30/2030
5/1/2026 – 4/30/2028

Library Commission
Regular Member – Sima Tavares 5/1/2026 – 4/30/2030

Parks and Recreation Commission
Regular Member – Rahul Kulkarni
Youth Member – Adam Dreyfus

5/1/2026 – 4/30/2030
5/1/2026 – 4/30/2028

Attachment 1

City Council Minutes Page 1 of 2 March 31, 2026

CITY OF PLEASANTON

CITY COUNCIL

MINUTES
Tuesday, March 31, 2026
3:00 PM

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Balch called the Special Meeting Closed Session of the City Council to order at the hour of 3:00 p.m. from the City Council Conference Room located at 200 Old Bernal Avenue.

ROLL CALL

Present: Councilmembers Eicher, Gaidos, Nibert, Testa, Mayor Balch

Absent: None.

1. Public Comment – Comments are limited to only those items listed on the agenda.

Mayor Balch opened public comment. There being no speakers, Mayor Balch closed the public comment.

ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION

2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS - Gov't Code Section 54957.6:

Agency designated representatives: Xaviera Scoggins, Tim Davis (Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLC)
Employee Organization: Pleasanton Police Officers Association

3. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS - Gov't Code Section 54956.8:

Property: 6601 Koll Center (aka “Sycamore Terrace”), Pleasanton, CA (APN:
946-4557-20-3)
Agency Negotiator: Gerry Beaudin, City Manager; Alexa Jeffress, Assistant City Manager
Negotiating Parties: West State Company, a California Limited Partnership Under
Negotiation:

Price and terms of payment

4. THREAT TO PUBLIC SERVICES OR FACILITIES (Training and Information) - Gov't Code section 54957(a):

Consultation with: Tracy Avelar, Police Chief
Item #2

City Council Minutes Page 2 of 2 March 31, 2026

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Sodergren reported that there was no reportable action.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Balch adjourned the meeting at 6:15 p.m.
______________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk

Item #3

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

May 5, 2026
City Manager

TITLE: RECEIVE A REPORT ON THE MARCH 17, 2026 STRATEGIC PLAN WORKSHOP OUTCOMES, UPDATED CITY COUNCIL PRIORITIES FOR FY 2026/27, AND

PRIORITY PROJECTS

SUMMARY
On March 17, 2026, the City Council held a Strategic Plan Workshop to review implementation progress, introduce the Strategic Plan Dashboard, and provide direction on City Council priorities and priority projects for the upcoming fiscal year.

Through two structured exercises, City Council:
• Confirmed and refined priority strategies for FY 2026/27; and • Provided input on the Priority Project List (Attachment 1), including potential tier adjustments and identification of new projects.

This report summarizes those outcomes and presents:
• Six updated City Council Priority Strategies; and
• Recommended priority project updates, including two new projects and proposed adjustment of existing Priority Projects based on City Council input and preliminary staff evaluation.

RECOMMENDATION
Receive the March 17, 2026 Strategic Plan Workshop outcomes and:

1. Adopt the six updated City Council Priority Strategies for FY 2026/27; and

2. Confirm two new priority projects: Project #83 – Residential Sports Court Ordinance and Project #84 – North Arroyo Trails Project.

BACKGROUND
The ONE Pleasanton Five-Year Strategic Plan (FY 2023/24 – FY 2027/28), adopted in October 2023, is the City’s first comprehensive, citywide Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan was developed to move the City away from ad hoc decision-making and priority-setting by establishing five strategic goals and 47 strategies to guide City operations, service delivery, and capital investment over the five-year period.

During the first three years of implementation, the City Council identified seven strategies to focus priority attention and ensure alignment among policy direction, staffing capacity, and

fiscal resources. As the City enters the final two years of the Strategic Plan (FY 2026/27 – FY 2027/28), implementation structures are in place, with defined implementation actions, assigned department leads, and priority projects aligned with departmental work plans.

In July 2025, the City Council adopted a Project Prioritization Framework, categorizing all active City projects as Priority 1 (Must-Do), Priority 2 (Committed), Priority 3 (Strategic Pipeline), or Priority 4 (Deferred) to ensure fiscal capacity and staffing resources are directed toward the City’s highest priorities. The framework was adopted at a Project Prioritization Workshop on July 15, 2025.

The Strategic Plan Dashboard is the City’s formal quarterly reporting tool. The dashboard integrates all five goals, 47 strategies, and associated Priority Projects into a unified reporting framework that provides transparency to the City Council, staff, and the community. The FY 2025/26 Q2 (October–December 2025) dashboard was presented to the City Council at the March 17, 2026, workshop.

The March 17, 2026, workshop represents the first annual strategic review under this framework and was intentionally aligned with the budget development cycle so that City Council direction can inform FY 2026/27 work plans and resource allocation.

DISCUSSION
Workshop Overview
The March 17, 2026, workshop provided an opportunity for the City Council to:
• Review implementation progress through the Strategic Plan Dashboard; • Confirm or refine priority strategies for the upcoming fiscal year; and • Provide feedback on the full Priority Project List (approximately 82 projects).

City Council direction on priorities is reflected in this report. Feedback on projects reflects City Council input and interest; final prioritization will be brought back following staff evaluation of feasibility, resource capacity, and alignment with strategic priorities.

Exercise 1 – City Council Priority Strategies
City Council reviewed the seven existing FY 2025/26 City Council Priority Strategies and provided direction on whether to reaffirm, remove, or add to the list for FY 2026/27. The target range was four to seven priority strategies.

Removal of Emergency Preparedness as a City Council priority For the emergency preparedness strategy (Goal D, Strategy 1 – Assess the City’s overall emergency preparedness capabilities, resources, and tools and implement changes as needed), the City Council noted that key milestones have been achieved, including completion of two Emergency Operations Center (EOC) activation exercises in 2025. The work will continue through departmental work plans and no longer requires elevated, City Council-level prioritization, as it is ongoing.

Reaffirmation and refinements to remaining priorities
All remaining six strategies were reaffirmed with the following noted refinements:

• Goal A, Strategy 2 (New Revenue Sources): broadened interpretation to explicitly include cellular lease revenue, sponsorships, fee recovery, and other diversified revenue streams in addition to the hotel tax measure under exploration. • Goal E, Strategy 4 (Economic Development): broadened interpretation to encompass downtown vitality and economic development areas more broadly, as referenced in the March 17, 2026, Downtown Workplan Memo.
• Goal A, Strategy 1 and Goal C, Strategy 2 (Infrastructure and Facility Funding and Asset Management): one councilmember noted interest in exploring whether the long- term funding strategy and asset management plan priorities could be consolidated. Staff will consider this framing in future reporting.

The updated City Council Priority list for FY 2026/27 is as follows:
# Strategic Goal Council Priority Strategy
1 Goal A – Funding Our Future Strategy 1: Develop a long-term strategy for funding operations and maintenance needs
of community-owned facilities and
infrastructure (including Asset Management
Plan)
2 Goal A – Funding Our Future Strategy 2: Identify expanded and new revenue sources to address significant
infrastructure needs (including cellular lease
revenue, hotel tax, and other revenue
diversification)
3 Goal C – Investing in Our
Environment
Strategy 2: Develop an Asset Management
Plan to address comprehensive long-term
planning for maintenance, renovation, repair,
and/or replacement of infrastructure and
public facilities
4 Goal C – Investing in Our
Environment
Strategy 3: Identify funding and implement
the recommendations from the Water Supply
Alternative Study to resolve PFAS water
quality issues
5 Goal E – Building a Community
Where Everyone Belongs
Strategy 4: Implement the updated 2024-
2028 Economic Development Strategic Plan
initiatives (with broader interpretation,
including downtown vitality and economic
development areas)
6 Goal E – Building a Community
Where Everyone Belongs

Strategy 9: Advance the East Pleasanton
Specific Plan

Exercise 2 – Priority Projects
City Council also reviewed the Strategic Plan Dashboard and the 82-project Priority Project List to validate completeness and express interest in any adjustments to project sequencing for the next two fiscal years. The feedback summarized below reflects the level of City Council support for each item discussed. Staff will use this input to assess feasibility, resource requirements, and alignment with staffing capacity before returning with formal tier

recommendations.

Projects where the City Council expressed interest in the elevation of priority level during straw polling:

Project #46 – Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2.0 Implementation • Priority 3 → Priority 2 (3 Councilmembers)
• Focus on advancing energy upgrades, regional electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure, and climate-related grant opportunities. Staff Assessment: All three sub- projects (PG&E grant program, AVA Community Charging, Climatec) continue to move forward.
• Staff Assessment: All three sub-projects (PG&E Energy Upgrades, AVA Community Charging, Climate Tech) continue to move forward. Due to limited staff resources (the

0.25 full-time equivalent (FTE) position currently assigned to sustainability is on leave until late 2026), it is unlikely that any new CAP 2.0 programs will be initiated until early 2027.

Project #51 – Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) Update
• Priority 3 → Priority 2 (3 Councilmembers)
• Focused amendments to the DSP to remove barriers to investment, enable active ground-floor uses, and revisit/update the Civic Center land use plan. • Staff Assessment: Feasible with additional consultant support; mid-term budget request anticipated.

Project #53 – Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) Amendments / East Pleasanton • Priority 3 → Priority 2 (3 Councilmembers)
• Focus on aligning boundary discussions with East Pleasanton planning and annexation efforts.
• Staff Assessment: This will be an outcome of the East Pleasanton Policy Framework, and will be a complex policy effort requiring multi-agency coordination and sequencing with ongoing planning and entitlement work for East Pleasanton properties. This process will also address the potential annexation of additional properties into Pleasanton, beyond the two sites for which the City Council has already indicated support. This work is underway and ongoing.

Project #57 – Cellular Lease Revenue Program Development • Priority 3 → Priority 2 (5 Councilmembers)
• Identified as a high-potential, non-tax revenue source. • Staff Assessment: Wireless Ordinance Amendments and Policies Adopted by the City Council on April 21, 2025. The program has the potential to deliver new revenues and is feasible to advance in the near term.

Project #73 – Investigate New Allowable Land Uses
• Priority 4 → Priority 3 (4 Councilmembers)
• Limited to cannabis-related business uses and short-term rental regulation. • Staff assessment: Resource-intensive, including community outreach, research, and program development; not anticipated to advance until late FY 2027.

Project #74 – Annexation of Various Areas
• Priority 4 → Priority 3 (3 Councilmembers)
• Focus on targeted annexation areas, limited to Castlewood, Remen Tract, Happy Valley, and rail-track adjacent areas. Annexations within the East Pleasanton area would be addressed as part of Project #53, East Pleasanton UGB amendments. • Staff Assessment: Requires significant staff resources, consultant support, infrastructure analysis, and associated costs. Considerations of community opposition and property owner support may be needed to proceed. Not anticipated to advance until late FY 2026/2027.

Project #79 – Fiber Master Plan
• Priority 4 → Priority 2 (3 Councilmembers)
• Focus on long-term digital infrastructure planning.
• Staff Assessment: Early scoping underway; mid-term budget request anticipated.

New projects identified for staff evaluation include:

Project #83 – Residential Sports Court Ordinance (Priority 2) • Unanimous support (5 Councilmembers)
• The proposed project would address gaps in zoning regulations related to residential sports courts.
• Staff Assessment: Limited resources required and feasible through Planning Commission and standard ordinance process (focused amendment to Pleasanton Municipal Code).

Project #84 – North Arroyo Trails Project (Priority 3)
• Supported for further exploration (4 Councilmembers)
• Requires community engagement and feasibility analysis due to prior concerns with the neighborhood surrounding the trail.
• Staff Assessment: Community-sensitive project requiring phased outreach and evaluation. Anticipated staff availability to start the task later in FY2026/27.

Summary of City Council feedback on priority projects

City
Council
Signal
No. Project Name Current
Tier
Expressed
Direction
Straw Poll
ELEVATED 46 Climate Action Plan
(CAP) 2.0
Priority 3 Priority 2 3
Councilmembers
ELEVATED 51 Downtown Specific Plan
Updates
Priority 3 Priority 2 3
councilmembers
ELEVATED 53 Urban Growth Boundary
Amendments – East
Pleasanton
Priority 3 Priority 2 3
councilmembers
ELEVATED 57 Cellular Lease Revenue
Program Development
Priority 3 Priority 2 5
councilmembers
ELEVATED 73 Investigate New
Allowable Land Uses
Priority 4 Priority 3 4
councilmembers
ELEVATED 74 Annexation of Various
Areas
Priority 4 Priority 3 3
councilmembers
ELEVATED 79 Fiber Master Plan Priority 4 Priority 2 3
councilmembers
NEW 83 Residential Sports Court
Ordinance
New
project
Priority 2 5
councilmembers
NEW 84 North Arroyo Trails
Project
New
project
Priority 3 4
councilmembers

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Approval of this action advances the ONE Pleasanton strategic goal of Goal B – Optimizing Our Organization: Organizational Effectiveness and supports all five strategic goals by establishing a structured, transparent, and accountable priority-setting framework.

OUTREACH
The March 17, 2026 Strategic Plan Informational Workshop was a publicly-noticed open City Council workshop. Public comment was received as part of the workshop discussion. The Strategic Plan Dashboard is publicly available at pleasantonstrategicplan.com, providing ongoing transparency on implementation progress to the community.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the ONE Pleasanton strategic goal of Goal B: Optimizing Our Organization: Organizational Effectiveness Strategy B.7 – Update and expand onboarding, professional development, and performance management plans, by establishing a consistent annual cycle of strategic priority-setting and performance accountability. This action also directly advances implementation of all five strategic goals by aligning City Council priorities, departmental work plans, and fiscal resources for FY 2026/27.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Affirming City Council priorities and

directing staff to evaluate priority project tier adjustments is an administrative action. No budget appropriations are required.

FY 2026/27 mid-term budget requests related to the following projects will be brought forward separately:
• Project #51 – Downtown Specific Plan Update
• Project #79 – Fiber Master Plan

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Sharon Petrehn, Principal
Analyst
Alexa Jeffress, Assistant City Manager

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Project Prioritization List

FY 2025/26 and 2026/27 Project Prioritization List Attachment 1 1 No. Prioritization
Category
Expressed Direction
(New Priority Level) Project Name Project Description Lead Dept
Straw Pole
(# of
Councilmembers)
1 1 - Must Do BART Station Concept Plan for Housing
Prepare a concept plan for the East Dublin-Pleasanton BART station for future redevelopment as high density housing, consistent with the Housing Element. CEDD
2 1 - Must Do
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
Update
Update to reflect recent developments, community needs, and best practices, including improvements near high-use areas (downtown, regional transit, schools). CEDD
3 1 - Must Do
Housing Element – Additional Residential
Rezones
Rezone three commercial properties (with CEQA review) for housing to meet No Net Loss requirements and the terms of the HAC Agreement. CEDD
4 1 - Must Do Streamlining Permit Process
Amend the municipal code and improve processes to simplify permitting, reduce delays, streamline design review and support business and retail attraction. CEDD
5 1 - Must Do East Pleasanton Planning and Policy
Process East Pleasanton applications, adopt an updated General Plan vision and policies, and explore an Infrastructure Financing/Community Facilities District. CEDD
6 1 - Must Do
LPFD/ State Water Resources Control
Board Investigation Continue to coordinate with State Water Board on PFAS source investigation at LPFD sites in Pleasanton. CMO 7 1 - Must Do Organizational Assessment Evaluate operational effectiveness, resource allocation, and strategic alignment of critical municipal departments. CMO 8 1 - Must Do
Eliminate Central Services Division
(Budget Implementation) Remove centralized delivery of office supplies and on-site print shop services previously provided by Central Services. CMO 9 1 - Must Do
Explore Potential Ballot/Revenue
Measure Options
Explore revenue options to address the City's structural deficit and fund aging infrastructure needs , including potential revenue- generating ballot measures.. FIN
10 1 - Must Do
Implementation and Financing for Water
Infrastructure
Debt financing is needed to support the capital projects identified in the Water System Management Plan (WSMP). The 2025 water rate study identified the need for debt financing along with rate increases (WSMP - 20-year Water CIP - $35M bond). FIN 11 1 - Must Do Labor Negotiations Complete negotiation of current and upcoming labor agreements over the next two fiscal years. HR 12 1 - Must Do
Library and Recreation Restructure
(Budget Implementation)
Implement budgetary decisions, including reduce library hours and programs, restructure recreation divisions, develop rental model for adult sports leagues, and modify contracts with vendors. LR 13 1 - Must Do Commission and Committee Restructure
Create a City Council Ad-Hoc Subcommittee to review the City's Commission/Committee structure based on the recently adopted budget, which includes reductions to staffing, programs, and services. LR 14 1 - Must Do Complete Asset Management Plan Complete the plan to inform capital improvement projects (CIP), repair and replacement (R&R) programs, and operational needs. PW 15 1 - Must Do
Implement Next Phase of Garbage
Franchise Agreement
Manage the next phase of the City's waste and recycling franchise agreement, scheduled to expire on June 30, 2029 to meet the city’s solids waste needs. PW
16 1 - Must Do Sewer System Plan and Rate Update
The State Water Resources Control Board requiring agencies to prevent sewage spills, comply with federal and state discharge prohibitions, follow monitoring and reporting requirements, and implement a Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP). PW 17 1 - Must Do
Implementation and Enforcement of
State Required Lead and Copper
Regulations
This is a federal mandated program designed to minimize lead and copper in drinking water by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). PW
18 1 - Must Do
Development of Sewer Pipe Blockage
Control Program
The Sewer Pipe Blockage Control Program is responsible for preventing fats, oils, and grease (FOG)related sanitary sewer overflows.

Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSOs) as required by the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board). PW 19 1 - Must Do
Implementation of Cross-Connection
Control Program
The state-mandated Cross Connections and Water Pollution Control Program is responsible for inspecting industrial, commercial, and medical facilities to ensure that no hazardous conditions exist between plant equipment, process waters, plumbing fixtures and the potable water system. PW
20 1 - Must Do
State Required SB1383 Waste and
Recycling Regulations - Implementation
This is a state-mandated program that requires the City to implement and enforce SB 1383 regulations aimed at reducing organic waste disposal in landfills. The program focuses on diverting food waste and other organics from the waste stream to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. PW
21 1 - Must Do Water Supply Alternative /Wells/PFAS
The City partnered with Zone 7 water agency on a joint groundwater facilities project in the Bernal subbasin. This effort aims to lower wholesale water costs, improve water supply reliability, and reduce future regulatory compliance risks. PW 22 1 - Must Do
Update Special District Rates for
Landscape Maintenance District
As required by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, the City must levy an annual assessment on all parcels benefited by its Landscape Maintenance District. PW
23 1 - Must Do
Fire Alarm System Upgrade at All City
Facilities This project involves upgrading the fire alarm systems at City facilities to meet code requirements during power outages. PW 24 2 - Committed
Priority Stoneridge Mall Master Plan
Continue collaborative efforts with Stoneridge Mall owners to advance a Master Plan or similar comprehensive land use plan for the Mall. CEDD
25 2 - Committed
Priority
Update Development Services Fees
(CEDD and Engineering)
Analyze and update development services fees for Planning, Building and Public Works Engineering to improve cost recovery for development applications/review. CEDD
26 2 - Committed
Priority Retail Attraction Strategy
This strategy focuses on attracting and retaining desirable retail businesses to strengthen the local economy. It includes providing a business concierge service to navigating city processes, streamlining permits ton ensure an efficient and business-friendly environment. CEDD Attachment 1: Priority Project List

FY 2025/26 and 2026/27 Project Prioritization List Attachment 1 2 No. Prioritization
Category
Expressed Direction
(New Priority Level) Project Name Project Description Lead Dept
Straw Pole
(# of
Councilmembers)
27 2 - Committed
Priority
Staples Ranch and Zahari Site
Activation/Use Explore public-private partnerships for regional sports facility at Staples Ranch Community Park site and rezone of Zahari property. CEDD 28 2 - Committed
Priority Transportation Safety Action Plan
The Plan will evaluate the City roadways and collisions to create a safety based action plan to address improvements needed along the high incident corridors to improve safety. CEDD
29 2 - Committed
Priority
Implement BELONG Pleasanton -
Employer of Choice
Advance organizational culture through BELONG (Building Equity, Leadership, Opportunity, Nurturing, and Growth)initiative by implementing training, support protocols, and inclusion strategies. Focus on workforce engagement, retention, and positioning Pleasanton as a top Bay Area employer. CMO
30 2 - Committed
Priority
Update Citywide Records Retention and
Disposition Policy Update the citywide records retention schedule for citywide records to align with current law. CMO 31 2 - Committed
Priority
Develop Communications Foundation
Documents
Create foundational documents that help staff maintain a consistent voice; streamline requests for communications and align work with Council priorities CMO
32 2 - Committed
Priority Final Phase of Website Migration
Coordinate with City departments to update and finalize remaining webpages from new site development to effectively and efficiently keep the community informed about City projects CMO
33 2 - Committed
Priority
Master Fee Study and Master Fee
Schedule Updates/User Fees Conduct a citywide fee study to adjust fees where necessary. FIN 34 2 - Committed
Priority Pension Strategy Develop a funding policy reflecting strategies to pay down unfunded liability and achieve long-term savings. FIN 35 2 - Committed
Priority
Develop and Implement Citywide
Employee Safety Program
Develop and implement comprehensive employee safety program including regular safety drills, emergency procedures, safety training protocols, and communication systems. HR
36 2 - Committed
Priority LPFD Strategic Planning Update Strategic Plan for FY26-FY31. Update with significant input from LPFD's Community Risk Assessment (CRA). LPFD 37 2 - Committed
Priority
LPFD/County Ambulance/Emergency
Medical Service (EMS) Delivery Model
Alameda County has authority over EMS transport in Pleasanton and intends to make significant changes to the current model that will include changes that impact the LPFD requiring implementation. LPFD 38 2 - Committed
Priority Electrical Fleet Replacement Programs This is a state mandated program. By January 1, 2027, 100% of all City vehicle purchases must be zero-emissions. PW 39 2 - Committed
Priority
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
Transition Plan
This state mandated program required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) that outlines how a public entity make facilities and programs accessible to people with disabilities. It details the process of identifying barriers to accessibility and developing a plan to remove those barriers. PW
40 2 - Committed
Priority
Non-functional Turf Ban Implementation
and Non-functional Turf Conversion
This project aims to assist private property owners to comply with this regulation by converting non-functional turf to mulch or drought- tolerant plantings. Convert 2.4 acres of non-functional turf across 11 locations within the City to mulch or drought-tolerant plantings. PW 41 2 - Committed
Priority
State Water Regulations/Conservation as
a Way of Life
This state-mandated program sets long-term water efficiency goals to promote sustainable water use across communities. It supports ongoing conservation practices to help California adapt to water challenges and reduce reliance on emergency drought measures. PW 42 2 - Committed
Priority Storm Water Master Plan
This project will develop a management plan in December 2026, that includes short and long-term recommended projects, programs, and actions to ensure the storm drain system continues to meet desired service levels. PW 43 2 - Committed
Priority Facilities Master Plan
This is a comprehensive plan that evaluate option for future space planning, as well as siting and feasibility analysis associated with certain major facilities needed for City operations. PW 44 2 - Committed
Priority
Comprehensive Facility and
Infrastructure Upgrades - Energy
Upgrades
Plan an engery upgrade to facilities and infrastructure to achieve long-term cost savings, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase facility resilience and upgrade/modernize facilities and replace assets at end of life. PW 45 3 - Strategic
Pipeline Pleasanton Community Academy (PCA)
The Pleasanton Community Academy is a free 6 month program that educates residents about City operations and services across all departments. PCA has been in operation for two years and has graduated over 50 community members. CMO 46 3 - Strategic
Pipeline 2 - Committed Priority
Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2.0
Implementation
Implementation to include supporting facility upgrades, fleet electrification, and EV charger installation. Launch a Sustainability Awards program and update the Municipal Code to require bicycle amenities for certain new developments. CEDD 3 47 3 - Strategic
Pipeline Analyze Railroad Quiet Zone
Evaluate the feasibility and requirements for establishing a Railroad Quiet Zone in Pleasanton, including all four of the City's at-grade rail crossings. CEDD
48 3 - Strategic
Pipeline Affordable Housing Project Program Advance a program to develop City-supported affordable housing. CEDD 49 3 - Strategic
Pipeline Community Benefit Program
Adopt a process to evaluate discretionary requests for residential re-zoning/up-zoning and develop structured menu of community benefits available in exchange for discretionary land use modification/upzoning, to replace negotiated benefits approach. CEDD 50 3 - Strategic
Pipeline General Plan Update A comprehensively update the 2005 General Plan. CEDD

FY 2025/26 and 2026/27 Project Prioritization List Attachment 1 3 No. Prioritization
Category
Expressed Direction
(New Priority Level) Project Name Project Description Lead Dept
Straw Pole
(# of
Councilmembers)
51 3 - Strategic
Pipeline 2 - Committed Priority Downtown Specific Plan Updates Identify strategic updates to the Downtown Specific Plan to reduce permitting barriers and encourage new investment with focused amendments and permit steamlining. CEDD 3
52 3 - Strategic
Pipeline
Land Use Planning and Amendments for
Stoneridge Mall Periphery
Expand planning for Stoneridge Mall core to encompass all properties in mall periphery, including consideration of new locations for Fire Station 2. CEDD
53 3 - Strategic
Pipeline 2 - Committed Priority
Urban Growth Boundary Amendments -
East Pleasanton
Initiate City Council or Voter-Approved Amendments to the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) if determined appropriate based on East Pleasanton Policy Framework process. CEDD 3
54 3 - Strategic
Pipeline
Bernal Community Park - Specific Plan
Amendment
Study alternative land uses for Bernal Community Park, and initiate Specific Plan Amendment, including voter approval of alternatives if needed. CEDD
55 3 - Strategic
Pipeline
Enhance Internal Coordination on
Communications (#YourCityAtWork)
Build stronger internal awareness around what makes a good story and how to share it. Work with departments to identify and elevate stories that demonstrate the value of City services and the positive impact of staff efforts. CMO 56 3 - Strategic
Pipeline
Develop Organizational Key Performance
Indicators (KPIs)
Develop and implement a comprehensive performance management system to track KPIs citywide. Provide ongoing performance monitoring that drives organizational effectiveness. CMO 57 3 - Strategic
Pipeline 2 - Committed Priority
Cellular Lease Revenue Program
Development
Develop a framework to generate revenue from cellular installations on city-owned properties, reversing the previous policy of declining all carrier requests. Initial focus at water facilities and city properties, with potential to generate $200,000-$500,000 annually within 2-3 years. CMO 5
58 3 - Strategic
Pipeline Develop Communications Strategic Plan
Develop a Strategic Communication Plan to enhance community engagement and build public trust. Provide a unified framework to ensure delivery of consistent, transparent, and effective communication with residents, businesses, and stakeholders. CMO 59 3 - Strategic
Pipeline
Human Services Program Reorganization
and Unhoused Services Framework
Development
Conduct an assessment of human services and unhoused services programs to determine optimal organizational structure and staffing needs. Develop a unhoused services framework. CMO
60 3 - Strategic
Pipeline
Strategic Initiatives & Innovation Pilot
Program
Establish a strategic initiatives function within the City Manager's Office to identify and implement cost-saving innovations, revenue enhancements, and service improvements like cross-departmental innovation projects, pursue grant opportunities, and pilot data-driven solutions. CMO
61 3 - Strategic
Pipeline
Grant Strategy & Pursuit Program
Development
Develop and implement a comprehensive grant strategy including establishing on-call grant writing services through RFQ process. Create internal grant coordination structure, tracking systems, and match funding protocols. CMO 62 3 - Strategic
Pipeline Finance Policy Update - Fee Policy Update the fee policy to ensure that fees are fair and equitable and meet the City's cost recovery goals. FIN 63 3 - Strategic
Pipeline Organizational Training & Development
Develop training programs to support staff development, deliver on-going training on topics such as supervisory skills, leadership development, communications, etc. HR
64 3 - Strategic
Pipeline Technology Strategic Plan
Draft a three to five year IT plan to set guiding principles, governance structures, funding strategies, and measurable KPIs for cybersecurity, digital services, data analytics, and infrastructure modernization, and staff resources evaluation. IT 65 3 - Strategic
Pipeline LPFD JPA Shared Services Transfer
Transition finance and payroll services to Pleasanton. Currently, Livermore provides payroll and finance services. Pleasanton would be providing all services to LPFD with these transfers. LPFD 66 3 - Strategic
Pipeline
Funding for Dolores Bengtson Aquatic
Center (DBAC) Begin funding discussions for the 50 meter pool at Dolores Bengston Aquatic Center. LR 67 3 - Strategic
Pipeline
Update Special District Rates - Geologic
Hazard Abatement Districts (GHAD)
Geologic Hazard Abatement Districts (GHADs) are property tax assessment districts formed to fund monitoring, maintenance, and repair of open space hillsides and related storm drainage infrastructure within neighborhoods subject to landslides or other unexpected geologic movement. PW
68 3 - Strategic
Pipeline
PUSD Maintenance Operations and
Transportation (MOT) Discussion Continue discussions around a co-location with Pleasanton Unified School Distrcit (PUSD) for maintenance facilities. PW 69 4 - Deferred
Study for Strategic Disposition of City
Assets/Land Identify surplus City land, facilities and assets, and develop strategy for their disposition. CEDD 70 4 - Deferred
Downtown Parking Strategy Update/
Downtown Parking Garage
Update baseline data in 2017 Downtown Parking Strategy and re-assess the menu of parking supply strategies, including a City parking garage with expert support. CEDD
71 4 - Deferred Sign Ordinance Update Comprehensively update the Signs Chapter of the Pleasanton Municipal Code (PMC). CEDD 72 4 - Deferred Historic Preservation Strategies
Study options and implement code amendments and other strategies (e.g. PMC Amendments, Historic District Designation, Mills Act) as appropriate. CEDD
73 4 - Deferred 3 - Strategic Pipeline Investigate New Allowable Land Uses Study potential Pleasanton Municipal Code (PMC) amendments to allow for potential business and revenue enhancing uses, currently not allowed, to establish in Pleasanton (e.g. Card rooms, cannabis-related businesses, short-term rentals). CEDD 4 74 4 - Deferred 3 - Strategic Pipeline Annexation of Various Areas Determining if annexation of areas like the Remen Tract, Happy Valley, Castlewood, Lester should be brought into the City’s official boundaries. CEDD 3

FY 2025/26 and 2026/27 Project Prioritization List Attachment 1 4 No. Prioritization
Category
Expressed Direction
(New Priority Level) Project Name Project Description Lead Dept
Straw Pole
(# of
Councilmembers)
75 4 - Deferred
New Emergency Operations Center
(EOC)/Department Operations Center
(DOC) Training Center
Plan, design, and construct a dedicated Emergency Operations Center with integrated Department Operations Center and training facilities. Includes site selection analysis and facility design to support emergency response and training activities. CMO 76 4 - Deferred Community Survey
The community survey is a comprehensive, statistacally valid data collection tool designed to gather resident feedback on municipal services, priorities, and overall satisfaction with city operations. CMO 77 4 - Deferred 2026 Semi-Quincentennial Celebration Coordination of Pleasanton's 250th anniversary celebration in 2026 through partnerships with local service organizations. CMO 78 4 - Deferred Short-term Rental Ordinance (TOT) Explore the possibility of developing a short-term rental ordinance to collect transient occupanty tax (hotel tax). FIN 79 4 - Deferred 2 - Committed Priority Fiber Master Plan Develop a city-wide fiber-optic blueprint that pinpoints current gaps, forecasts future bandwidth demand, and outlines phased build-out options. IT 3
80 4 - Deferred First Responder Fees
Exploration of revenue opportunities for Livermore Pleasanton Fire Department (LPFD)services including paramedic first responder fees, insurance coverage of some fire response costs and/or a property tax. LPFD 81 4 - Deferred
City-Wide Access Control System/
Replacement and Security Integration
Replace legacy door-access and alarm systems across all municipal facilities with a single, centrally managed access-control and physical- security platform. PW
82 4 - Deferred
Relocation of Firearm Training Range and
Other Training Centers - 3333 Busch
Road
The Police Department firearm training range facility and the Livermore-Pleasanton Fire Department training center need renovation.

With housing developments planned in the area relocation is needed to meet state regulations that will better meet operational needs. PW 83 NEW 2 - Committed Priority Residential Sports Court Ordinance Address gaps in zoning regulations related to residential sports courts CEDD 5 84 NEW 3 - Strategic Pipeline North Arroyo Trails Project Explore reopening of North Arroyo Trails, with community engagement and feasibility analysis PW 4

Item #4

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

May 5, 2026
Community and Economic Development

TITLE: ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 2305 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER 18.110 OF

THE PLEASANTON MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING PERSONAL WIRELESS

SERVICE FACILITIES

The foregoing Ordinance No. 2305 was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on April 21, 2026, by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Eicher, Gaidos, Nibert, Testa, Mayor Balch Noes: None

Absent: None
Abstain: None

ORDINANCE NO. 2305

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER 18.110 OF THE PLEASANTON

MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE

FACILITIES

WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Constitution, Article XI, section 7; California Government Code Section 37100 and other applicable law, the City Council of the City of Pleasanton (“City Council”) may make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary and other ordinances, resolutions and other regulations not in conflict with general laws; and

WHEREAS, the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B), preserves local government zoning authority as it relates to location and siting of wireless communication facilities, but limits local regulations in three key ways: (1) a local ordinance may not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services; (2) a local ordinance may not prohibit or effectively prohibit service; and (3) a local ordinance may not regulate based on environmental impacts from radio frequency emissions; and

WHEREAS, the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 253 prohibits state and local requirements that prohibit or effectively prohibit any entity’s ability to provide any telecommunication service but preserves the authority of state and local governments to manage the public right-of-way on a nondiscriminatory basis; and

WHEREAS, Section 7901 of the California Public Utilities Code grants telephone corporations the limited right to use the public right-of-way to the extent necessary to provide services to their customers in a manner that does not incommode the public’s use of the public right-of-way; and

WHEREAS, Section 7901.1 of the California Public Utilities Code bolsters the rights reserved to California local governments under Section 7901 and affirms local authority to manage, on a nondiscriminatory basis, the time, place and manner in which telephone corporations access the public right-of-way and deploy their facilities; and

WHEREAS, since the enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, significant changes have occurred in federal and state laws that affect local authority over personal wireless service facilities, which includes, without limitation, the following:

• On November 18, 2009, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) adopted a Declaratory Ruling in the proceeding titled Petition for Declaratory Ruling to Clarify Provisions of Section 332(c)(7)(B) to Ensure Timely Siting Review, 24 FCC Rcd. 13994 (Nov. 18, 2009) (the “2009 Declaratory Ruling”), which imposed procedural restrictions on state and local permit application reviews such as presumptively reasonable times for action. After a petition for judicial review, the U.S. Supreme Court in City of Arlington v. FCC, 569 U.S. 290 (2013), upheld the FCC’s authority to issue these rules;

• On February 22, 2012, Congress adopted Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-96, 126 Stat. 156, codified as 47 U.S.C. § 1455(a), which amended the Communications Act. This statute generally required that state and local governments “may not deny, and shall approve” certain

Ordinance No. 2305

additions and modifications to existing wireless facilities that do not substantially change existing facility’s physical dimensions. Applications covered by this statute are deemed “eligible facilities requests”;

• On October 21, 2014, the FCC adopted a Report and Order in the rulemaking proceeding titled Acceleration of Broadband Deployment by Improving Wireless Facilities Siting Policies, WT Docket No. 13-238, Report and Order, 30 FCC Rcd. 31 (Oct. 21, 2014) (the “2014 Infrastructure Order”), which implemented regulations for “eligible facilities requests” that defined statutory terms, prohibited certain application requirements, limited application review periods and deemed applications automatically granted when the state or local government fails to act within the applicable timeframe. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Montgomery Cnty. v. FCC, 811 F.3d 121 (4th Cir. 2015), denied petitions for review;

• On October 9, 2015, Governor Edmund Brown signed into law Assembly Bill No. 57 (Quirk), codified as California Government Code Section 65964.1, which created a “deemed-approved” remedy for when a local government fails to act on applications for certain wireless facilities within the presumptively reasonable times established in the 2009 Declaratory Ruling and 2014 Infrastructure Order;

• On August 3, 2018, the FCC adopted a Third Report and Order and Declaratory Ruling in the rulemaking proceeding titled Accelerating Wireline and Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment, 33 FCC Rcd. 7705 (Aug. 3, 2018) (the “Moratorium Order”), that formally prohibited express and de facto moratoria for all personal wireless services, telecommunications services and their related facilities under 47 U.S.C. Section 253(a) and directed the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau and Wireline Competition Bureau to hear and resolve all complaints on an expedited basis;

• On September 27, 2018, the FCC adopted a Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order, FCC 18-133 (the “Small Cell Order”), in connection with two informal rulemaking proceedings entitled Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment, WT Docket No. 17-79, and Accelerating Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment, WC Docket No. 17-84. The Small Cell Order set forth limitations on state and local government regulation of small cell wireless facilities that are placed on vertical infrastructure such as utility poles and street light standards located in the public rights-of-way. The Small Cell order: (1) limited the level of local permitting and discretion; (2) established “shot clock” rules (e.g., time limits and deadlines) for processing action on local permits; and (3) limited the fees that can be charged for the facilities. The Small Cell Order further established that any aesthetic regulations and fees required for processing small wireless facilities be published in advance; and

• On the April 4, 2019, the California Supreme Court in T-Mobile West LLC v. City and County of San Francisco, 438 P.3d 239 (Cal. 2019), held that California Public Utilities Code Sections 7901 and 7901.1 do not completely divest local governments of their police powers and only prohibit local franchises as a precondition for access to the public right-of-way by telephone corporations;

Ordinance No. 2305

• On June 10, 2020, the FCC adopted additional regulations purporting to clarify its rules to interpret and implement Section 6409 in Implementation of State and Local Governments’ Obligation to Approve Certain Wireless Facility Modification Requests Under Section 6409(a) of the Spectrum Act of 2012, WT Docket No. 19-250, RM- 11849, Declaratory Ruling and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 35 FCC Rcd. 5977 (Jun. 10, 2020) (the “2020 Declaratory Ruling”). These additional regulations specified what steps an applicant must take for the shot clock to commence, modified what constitutes a substantial change to a wireless facility and clarified the circumstances under which an environmental assessment is not required.

• On August 12, 2020, in Portland v. United States, 969 F.3d 1020 (9th Cir. 2020), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit invalidated many aesthetic restrictions in the Small Cell Order but largely upheld the other limitations. The court specifically invalidated the requirements that aesthetic regulations be objective and no more burdensome than those applied to other infrastructure deployments. The U.S.

Supreme Court denied a petition for review of the Ninth Circuit’s decision to uphold the FCC’s fee restrictions in the Order Denying Petition for Certiorari, Sprint Corp. v.

FCC, No. 20-1354 (June 28, 2021). Thus, the Small Cell Order, as modified by the Ninth Circuit’s partial invalidation, is final with no further pending judicial review;

• On November 3, 2020, the FCC adopted further regulations in Implementation of State and Local Governments’ Obligation to Approve Certain Wireless Facility Modification Requests Under Section 6409(a) of the Spectrum Act of 2012, WT Docket No. 19-250, RM-11849, Report and Order, 35 FCC Rcd. 13188 (Nov. 3, 2020) that defined wireless facility site boundaries and allowed certain additional excavation and deployment of transmission equipment beyond existing site boundaries; and

• On October 4, 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill 537 which amended Government Code Section 65964.1 to provide applicants a “deemed approved” remedy for a collocation or siting application for a wireless telecommunications facility if a city or county fails to approve or disapprove an application within a reasonable period of time in accordance with FCC rules, subject to certain requirements and limitations;

• On October 8, 2023, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill 965 which added Section 65964.3 to the Government Code to require local agencies to undertake batch broadband permit processing of two or more broadband permit applications for substantially similar broadband project sites under a single permit and extends the existing state law “deemed approved” remedy in Government Code Section 65964.1, if a city or county fails to approve or disapprove an application within a reasonable period of time specified in applicable law, subject to certain requirements and limitations; and

WHEREAS, given the rapid and substantial changes in applicable law, the active and effective federal prohibition on reasonable moratorium ordinances to allow local public agencies to study these changes and develop appropriate responses and the significant adverse consequences for noncompliance with these changes in applicable law, and in response to practical experience processing applications for wireless facilities under the Pleasanton Municipal Code (“PMC”), the City Council desires to amend PMC Chapter 18.110 by adopting Exhibit A

Ordinance No. 2305

hereto to allow the City greater flexibility and responsiveness to these federal and state laws in order to preserve the City’s traditional authority to the maximum extent practicable; and

WHEREAS, the City Council finds that amending PMC Chapter 18.110 by adopting Exhibit A hereto will allow the City Council to quickly and efficiently adopt administrative policies that provide clear procedures for wireless facilities, small wireless facilities, eligible facilities requests and emergency standby generator applications and deployment and bolster the City’s policies and regulations concerning public health, safety and welfare and the aesthetic character of the City; and

WHEREAS, amending PMC Chapter 18.110 by adopting Exhibit A hereto is necessary to protect public health, safety, welfare, and aesthetic interests, and the enforcement thereof will not result in the imposition of excessive costs on operators and users of wireless telecommunications services. The City Council finds, further, that the amendment of PMC Chapter 18.110 by adopting Exhibit A hereto neither materially limits a person’s ability to receive wireless communications services nor creates unfair competition among wireless telecommunications service providers; and

WHEREAS, the City Council finds the amendment of PMC Chapter 18.110 by adopting Exhibit A hereto will, to the extent permitted by federal and California state law, protect and promote public health, safety, and welfare, and also balance the benefits that flow from robust, advanced wireless services within the City’s local values, which includes without limitation the aesthetic character of the City, its neighborhoods, and community;

WHEREAS, the Pleasanton Planning Commission considered the proposed Exhibit A hereto at a duly noticed public hearing on March 25, 2026, and by a vote of 3 to 0 recommended the City Council approve a categorical exemption per CEQA and approve Exhibit A hereto to amend PMC Chapter 18.110; and

WHEREAS, on April 21, 2026, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to take public testimony and consider the introduction of this Ordinance to amend PMC Chapter

18.110 by adopting Exhibit A hereto.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. FINDINGS. The City Council finds that: (a) the facts set forth in the recitals in this Ordinance are true and correct and incorporated by reference; (b) the recitals constitute findings in this matter and, together with the staff report, other written reports, public testimony and other information contained in the record, are an adequate and appropriate evidentiary basis for the actions taken in this Ordinance; (c) the provisions in this Ordinance and PMC Chapter

18.110 are consistent with the Pleasanton General Plan, the PMC and applicable federal and state law; and (d) neither this Ordinance nor PMC Chapter 18.110 will be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare.

SECTION 2. AMENDMENT OF PMC CHAPTER 18.110. The City Council does hereby repeal and replace PMC Chapter 18.110 (Personal Wireless Service Facilities) to read as set forth in Exhibit A.

SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or term (each a “Provision”) in this Ordinance or PMC Chapter 18.110, or any Provision’s

Ordinance No. 2305

application to any person or circumstance, is held illegal, invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, all other Provisions not held illegal, invalid or unconstitutional, or such Provision’s application to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected. The City Council declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and amended PMC Chapter 18.110 and each Provision therein, whether any one or more Provisions be declared illegal, invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 4. CEQA. If this Ordinance qualifies as a “project” subject to California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines § 15378 and California Public Resources Code § 21065, the City Council finds that, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3), there is no possibility that this project will have a significant impact on the physical environment. This Ordinance amends PMC Chapter 18.110 in a manner that complies with federal and state regulations. This Ordinance does not directly or indirectly authorize or approve any actual changes in the physical environment. Applications for any new wireless facility or change to an existing wireless facility would be subject to additional environmental review on a case-by-case basis. Accordingly, the City Council finds that this Ordinance is exempt from CEQA under the general rule.

SECTION 5. POSTING/PUBLISHING OF NOTICE. A summary of this ordinance shall be published once within fifteen (15) days after its adoption in “The Valley Times,” a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Pleasanton, and the complete ordinance shall be posted for fifteen (15) days in the City Clerk’s office within fifteen (15) days after its adoption.

SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its passage and adoption.

The foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pleasanton on April 21, 2026, and was adopted at a regular meeting on May 5, 2026, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

______________________________
Jack Balch, Mayor

ATTEST:

____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

____________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Ordinance No. 2305

EXHIBIT A

CHAPTER 18.110

PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITIES

§ 18.110.010. Purpose and Intent.

This chapter of the Pleasanton Municipal Code establishes the regulatory process for all requests for the City’s regulatory authorization to construct, install, operate, collocate, modify, relocate, remove or otherwise deploy wireless facilities, small wireless facilities and eligible facilities requests within the City’s territorial and jurisdictional boundaries.

§ 18.110.020. Definitions.

Notwithstanding anything in this chapter to the contrary, the abbreviations, phrases, terms and words used in this chapter will have the following meanings assigned to them unless context indicates otherwise. Undefined phrases, terms or words in this section will have their ordinary meanings. The definitions in this section shall control over conflicting definitions for the same or similar abbreviations, phrases, terms or words as may be defined elsewhere in this chapter or in the Pleasanton Municipal Code. However, if any definition assigned to any phrase, term or word in this chapter conflicts with any federal or state-mandated definition, the federal or state- mandated definition will control.

(a) “eligible facilities request” means the same as defined in 47 U.S.C. Section 1455(a)(2), and as interpreted by the FCC in 47 C.F.R. Section 1.6100(b)(3).

(b) “FCC” means the “Federal Communications Commission”, as constituted by the Communications Act of 1934, Pub. L: 73-416, 48 Stat. 1064, codified as 47 U.S.C. Sections 151 et seq. or its duly appointed successor agency.

(c) “personal wireless service facilities” mean the same as defined in 47 U.S.C. Section 332(c)(7)(C)(ii).

(d) “Section 6409” means Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-96, 126 Stat. 156, codified as 47 U.S.C. Section 1455(a).

(e) “small wireless facility” means same as defined by the FCC in 47 C.F.R. Section

1.6002(l).

(f) “wireless facility” means a personal wireless service facility.

§ 18.110.030. Wireless Facilities.

All requests for the City’s regulatory authorization to construct, install, operate, collocate, modify, relocate, remove or otherwise deploy wireless facilities not otherwise regulated by Section 18.110.040 through Section 18.110.050 within the City’s territorial and jurisdictional boundaries are subject to a permit as specified in a City Council policy, which may be adopted,

Ordinance No. 2305

amended and/or repealed by a resolution of the City Council. All wireless facilities shall comply with the City Council’s policy. If a City Council policy is not adopted, or is otherwise repealed after adoption and not replaced, an application for a wireless facility shall be processed pursuant to Title 18 (Zoning).

§ 18.110.040. Small Wireless Facilities.

All small wireless facilities are subject to a permit as specified in a City Council policy, which may be adopted, amended and/or repealed by a resolution of the City Council. All small wireless facilities shall comply with the City Council’s policy. If a City Council policy is not adopted, or is otherwise repealed after adoption and not replaced, an application for a small wireless facility shall be processed pursuant to Title 18 (Zoning).

§ 18.110.050. Eligible Facilities Requests.

All eligible facilities requests and other applications submitted for approval pursuant to Section 6409 are subject to a permit as specified in a City Council policy, which may be adopted, amended and/or repealed by a resolution of the City Council. All eligible facilities requests and other applications submitted for approval pursuant to Section 6409 shall comply with the City Council’s policy. If a City Council policy is not adopted, or is otherwise repealed after adoption and not replaced, an eligible facilities request or other application submitted for approval pursuant to Section 6409 shall be processed pursuant to Title 18 (Zoning).

§ 18.110.060. Violations.

Any use or condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of any provision of this chapter shall be and hereby is declared a public nuisance and may be subject to injunctive relief as set forth in Chapter 1.16 (Injunctive Relief), administrative citations as set forth in Chapter 1.24 (Administrative Citations), administrative remedies as set forth in Chapter 1.28 (Administrative Remedies), abatement pursuant to Chapter 9.28 (Property Maintenance), any and all applicable processes and procedures pursuant to the Pleasanton Municipal Code, including but not limited to Chapter 18.140 (Penalties), California Code of Civil Procedure Section 731, or any other remedy available to the City.

Item #5

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

May 5, 2026
Fire

TITLE: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE

EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FIRST RESPONDER ADVANCED LIFE

SUPPORT (FRALS) AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE COUNTY OF

ALAMEDA

SUMMARY
The City of Pleasanton has an agreement with Alameda County to provide First Responder Advanced Life Support (FRALS) services, as part of the countywide local emergency medical services (EMS) system. Staff is recommending an update to the FRALS Agreement to ratify the time/date range for the current contract, which is slated to expire on July 1, 2026. The updated agreement, with changes, is intended to capture the direction from the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to extend the agreement with the current provider, FALCK, USA, for a two-year term, including a possible one-year extension. The proposed timeline within the agreement will terminate if a new transport provider is selected, and an updated agreement will be presented to the City Council before the start of any new provider.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign the second amendment to the EMS FRALS Agreement.

BACKGROUND
In 1980, the State Legislature enacted the Emergency Medical Services System and the Prehospital Emergency Medical Care Personnel Act (EMS Act) to create a comprehensive system governing pre-hospital emergency medical services. The purpose of the EMS Act is to provide for integrated and effective emergency medical services throughout the state.

Pursuant to the EMS Act, Alameda County is the designated Local Emergency Medical Services Agency (LEMSA) responsible for the medical control and management of the emergency medical services system in Alameda County.

In 2011, the City of Pleasanton entered into a five (5) year agreement with Alameda County as the LEMSA for the City to provide First Responder Advanced Life Support (FRALS) services, as part of the local emergency medical services system in Alameda County (Original Agreement). Similar agreements were entered into by other cities and agencies in the County, including the City of Livermore. The Original Agreement defined the FRALS standards and delivery, and contained a detailed schedule of reimbursements from the County to the City to offset some of the City costs to provide paramedic services.

Multiple amendments to the Original Agreement extended the expiration date to June 30, 2019, and discontinued the County's reimbursements to the City for FRALS services that had offset some of the City's costs to provide paramedic services.

In July 2019, a new FRALS Agreement was executed with the County. In June 2024, the City executed the First Amendment to the 2019 Agreement with the County, extending the term through June 30, 2026, and adding the potential for a telemedicine program.

DISCUSSION
The County is requesting a Second Amendment to extend the term through June 30, 2029.

The proposed timeline within the agreement will terminate if a new transport provider is selected and an updated agreement will be presented prior to the start of a new provider.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Maintaining an emergency medical services agreement ensures that all residents and businesses in Pleasanton are able to access fire and safety services.

OUTREACH
No outreach was conducted as this is a routine matter of City business.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the ONE Pleasanton Strategic Plan Goal of Safeguarding Our City - Strategy 6, by implementing high-priority items from the 2022-2026 Livermore- Pleasanton Fire Department (LPFD) Strategic Plan.

FISCAL IMPACT
There are no additional fiscal impacts.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Aaron Lacey

Gina Eleccion, Business
Manager
Aaron Lacey, Fire Chief

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON TO

APPROVE THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES

FIRST RESPONDER ADVANCED LIFE SUPPORT (FRALS) AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY AND THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

WHEREAS, in 1980, the State Legislature enacted the Emergency Medical Services System and the Prehospital Emergency Medical Care Personnel Act ("EMS Act") to create a comprehensive system governing prehospital emergency medical services. The purpose of the EMS Act is to provide for integrated and effective emergency medical services throughout the state: and

WHEREAS, pursuant to the EMS Act, Alameda County is the designated Local Emergency Medical Services Agency ("LEMSA") responsible for the medical control and management of the emergency medical services system in Alameda County; and

WHEREAS, in 2019, the City of Pleasanton entered into a five (5) year agreement with Alameda County as the LEMSA for the City to provide First Responder Advanced Life Support ("FRALS") services, as part of the local emergency medical services system in Alameda County ("Original Agreement"). Similar agreements were entered into by other cities and agencies in the County, including the City of Livermore; and

WHEREAS, in June 2024, the City executed the First Amendment to the 2019 Agreement with the County, extending the term through June 30, 2026, and adding the potential for a telemedicine program. The County is requesting a Second Amendment to extend the term through June 30, 2029.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING:

SECTION 1. Authorizes the City Manager to sign the Second Amendment to the Emergency Medical Services First Responder Advanced Life Support Services Agreement between the City and the County of Alameda executed in 2019, in substantially the same form as the agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A, and upon the City Attorney's approval as to form.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Pleasanton at a regular meeting held on May 5, 2026.

I, Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk of the City of Pleasanton, California, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 5th day of May 2026, by the following vote:

Resolution No.

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

_____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_______________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

EXHIBIT A

SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
This Second Amendment (“Amendment”) to the Emergency Medical Services First Responder Advanced Life Support Services Agreement (“Agreement”), made and entered into on July 1, 2019, is made by the County of Alameda (“County”) and the City of Pleasanton (“Contractor”).

For valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, County and Contractor agree to amend the Agreement in the following respects:

1. Section 2.1 of the Agreement, concerning the term, shall be deleted and replaced with the following language:

2.1 The term of the agreement shall be July 1, 2019, through June 30, 2029. The EMS Agency may terminate this Agreement earlier if the County initiates a new EMS system design that significantly alters service delivery, and a new Agreement is negotiated with the Contractor.

2. Except as expressly modified by this Second Amendment, all of the terms and conditions of the Agreement, are and remain in full force and effect.

EXHIBIT A

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Second Amendment to the Agreement on the date(s) referenced below.

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA CITY OF PLEASANTON

By:______________________________
Signature

By:_____________________________
Signature

Name:

Name: Gerry Beaudin

Title:

Title: City Manager

Date:___________________________

Date:___________________________

Approved as to Form:

DONNA R. ZIEGLER, County Counsel

By:________________________________
K. Scott Dickey, Assistant County Counsel
By signing above, signatory warrants and
represents that he/she executed this
Second Amendment in his/her authorized
capacity and that by his/her signature on
this Second Amendment, he/she or the
entity upon behalf of which he/she acted,
executed this Second Amendment.

Item #6

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

May 5, 2026
Library and Recreation

TITLE: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION

TO THE ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FOR

MEASURE BB FUNDS FOR THE PLEASANTON RIDES DOOR-TO-DOOR

SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

SUMMARY
Measure BB provides for the disbursement of funds through the Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC) to support community transit services for seniors and people with disabilities. Eligible agencies, such as the City of Pleasanton, are required to file applications annually with the ACTC to receive funding.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution authorizing the submittal of an application to the Alameda County Transportation Commission for Measure BB Funds for the Pleasanton Rides Door-to-Door senior transportation program.

BACKGROUND
The Pleasanton Rides Door-to-Door program provides affordable rides for Pleasanton Seniors 70 years and older, and is funded in part by Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC) Measure BB. The ACTC has established a funding formula for the distribution of Measure BB funds (dedicated sales tax) each year to provide special transportation for seniors and persons with disabilities. Each eligible agency must submit an application and an approved City Council resolution. Program plan applications are then forwarded to the Paratransit Advisory Planning Committee for consideration and approval.

DISCUSSION
The total estimated cost of the Pleasanton Rides Door-to-Door program for Fiscal Year 2026/27 is $600,424. The anticipated Measure BB funding is $568,136. The additional funding needed for the program will come from existing Measure BB fund balance.

This program has historically been funded through a variety of sources, including Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) – Transportation Development Act (TDA) 4.5, Measure B, Measure BB, and City General Funds. Current available funding sources are Measure BB and City General Funds. Measure B has sunset, and City of Pleasanton MTC TDA 4.5 funds were relinquished to the Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA) to supplement its costs for providing Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) transportation to Pleasanton residents.

Table 1 - Pleasanton Rides Program Funding
Funding Sources Amount

Outside Revenue Sources:

Measure BB – Alameda County ½ cent Transportation Tax $568,136 Sub-total: $568,136
Program Expense:

Service contract with Black Tie Transportation ($354,576), LAVTA payment for ADA transportation ($198,848), Senior Day Trips and Recreation for Adults with Disabilities (RADD) trips ($16,000), Paratransit management/overhead ($31,000)
$600,424

The Pleasanton Rides Door-to-Door program continues to be offered through the Library and Recreation Department. Enhancements to the program include offering a fee assistance program for low-income seniors and a group trip program for seniors and adults with developmental disabilities. The group trip program offers affordable day trips to destinations that offer educational and enrichment opportunities in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Staff will continue to provide outreach, education, and mobility coordination with other local transportation providers such as LAVTA and the CityServe of the Tri-Valley Volunteer Driver Program.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Acquiring Measure BB funds for the Pleasanton Rides program ensures the City can continue to provide affordable transportation access for senior citizens and adults with developmental disabilities, enabling them to meet daily needs, attend appointments, and take excursions.

OUTREACH
Not applicable as this is a routine item of City business.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This action advances the ONE Pleasanton Strategic Plan goal of Building a Community where Everyone Belongs.

FISCAL IMPACT
The City expects to receive $568,136 in funding from the Alameda County Transportation Commission, Measure BB (45250356-313057). The total direct cost of the City’s Pleasanton Rides Door-to-Door program for Fiscal Year 2026/27 is expected to be $600,424. The additional funding needed for the program comes from Measure BB fund balance.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Ania Pawlak

Ania Pawlak, Management
Analyst
Heidi Murphy, Director of Library and
Recreation

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Resolution

ATTACHMENT 1

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON

AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A CLAIM WITH THE ALAMEDA COUNTY

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (ACTC) FOR MEASURE BB FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026/27

WHEREAS, Alameda County Measure BB provides for the distribution of funds from local dedicated sales tax to provide special transportation for seniors and persons with disabilities; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Measure BB, a prospective claimant wishing to receive an allocation from Alameda County shall file its claim with the Alameda County Transportation Commission; and

WHEREAS, the claims propose to continue a current program utilizing existing equipment, manpower, and routes, and proposes minor additional services and is, therefore, considered exempt from the requirements of the California Environment Quality Act; and

WHEREAS, Measure BB funds will be required by the Pleasanton Rides service in Fiscal Year 2026/27 for community transit services.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING:

SECTION 1: Authorizes the City Manager or designee to execute and file appropriate claims pursuant to the terms of the Alameda County Measure BB, as amended, and pursuant to applicable rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, together with all necessary supporting documents, with ACTC for an allocation of Measure BB funds for Fiscal Year 2026/27.

SECTION 2: Transmit a copy of this Resolution to the ACTC in conjunction with the filing of claims, and ACTC will be requested to grant the allocations of funds as specified herein.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Pleasanton at a regular meeting held on May 5, 2026.

I, Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk of the City of Pleasanton, California, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 5 th day of May 2026 by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Item #7

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

May 5, 2026
Police Department

TITLE: ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 2304 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2238 TO AMEND THE PLEASANTON POLICE DEPARTMENT’S MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE POLICY TO ADD EQUIPMENT TO THE POLICY’S MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY

The foregoing Ordinance No. 2304 was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on April 21, 2026, by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Eicher, Gaidos, Nibert, Testa, Mayor Balch Noes: None

Absent: None
Abstain: None

ORDINANCE NO. 2304

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2238 TO AMEND THE PLEASANTON POLICE DEPARTMENT’S MILITARY EQUIPMENT USE POLICY TO ADD EQUIPMENT TO THE POLICY’S MILITARY EQUIPMENT INVENTORY

WHEREAS, On July 19, 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2238 approving the Pleasanton Police Department’s Military Equipment Use Policy; and

WHEREAS, the Military Equipment Use Policy was amended on October 18, 2022 by Ordinance No. 2240 to add a Command Vehicle to the Policy’s military equipment inventory; and

WHEREAS, the Military Equipment Use Policy was amended on April 18, 2023 by Ordinance No. 2246 to add additional equipment to the Policy’s military equipment inventory; and

WHEREAS, the Military Equipment Use Policy was amended on April 16, 2024 by Ordinance No. 2279 to add additional equipment to the Policy’s military equipment inventory; and

WHEREAS, the Military Equipment Use Polic was amended on May 20, 2025 by Ordinance No. 2294 to add additional equipment to the Policy’s military equipment inventory; and

WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to renew Ordinance No. 2238, approving the Pleasanton Police Department’s Military Equipment Use Policy; and

WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to amend the Military Equipment Use Policy to add additional equipment to the Policy’s military equipment inventory.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Amendment. Ordinance No. 2238 is amended to add the equipment described in Exhibit “A” to the Military Equipment Use Policy’s military equipment inventory.

Section 2. Severability. If any part of this ordinance is declared invalid by a court, such invalidity shall not affect any of the remaining parts.

Section 3. Publication. This ordinance, or a summary prepared by the City Attorney, shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation of the City of Pleasanton within fifteen days after its adoption.

Ordinance No. 2304

Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect 30 days after its adoption.

The foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pleasanton on April 21, 2026, and adopted on May 5, 2026, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

______________________
Jack Balch, Mayor

ATTEST:

____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

____________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Ordinance No. 2304

EXHIBIT A
Additional Military Equipment Requested:

Item #8

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

May 5, 2026
Public Works - Engineering Division

TITLE: ADOPT RESOLUTIONS PRELIMINARILY APPROVING ENGINEER’S REPORTS AND ORDERING PROPOSITION 218 ASSESSMENT BALLOT PROCEEDINGS

FOR THE PONDEROSA-DEL PRADO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 2026-1 AND BONDE RANCH LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 2026-2; AND SETTING JULY 21, 2026, AT 7:00 P.M. FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING

SUMMARY
In 2025, the City increased rates for the four Landscape Maintenance Districts in Pleasanton where increases could be made without triggering a Proposition 218 vote. However, those limited increases were not sufficient to address the ongoing structural funding deficits in the Ponderosa-Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District and the Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District. The original formation documents for these districts did not include an annual inflationary adjustment mechanism, requiring a Proposition 218 process to implement future rate increases.

Over the past year, the City conducted extensive outreach with residents to identify desired service and assessment levels that property owners are willing to support. On March 17, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolutions 2026-009 and 2026-0010, initiating proceedings for the formation of two new Landscape Maintenance Districts (LMDs): Ponderosa-Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026-1 and Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026-2, to replace the existing districts. The City Council action formalized work that began in 2020 to address funding shortfalls leading to below-minimum service levels in the districts.

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed resolutions to preliminarily approve the Engineer’s Reports, order Proposition 218 property owner assessment ballot proceedings, and set July 21, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. as the date and time of the public hearing. The report and proposed assessments would only take effect upon majority property owner approval and subsequent City Council action in July. Alternative resolutions and Engineer’s Reports reflecting a no-vote outcome for all five districts will be presented to the City Council on June 2, 2026.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Adopt a resolution to preliminarily approve the Engineer’s Report for Ponderosa-Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026-1 and set July 21, 2026, as the date of the public hearing.

2. Adopt a resolution to order Proposition 218 property owner assessment ballot proceedings for Ponderosa-Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026-1.

3. Adopt a resolution to preliminarily approve the Engineer’s Report for Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026-2 and set July 21, 2026, as the date of the public hearing.

4. Adopt a resolution to order Proposition 218 property owner assessment ballot proceedings for Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026-2.

BACKGROUND
The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, codified in Division 15, Part 2, Chapter 2, Sections 22500 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code, authorizes local agencies to impose annual assessments on real property that receives special benefit from the installation, maintenance, and servicing of landscaping and lighting improvements. Proposition 218, codified in Article XIIID of the California Constitution, establishes procedural and substantive requirements for property-related assessments, including preparation of an Engineer’s Report, public notice and hearing procedures, and approval through a weighted property owner ballot proceeding.

The City currently administers five Landscape Maintenance Districts (LMDs). All five were formed before Proposition 218 was adopted in 1996 and are structurally underfunded. The City began actively assessing rate adjustment options in 2020 and has held discussions on the subject with all five districts. In 2025, the City raised the assessments for the four districts that had a higher assessment rate approved when the districts were formed. Assessments remained the same for Landscape Maintenance District 1993-1 (Windsor) as the approved assessment rates were already consistent with the current assessment rates.

Landscape Maintenance Districts 1994-1 (Oak Tree Farm) and 1995-1 (Moller Ranch) include an inflation factor, and their assessments were updated last year. As a result, a Proposition 218 ballot process is not currently expected to be necessary for those districts. The City and HOA for Landscape Maintenance District 1993-1 (Windsor) are working towards a possible transfer of maintenance responsibilities. The Engineer’s Reports for the Windsor, Moller Ranch, and Oak Tree Farm LMDs, along with the Engineer’s Reports for the Ponderosa-Del Prado and Bonde Ranch LMDs, should the votes not pass, will be presented to the City Council on June 2, 2026.

Landscape Maintenance Districts 1984-1 (Ponderosa-Del Prado) and 1993-2 (Bonde Ranch) were prioritized for the Proposition 218 vote because they face the most significant funding shortfalls. Neither district includes an annual inflationary adjustment factor, assessment revenues have not kept pace with rising maintenance and water costs, and neither district maintains adequate reserves for capital repair and replacement needs.

The City conducted three rounds of neighborhood meetings for the Ponderosa-Del Prado and Bonde Ranch LMDs between November 2025 and April 2026. The first meeting, held online, informed residents of the districts’ financial conditions and gathered initial input. The second and third meetings were held in person. At the second meeting, staff presented assessment options (a high level of maintenance more consistent with the plans approved at the formation of the development, a mid-level recommended by the City to reflect a sustainable maintenance level based on the condition of the existing mature landscape, and a reduced maintenance level, reflecting the minimum level necessary to sustainably maintain the landscape safely) and notified property owners that an informal survey would be distributed to gauge support for the options. At the third and final meeting, staff shared the survey results and outlined the next steps.

On March 17, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolutions 2026-009 and 2026-0010, initiating proceedings to form two new districts to replace the existing Ponderosa-Del Prado and Bonde Ranch districts. The City Council designated SCI Consulting Group as Engineer of Work and directed the preparation of Engineer’s Reports consistent with the requirements of the Act and Article XIIID.

DISCUSSION
Engineer’s Reports
The City retained SCI Consulting Group to prepare Engineer’s Reports for both proposed districts in accordance with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 and Article XIIID of the California Constitution. Each Engineer’s Report outlines the yearly anticipated expenditures and revenues. It provides a detailed description of the proposed improvements, district boundaries, and assessment diagram, the proposed method of assessment apportionment, and the assessment roll. The Engineer’s Reports are filed with the City Clerk and are part of the respective preliminary approval resolutions.

If the City Council preliminarily approves the Engineer’s Reports, official property owner ballots and notices of the public hearing will be mailed to all record owners of parcels within each proposed district no later than May 15, 2026.

Ponderosa-Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026-1 The Ponderosa-Del Prado LMD serves 344 parcels, consisting of 343 single-family residential parcels and one City-owned parcel, within the Ponderosa Homes subdivision. The district was originally formed in 1984 and funds maintenance of landscaped areas, trees, shrubbery, groundcover, and irrigation systems along Paseo Santa Cruz. The current annual assessment is $61.10 per parcel, including the County collection fee.

An informal survey was distributed by mail to all district property owners, and by email to all property owners for whom the City had email addresses on file. Of the 47 unique survey responses received, 61.7 percent of respondents, weighted by proposed assessment, indicated support for the City-recommended maintenance level.

Based on the public meetings, correspondence with residents, and informal survey results, staff recommends the City-recommended option for the ballot, with a total annual district budget of $84,224 after weighing properties under Proposition 218 requirements. This option moves the district closer to its original maintenance standard and includes immediate safety improvements, plant and landscape restoration, tree pruning and replacement, entry feature repairs, and preventive and proactive care.

The proposed assessments range from approximately $242 to $281 per parcel per year across five assessment zones, with rates dependent on the special benefit that each property receives. Properties would be subject to an annual Consumer Price Index adjustment capped at 3 percent. Final zone rates are confirmed in the Engineer’s Report.

Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026-2
The Bonde Ranch LMD serves 103 parcels, consisting of 102 single-family residential parcels and one City-owned parcel containing a water tank, within the Bonde Ranch subdivision. The district was originally formed in 1993 and funds maintenance of landscaped areas, open-space slopes, fuel transition zones (fire breaks), entry features, open-space drainage ditches,

irrigation systems, and trees within Tracts 6483 and 6518. The current annual assessment is $396.18 per parcel, including the County collection fee.

An informal survey was distributed by mail to all district property owners, and by email to all property owners for whom the City had email addresses on file. Of the 36 unique survey responses received, 65.6 percent of respondents, weighted by proposed assessment, indicated support for the Reduced Maintenance level.

Based on public meetings, correspondence with residents, and informal survey results, staff recommends the Reduced Maintenance option for the ballot, with a total annual district budget of $52,364 after weighing properties under Proposition 218 requirements. This option focuses primarily on safety by maintaining current conditions through basic tree pruning and removal, basic fire break maintenance, weed abatement, and minimal irrigation to sustain plantings.

Proposed assessments would be $633 per year for Zone A parcels, with the City paying $1,266 for the water tank site in Zone A, and $279 per year for Zone B parcels, subject to an annual Consumer Price Index adjustment capped at 3 percent. Zone A parcels are weighted more heavily under Proposition 218 requirements because they receive a much greater special benefit from fire protection and landscape maintenance services. The water tank property is assessed at an even higher rate due to its value in the event of a fire and the benefit it receives from being protected.

Replacement of Existing Districts and Transfer of Funds If a proposed district is approved through the Proposition 218 ballot process and is not subject to a majority protest, the corresponding existing district will be dissolved and replaced by the new district.
• If Ponderosa-Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026-1 is approved, Landscape Maintenance District 1984-1 (Ponderosa-Del Prado) will be dissolved. All unexpended funds held in the existing district fund (Fund 134) at the time of dissolution, approximately $73,260 as of April 2026, will be transferred to Ponderosa-Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026-1.
• If Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026-2 is approved, Landscape Maintenance District 1993-2 (Bonde Ranch) will be dissolved. All unexpended funds held in the existing district fund (Fund 136) at the time of dissolution, approximately $35,155 as of April 2026, will be transferred to Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026-2.

If either proposed district is not approved or is subject to a majority protest, the corresponding existing district will continue to operate under its current assessment structure based on the Engineer’s Reports that will be presented to the City Council in June.

Ballot Process and Timeline
The following schedule governs the ballot proceedings for both proposed districts:
• May 5, 2026: City Council preliminarily approves the Engineer’s Reports and orders ballot proceedings.
• May 15, 2026: Official Proposition 218 ballots are mailed to all record owners of parcels within each proposed district.

• June 2, 2026: City Council preliminarily approves Engineer’s Reports for all five LMDs, including alternative Engineer’s Reports for Ponderosa-Del Prado and Bonde Ranch in the event the Proposition 218 ballot measures do not pass. • July 21, 2026: Public hearing is held. Ballots must be received by the City Clerk by the close of the public hearing. Postmarks do not constitute timely receipt. • August 2026: If approved, the new assessments are submitted to the Alameda County Auditor-Controller for inclusion on FY 2026-27 property tax bills.

Votes are weighted by the proposed assessment amount for each parcel. Only returned ballots are counted; ballots not returned are neither counted in support of nor opposition to the proposed assessments. If a majority protest exists, meaning weighted ballots in opposition exceed weighted ballots in support of the returned ballots, the proposed assessment may not be imposed.

The table below lists the assessments that would be collected in each district this fiscal year if the ballot measure passes.

Table 1. Ponderosa-Del Prado LMD

Table 2. Bonde Ranch LMD

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
This action does not result in a physical environmental impact. Maintenance work within each LMD is categorically exempt from CEQA under Guidelines Section 15302, “Replacement or Reconstruction.” Moreover, under CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(4), this action is not a project because it involves a government funding mechanism that does not commit the City to a specific project that may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
The Proposition 218 ballot process, should the vote be approved, would improve the long-term sustainability of the landscape maintenance for the Ponderosa-Del Prado and Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance Districts, increase protection against wildfire, and provide more funding for better care of the landscapes for each district.

OUTREACH
The City conducted three neighborhood meetings for each proposed district. The first and second meetings informed property owners about the proposed process, the financial challenges facing each district, and the maintenance level options. The third meeting, held on April 6, 2026, for Bonde Ranch, and on April 7, 2026, for Ponderosa-Del Prado, at the Pleasanton Senior Center, presented survey results, the proposed ballot option, and an explanation of the Proposition 218 ballot process.

Dedicated informational websites for each district have been active since early 2026 and are available to property owners at any time. The websites include informal survey results, meeting summaries, presentations, meeting recordings, and other background materials.

Ponderosa-Del Prado Website
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/a65e86d56f924ccbbc9d55c3afb6c7ed Bonde Ranch Website
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/a1bd9b1b6e074033b350934a8e211fa1

Informational flyers summarizing the ballot process were mailed to all district property owners in April 2026.

Following the City Council’s action on this item, formal Proposition 218 ballot packages will be

mailed to all record owners of parcels within each proposed district no later than May 15, 2026, in compliance with the requirements of Article XIIID of the California Constitution.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the citywide ONE Pleasanton strategic plan goal of Funding our Future - to support financial health and sound fiscal policies through long-term planning, cost recovery, increased revenue, and cost containment.

FISCAL IMPACT
The LMDs are special assessment districts managed by the City. Funds collected within each district may be used only for that district and may not be commingled. As required by law, the City will continue to bear the cost of assessments attributable to general benefit and City- owned parcels. Accordingly, the City’s annual assessment responsibility would be as follows:

Table 3. City Annual Assessment

With the proposed increased assessment amounts, and consistent with the prior year's assessments, staff recommends that $1,570.50 be appropriated from the General Fund to the LMDs. The proposed FY 2026-27 budget includes this expense from the General Fund.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Adam Nelkie, Assistant Dir.
of Public Works -
Engineering
Siew-Chin Yeong, Director of Public
Works

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Resolution Ponderosa-Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026-1 (with Exhibit A – Engineer’s Report)

2. Resolution Ponderosa-Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026-1 for Proposition 218

3. Resolution Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026-2 (with Exhibit A – Engineer’s Report)

4. Resolution Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026-2 for Proposition 218

Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON

DECLARING THE INTENTION TO FORM PONDEROSA-DEL PRADO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 2026-1, PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ENGINEER’S REPORT; AND SETTING A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolution No.2026-0009 initiating proceedings for the formation of Ponderosa-Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026-1 (the “District”) pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (the “Act”), Division 15, Part 2, Chapter 2, Sections 22500 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code, for the installation, maintenance, and servicing of landscaping and other improvements; and WHEREAS, Proposition 218 was adopted on November 6, 1996, adding Articles XIIIC and XIIID to the California Constitution, which impose certain procedural and substantive requirements relating to assessments (as defined); and
WHEREAS, an Engineer’s Report (“Report”) has been prepared by SCI Consulting Group, registered, professional engineers (“Assessment Engineer”), and submitted to the City Council, in which an assessment is proposed to fund the cost of the installation, maintenance and servicing of improvements within the District boundaries as described in §3 below. The proposed Landscape Maintenance District shall be described as “Ponderosa-Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026-1” of the City of Pleasanton (hereinafter the “Assessment District”).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING:

SECTION 1. The above Recitals are in all respects true and correct.

SECTION 2. Reference to Initiation. In accordance with direction from the City Council, SCI Consulting Group, (“Engineer of Work”), prepared an Engineer’s Report (“Report”) pursuant to the Act and Article XIIID of the California Constitution. The Report has been prepared, filed with the City Clerk, reviewed, and duly considered by the City Council and is hereby deemed sufficient and preliminarily approved. The Report shall stand as the Engineer’s Report for all subsequent proceedings under and pursuant to this Resolution.

SECTION 3. Description of the Improvements. The purpose of the Assessment District shall be for the installation, maintenance, and servicing of improvements. Within the District, the existing and proposed improvements (“Improvements”) are generally described as the installation, maintenance, and servicing of landscaped areas, including but not limited to, trees, shrubs, groundcover, turf, mulch, and irrigation and drainage systems, all as delineated on the landscape and irrigation plans for Tract 5256 (Phase III Landscape Maintenance District 1984- 1) and Tract 4986 (Arroyo de la Laguna Improvements). The Improvements are located within the following areas: (1) north of Corte de Flores on the west side of Paseo Santa Cruz, approximately 160 feet long by 6 feet wide; and (2) north of Corte Pacifica on the east side of Paseo Santa Cruz, approximately 1,370 feet long by 6 feet wide. The Improvements also include maintenance of and access to the Centennial Trail frontage and appurtenant landscape areas, entry feature repair and improvements, fencing and gates, and all associated appurtenant facilities and incidental expenses.

“Installation” means the construction of landscape improvements, including but not limited to land preparation such as grading, leveling, cutting and filling, sod, landscaping, irrigation systems, and drainage. “Maintenance” means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation, and servicing of said Improvements, including: (a) repair, removal, or replacement of all or any part of any improvement; (b) providing for the life, growth, health, and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, pruning, spraying, fertilizing, treating for disease or injury, plant and mulch replacement, and weed abatement; (c) the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris, and other solid waste; (d) fire prevention management, including tree pruning and removal of hazardous or dead vegetation; (e) repair, maintenance, and replacement of irrigation systems, water-efficient upgrades, and drainage facilities; (f) repair and maintenance of fencing, gates, and entry features; and (g) safety improvements necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of district property and the public. “Servicing” means the furnishing of (a) water for the irrigation of any landscaping or the maintenance of any other improvements, and (b) electric current or energy for the lighting or operation of any improvements. The Improvements also include all labor, materials, supplies, utilities, and equipment necessary or incidental to the foregoing, together with all costs of administration, engineering, legal, and other incidental expenses associated with the District.

SECTION 4. Reference to Engineer’s Report. The Report is hereby incorporated by reference. Reference is hereby made to the Report for a full and detailed description of the Improvements, the boundaries of the Assessment District and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within the Assessment District. Reference is also hereby made to the Report for an estimate of the costs of the Improvements proposed to be financed from the proceeds of the proposed assessment.

SECTION 5. Report of the Assessment Engineer: The Report is available for public review at the City of Pleasanton City Hall, located at 123 Main St, Pleasanton, CA. The Engineer’s Report includes:

A. A description of the Improvements to be funded with assessment proceeds, services and incidental costs; and
B. An estimate of the annual cost of such Improvements; and C. A description of the assessable parcels of land within the District and proposed to be subject to the assessment; and
D. A description of the proportionate special and general benefits conferred on property by the proposed assessment; and
E. A description of the boundaries of the proposed Assessment District; and F. A specification of the amount to be assessed upon various types of assessable land to fund the cost of the Improvements; and
G. The proposed method and formula of assessing the costs and expenses of the Improvements to the properties which will specially benefit from the Improvements.

SECTION 6. Description of Assessment District. The Assessment District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the Assessment District on file with the City Clerk, and reference is hereby made to such map for further particulars.

SECTION 7. Proposed Assessment Rate. It is the intention of this City Council to levy and collect assessments within the Assessment District. The estimated Fiscal Year 2026-27 cost of providing the Improvements is $84,224. Said estimated cost results in a proposed Single-Family Equivalent ("SFE") assessment rate of TWO HUNDRED FORTY-ONE DOLLARS AND FORTY-FOUR CENTS ($241.44) for Zone 1 (Base Level), TWO HUNDRED FIFTY-TWO DOLLARS AND FIFTY-FIVE CENTS ($252.55) for Zone 2 (Central Wall), TWO HUNDRED FIFTY-FIVE DOLLARS AND FORTY-FOUR CENTS ($255.44) for Zone 3 (Adjacent to Trail), TWO HUNDRED SIXTY-SIX DOLLARS AND FIFTY-FIVE CENTS ($266.55) for Zone 4 (Proximate Trail Access), and TWO HUNDRED EIGHTY DOLLARS AND FIFTY-FIVE CENTS ($280.55) for Zone 5 (Proximate Trail Access + Adjacent) to Trail for fiscal year 2026-27. It is the further intention of the City to have the assessment collected on the tax roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not separately from, its general taxes.

SECTION 8.

Public Hearing. Notice is hereby given that the Public Hearing on the proposed assessment shall be held before the City Council on Tuesday, July 21, 2026, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, located at 200 Old Bernal Avenue, Pleasanton, California, or soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, for the purpose of this City Council’s determination of whether the Public interest, convenience, and necessity require the improvements and this City Council’s final action upon the report and the assessments therein.

All interested persons shall be afforded the opportunity to hear and be heard. Any interested person may file a written protest with the City Clerk, or, having previously filed a protest, may file a written withdrawal of that protest, prior to the conclusion of the public input portion of the public hearing. A written protest shall state all grounds of objection. A protest by a property owner shall contain a description sufficient to identify the property owned by the signer thereof.

The City Council shall consider all oral statements and all written protests made or filed by any interested person. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 53759.1 and 53759.2, timely written objections will be duly considered and written responses will be provided to such objections SECTION 9. Notice and Ballot. The City Clerk hereby is authorized and directed to cause Notice of the hearing ordered under Section 8 hereof to be given in accordance with law by United States Mail, and such Notice shall be deemed to have been given when so deposited in the United States Mail. The envelope or cover of the mailing shall include the name of the City. The mailed Notice shall be given to all property owners of assessable parcels within the Assessment District by such mailing by name to those persons whose names and addresses appear on the last equalized secured property tax assessment roll of Alameda County, or in the case of any public entity, the representative of such public entity at the address thereof known to the City Clerk. The Notice shall include, but not be limited to, the total amount of assessment proposed to be levied in the Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2026-27, the assessment proposed for the owner’s particular parcel(s) and the duration thereof and the reason for the assessment. Each Notice shall also contain the proposed assessment and the basis upon which the amount of the assessment was calculated. Each Notice shall also contain an assessment ballot, a summary of the procedures applicable to the completion, return and tabulation of assessment ballots, the date, time, and location of the public hearing and a statement that the existence of a majority protest will result in the assessment not being imposed. The Notice herein provided shall be mailed not less than forty-five (45) days before the date of the public hearing.

SECTION 10. Additional Information. To obtain additional information about the proposed assessments, the Assessment District or the proposed Improvements contact: Matt

Gruber, Landscape Architect, 123 Main St, Pleasanton, CA, telephone number (925) 931-5672.

The Engineer’s Report and other written material about the Assessment District may also be reviewed at the Office of the City Clerk during regular business hours.

SECTION 11. Annual Assessments. The assessments are proposed to be levied annually. If the proposed assessments are approved and confirmed by the City Council, the assessments will increase in future years by an amount up to the change in the San Francisco Bay Area Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) with a maximum of 3% without a further vote or balloting process. In the event that the actual assessment rate for any given year is not increased by an amount equal to the CPI change, any such deferred assessment increase may be added to the total amount assessed in any subsequent year. In such event, the maximum authorized assessment amount shall be equal to the base year assessment as adjusted by the increase to the CPI, plus any and all CPI adjustments deferred in any and all prior years. In each subsequent year in which the assessments will be levied, an updated Engineer’s Report, including a proposed budget and assessment rate, shall be prepared. The updated Engineer’s Report shall be considered by the City Council at a noticed public hearing. The updated Engineer’s Report shall serve as the basis for the continuation of the assessments.

SECTION 12. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Pleasanton at a regular meeting held on May 5, 2026.

I, Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk of the City of Pleasanton, California, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 5th day of May 2026 by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
_____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Fiscal Year 2026‐27

ENGINEER’S REPORT
City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa ‐Del Prado
Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1
April 2026

Pursuant to the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 and Article XIIID of the California Constitution

Exhibit A

(This page Intentionally left blank)

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

City  of Pleasanton
Mayor
Jack Balch

City  Council
Matt Gaidos, District 4, Vice Mayor
Jeff Nibert, District 1, Member
Craig Eicher, District 2, Member
Julie Testa, District 3, Member

City  of  Pleasanton  Staff
Siew‐Chin Yeong, Director of Public Works
Adam Nelkie, Assistant Director of Public Works, Engineering/City Engineer Matt Gruber, Landscape Architect

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Table  of Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................... 4 Overview ...................................................................................................................... 4 Community Outreach ................................................................................................... 5 Assessment Process ..................................................................................................... 6 Legislative Analysis ....................................................................................................... 8 Plans and Specifications .................................................................................. 11 Estimate of Cost and Budget ........................................................................... 13 Notes for Estimates of Costs ...................................................................................... 15 Method of Apportionment ......................................................................................... 16 Discussion of Benefit .................................................................................................. 17 Benefit Factors ........................................................................................................... 18 General versus Special Benefit ................................................................................... 21 Benefit Finding ........................................................................................................... 22 Source of Contributions from Other Funds ................................................................ 25 Zones of Benefit ......................................................................................................... 27 Method of Assessment ............................................................................................... 30 Residential Properties ................................................................................................ 30 Other Properties ......................................................................................................... 31 Consumer Price Index Adjustments ........................................................................... 32 Government Code § 53759.1 and 53759.2 ................................................................ 32 Assessment Statement ................................................................................... 34 Assessment Diagram ....................................................................................... 36 Assessment Roll .............................................................................................. 38

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

List  of Tables
Table 1 ‐ Fiscal Year 2026‐27 Estimate of Cost and Budget .............................................. 14 Table 2 ‐ Relative Benefit Levels ....................................................................................... 21 Table 3 – Benefit to Property Outside the Assessment District ....................................... 23 Table 4 – Summary of General Benefit ............................................................................. 25 Table 5 – City In‐Kind General Benefit Contributions ....................................................... 27 Table 6 ‐ Relative Benefit Levels By Zone ......................................................................... 29 Table 7 ‐ Assessment Rate Determination by Estimate of Costs ...................................... 31 Table 8 – Summary of Combined Cost Estimate ............................................................... 34

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Introduction
Overview
Landscape  Maintenance  District  No.  1984‐1,  Ponderosa‐Del  Prado  ("1984‐1  Ponderosa LMD") was established by the City of Pleasanton in 1984 as a condition of approval for the  Ponderosa  residential  development.  The  1984‐1  Ponderosa  LMD  was  formed pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (California Streets and Highways Code, Sections 22500 et seq., the "Act") to fund the ongoing maintenance of landscaping, trees, shrubs, groundcover, and irrigation systems within the Ponderosa subdivision. The Ponderosa single‐family residential project was approved in two phases, October 1983 and January 1985.

The original assessment was established in 1984, prior to the passage of Proposition 218.

The first assessment on record, approved by Resolution 88‐375, was $60.08 per parcel per year. Beginning in Fiscal Year 2000‐01, the assessment was reduced  to $16.62 per parcel,  where  it  remained  through  Fiscal  Year  2024‐25.  With  no  inflation  escalator, assessment  revenues  have  not  kept  pace  with  the  rising  costs  of  maintenance,  water, utilities,  and  capital  replacement.  The  resulting  funding  shortfall  has  produced  a measurable decline in the condition of the landscape and infrastructure within the 1984‐ 1 Ponderosa LMD.

In Fiscal Year 2025‐26, the City restored the assessment to $60.08 per parcel per year, the amount established by Resolution 88‐375. However, this restoration is insufficient to fund the  full  scope  of  maintenance  and  capital  improvements  needed  within  the  District.

Water costs increased thirty percent in calendar year 2024, an additional twelve percent in 2025, and rates were restructured in 2026, moving away from the tiered system based on quantity, which will more heavily impact low water‐use properties, such as the 1984‐ 1 Ponderosa LMD. Water rates are projected to continue to increase in future years to pay for necessary infrastructure and treatment costs. The reserve fund has been partially drawn to fund the costs of the Proposition 218 ballot proceeding.

The  City  Council  has  directed  that  a  new  assessment  be  proposed  and  voted  on  by property owners within the District in accordance with Proposition 218 (Article XIIID of the California Constitution). The intent is to replace the existing District No. 1984‐1 with a  new  Ponderosa‐Del  Prado  Landscape  Maintenance  District  2026‐1  ("Assessment District"  or  "District")  that  includes  a  cost‐of‐living  adjustment  provision  to  provide adequate  and  sustainable  funding  for  maintenance  and  services  going  forward.  If approved by property owner ballot, the existing 1984‐1 Ponderosa LMD will be replaced by the Assessment District.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

This  Engineer's  Report  ("Report")  was  prepared  to  establish  the  budget  for  the improvements  and  services  ("Improvements")  that  will  be  funded  by  the  proposed assessments,  to  determine  the  general  and  special  benefits  received  from  the Improvements by property within the Assessment District, and to establish the method of assessment apportionment to lots and parcels. This Report and the assessments have been made pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "Act") and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (the "Article"). The boundaries of the Assessment District are the same as the  boundaries  of  the  existing  District  No.  1984‐1  and  include  all  parcels  within  the Ponderosa subdivision as shown on the Assessment Diagram incorporated in this Report.

Community  Outreach
Prior  to  initiating  Proposition  218  proceedings,  the  City  of  Pleasanton  conducted  an extensive  community  outreach  process  to  inform  property  owners  of  the  District's financial  condition,  solicit  input  on  proposed  maintenance  levels,  and  explain  the Proposition  218  ballot  process.  Prior  to  each  community  meeting,  the  City  mailed  and emailed  informational  flyers  to  all  district  property  owners  summarizing  the  meeting date, location, and topics to be covered.

On November 17, 2025, the City held its first informational community meeting virtually.

City staff and SCI Consulting Group presented information about the District's formation and history, the current state of the landscape and infrastructure, the funding shortfall resulting  from  decades  of  unchanged  assessments,  and  the  Proposition  218  process required  to  increase  the  assessment.  Property  owners  were  invited  to  submit  written feedback  to  the  City  and  notified  that  the  City  would  be  holding  another  meeting  in response to the input received and to present more detailed cost information.

On  February  19,  2026,  the  City  held  its  second  community  meeting  at  the  Pleasanton Senior Center, available both in person and virtually. The City presented updated budget options, the zone of benefit structure, the Proposition 218 ballot process and timeline, and an overview of the survey to date.

The informal survey was distributed via mail to all district property owners and email for all  property  owners  that  had  provided  the  City  with  their  email  addresses.  The  survey sought input on preferred maintenance levels, priorities for improvements, and attitudes toward the proposed assessment.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

The  survey  closed  on  March  16,  2026.  Of  the  47  unique  survey  responses  ultimately received, 61.7% of respondents, weighted by proposed assessment, indicated cumulative support  for  the  City  Recommended  maintenance  level.  The  top  priorities  identified  by respondents  were  weed  abatement,  tree  maintenance  pruning  and  removal,  fire prevention management, and irrigation system repairs and replacement. Survey results are directional and are not statistically valid as a prediction of ballot outcome.

On March 17, 2026, the City Council adopted resolutions initiating proceedings for the formation  of  the  Ponderosa‐Del  Prado  Landscape  Maintenance  District  2026‐1  and designated SCI Consulting Group as Engineer of Work for the proposed district.

The third and final neighborhood meeting was held on April 7, 2026, at the Pleasanton Senior  Center,  available  both  in‐person  and  virtually.  The  meeting  presented  the  final survey  results,  the  proposed  ballot  option  recommended  by  the  City,  a  detailed explanation  of  the  Proposition  218  weighted  ballot  process,  and  the  next  steps  in  the proceedings.

Throughout the outreach process, the City maintained a dedicated informational website for the District available to property owners at all times. The website includes recordings of all three community meetings, slide decks, meeting Q&A summaries, frequently asked questions, formation documents, and budget information. The website has been updated following each community meeting to reflect the most current information available.

Assessment  Process
This  Engineer’s  Report  establishes  the  budget  for  the  maintenance  and  services  to  be undertaken by the Assessment District that will be funded by the proposed Fiscal Year 2026‐27 assessments and also determines the benefits received from the maintenance and  services  by  property  within  the  Assessment  District  as  well  as  the  method  of assessment  apportionment  to  lots  and  parcels.  This  Report  and  the  proposed assessments have been made pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "Act") and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (the “Article”).

Following the submittal of this Report to the City of Pleasanton City Council (“Council”) for preliminary approval, the Council  may, by Resolution, call for an assessment  ballot proceeding  and  Public  Hearing  on  the  establishment  of  the  Ponderosa‐Del  Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

If the Council approves such Resolution and calls for the mailing of notices and ballots, a notice of assessment and assessment ballot will be mailed to property owners at least 45 days prior to the date of the Public Hearing set by the Council. Such notice would include a description of the assessments as well as an explanation of the method of voting on the assessments. Each notice would include a ballot on which the property owner could mark his or her approval or disapproval of the assessments and a ballot return envelope.

After the ballots are mailed to property owners, a minimum 45‐day time period must be provided for the return of the assessment ballots. Following this 45‐day time period, a public hearing must be held for the purpose of allowing public testimony regarding the proposed  assessments  and  services.  At  this  hearing,  the  public  would  have  the opportunity to provide input on this issue and would have a final opportunity to submit ballots. After the conclusion of the public input portion of the hearing, the hearing may be continued to a later time to allow time for the tabulation of ballots.

With the passage of Proposition 218 on November 6, 1996, The Right to Vote on Taxes Act, now Article XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution, the proposed assessments can be levied for Fiscal Year 2026‐27 and future years, only if the ballots submitted in favor  of  the  assessments  are  greater  than  the  ballots  submitted  in  opposition  to  the assessments.  Each  ballot  is  weighted  by  the  amount  of  proposed  assessment  for  the property that it represents.

If  it  is  determined,  when  the  tabulation  results  are  announced,  that  the  assessment ballots  submitted  in  opposition  to  the  proposed  assessments  do  not  exceed  the assessment ballots submitted in favor of the assessments (weighted by the proportional financial obligation of the property for which ballots are submitted) the Council may take action, by resolution, to approve the levy of the assessments for Fiscal Year 2026‐27 and future fiscal years. If the assessments are confirmed and approved, the levies, as outlined in this Engineer’s Report, will be submitted to the Alameda County Auditor for inclusion on the property tax rolls for Fiscal Year 2026‐27. If the assessment ballots submitted in opposition to the proposed assessments do exceed assessment ballots submitted in favor of  the  assessments,  the  assessment  rates  will  be  consistent  with  the  previous  year’s assessment rates as indicated in a separate Engineer’s Report to be submitted at a future date.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Legislative  Analysis
Proposition  218
The Right to Vote on Taxes Act was approved by the voters of California on November 6, 1996  and  is  now  Article  XIIIC  and  XIIID  of  the  California  Constitution.   Proposition  218 provides for benefit assessments to be levied to fund the cost of providing services and improvements, as well as maintenance and operation expenses to a public improvement which benefits the assessed property.

Proposition 218 describes several important requirements, including a property owner balloting, for the formation and continuation of assessments, and these requirements are satisfied by the process used to establish this assessment.

Silicon  Valley  Taxpayers  Association,  Inc.  v Santa  Clara  County  Open  Space Authority  (2008)  44  Cal.  4th  431
In  July  of  2008,  the  California  Supreme  Court  issued  its  ruling  on  the  Silicon  Valley Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (“SVTA”).   This ruling is significant in that the Court clarified how Proposition 218 made changes to the determination of special benefit. The Court also found that:
 Benefit assessments are for special, not general, benefit.  The  services  and/or  improvements  funded  by  assessments  must  be  clearly defined.
 Special  benefits  are  directly  received  by  and  provide  a  direct  advantage  to property in the assessment district.

Dahms  v.  Downtown  Pomona  Property  (2009)  174  Cal.  App.  4th  708 In Dahms v. Downtown Pomona Property (“Dahms”) the Court upheld an assessment that was 100% special benefit (i.e. 0% general benefit) on the rationale that the services and improvements  funded  by  the  assessments  were  directly  provided  to  property  in  the assessment  district.  The  Court  also  upheld  discounts  and  exemptions  from  the assessment for certain properties.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Bonander  v.  Town  of  Tiburon  (2009)  180  Cal.  App.  4th  103 Bonander v. Town of Tiburon (“Bonander”), the 1st District Court of Appeal overturned a benefit assessment approved by property owners to pay for placing overhead utility lines underground in an area of the Town of Tiburon.  The Court invalidated the assessments primarily  on  the  grounds  that  the  assessments  had  been  apportioned  to  assessed property based on the costs within sub‐areas of the assessment district instead of the overall cost of the improvements and the overall proportional special benefits.

Beutz  v.  County  of  Riverside  (2010)  184  Cal.  App.  4th  1516 Steven Beutz v. County of Riverside (“Beutz”) the Court overturned an assessment for park maintenance in Wildomar, California, primarily because the general benefits associated with improvements and services were not explicitly calculated, quantified and separated from the special benefits.

Golden  Hill  Neighborhood  Association  v.  City  of  San  Diego  (2011)  199  Cal.

App.  4th  416
On September 22, 2011, the 4th District Court of Appeal issued a decision on the Golden Hill  Neighborhood  Association  v.  City  of  San  Diego  (“Greater  Golden  Hill”)  appeal.  This decision overturned an assessment for street and landscaping maintenance in the Greater Golden  Hill  neighborhood  of  San  Diego,  California.  The  court  described  two  primary reasons for its decision. First, like in Beutz, the court found the general benefits associated with services were not explicitly calculated, quantified, and separated from the special benefits. Second,  the  court  found  that  the  City  had  failed  to  record  the  basis  for  the assessment on its own parcels.

Compliance  with  Current  Law
This Engineer’s Report is consistent with the requirements of Article XIIIC and XIIID of the California  Constitution  and  with  the  SVTA  decision  because  the  assessments  are  for special,  not  general,  benefit;  the  improvements  to  be  funded  are  clearly  defined;  the improvements  are  directly  available  to  and  will  directly  benefit  property  in  the Assessment District; and the improvements provide a direct advantage to property in the Assessment District that would not be received in absence of the Assessments.

This  Engineer’s  Report  is  consistent  with  Dahms  because,  similar  to  the  Downtown Pomona assessment validated in Dahms, the services will be directly provided to property in the Assessment District. Moreover, while Dahms could be used as the basis for a finding of 0% general benefits, this Engineer’s Report establishes a more conservative measure of general benefits.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

This Engineer’s Report is consistent with Beutz, Dahms, and Greater Golden Hill because the  improvements  will  directly  benefit  property  in  the  Assessment  District,  and  the general  benefits  have  been  explicitly  calculated  and  quantified  and  excluded  from  the Assessments. The  Engineer’s  Report  is  consistent  with  Bonander  because  the Assessments have been apportioned based on the overall cost of the improvements and proportional special benefit to each property.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Plans  and  Specifications
The City of Pleasanton maintains landscaping and other improvements in locations within the Assessment District's boundaries. The work and improvements to be undertaken by the Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1, and the cost thereof paid from the levy of the annual Assessment, provide special benefit to parcels within the Assessment District as defined in the Method of Assessment herein. In addition to the definitions provided by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (the "Act"), the work and  improvements  are  generally  described  as  designated  landscaping,  trees,  shrubs, groundcover, irrigation systems, and trail landscaping within the Ponderosa subdivision, including the landscaped strip north of Corte de Flores on the west side of Paseo Santa Cruz and north of Corte Pacifica on the east side of Paseo Santa Cruz, and the landscaped area on the east side of the Arroyo de la Laguna trail between the Pleasanton Canal and Arroyo  del  Valle,  within  the  City  of  Pleasanton.  The  Assessment  Diagram  shows  the location and extent of the Improvements to be installed, maintained, or serviced by the proceeds from this Assessment District.

Installation, maintenance, and servicing of Improvements may include, but are not limited to, landscaping, ground cover, shrubs and trees, irrigation systems, fencing, and labor, materials,  supplies,  utilities,  and  equipment,  as  applicable,  at  each  of  the  locations owned, operated, or maintained by the Assessment District.

As applied herein, "Installation" means the construction of Improvements, including, but not  limited  to,  land  preparation  (such  as  grading,  leveling,  cutting  and  filling),  sod, landscaping, irrigation systems, walkways, and drainage facilities. "Maintenance" means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation, and servicing of any improvement, including repair, removal, or replacement of all or any part of any improvement; providing for the life, growth, health, and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury; and the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris, and other solid waste.
"Servicing"  means  the  furnishing  of  electric  current  or  energy  for  the  operation  of irrigation  system  controllers,  and  water  for  the  irrigation  of  any  landscaping  or  the maintenance of any other improvements.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

"Incidental  expenses"  include  all  of  the  following:  (a)  the  costs  of  preparation  of  the report, including plans, specifications, estimates, diagram, and assessment; (b) the costs of  printing,  advertising,  and  the  giving  of  published,  posted,  and  mailed  notices;  (c) compensation payable to the County for collection of assessments; (d) compensation of any  engineer  or  attorney  employed  to  render  services  in  proceedings  pursuant  to  this part; (e) any other expenses incidental to the construction, installation, or maintenance and servicing of the Improvements; (f) any expenses incidental to the issuance of bonds or notes pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 22662.5; and (g) costs associated with any elections held for the approval of a new or increased assessment (Streets and Highways Code Section 22526).

All assessment proceeds will be used exclusively for the Improvements described herein and incidental expenses within the Assessment District.

Landscape plans and specifications for the Improvements to this Assessment District are those prepared for Tracts 5256 and 4986 by The Environmental Center, dated October 30, 1984, and January 13, 1986. These plans and specifications have been filed with the City Clerk and are incorporated in this Report by reference.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Estimate  of Cost  and  Budget
The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 provides that the total costs for providing the maintenance and services of the Assessment District, including incidental expenses, can be recovered through the assessment. An estimate of Assessment District costs for Fiscal Year 2026‐27 is provided in Table 1 on the following page.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Table 1 ‐ Fiscal Year 2026‐27 Estimate of Cost and Budget CITY OF PLEASANTON
Ponderosa ‐ Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Budget
Installation, Maintenance & Servicing Costs
Landscaping (maintenance)
Basic maintenance    $20,960.00
Extra Work
Tree pruning and removal    $32,004.71
Irrigation repair and replacement  $16,332.00

Water    $9,000.00
Power ‐ One controller  $200.00
Total for Installation, Maintenance & Servicing  $78,496.71

Incidental and Administration Costs 1
City administration fees  $1,800.00
County Collection Costs  $1,427.71
Annual Engineer's Report  $2,500.00
Total Incidental and Administration Costs  $5,727.71

Amount to/(from) Reserve Fund 2
Reserve/Long‐Term Replacement Fund for scheduled
Long‐term replacement of various district improvements  $0

City's Contribution for General Benefit*

TOTAL COSTS

$84,224.42
BUDGET ALLOCATION TO PROPERTY
Number of Parcels/Units
Single
Family
Equivalent
Units (SFE) 4
Proposed
Assessment
Rate
Total Assessment
5 344  348.84  $241.44  $84,224.42

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Notes  for  Estimates  of  Costs

1. Incidental  and  administration  cost  estimates  include  City  staff  hours dedicated to the administration of the assessment (including staff time to bid work,  monitor  contracts  and  contractors,  respond  to  residents’  inquiries, etc.), county charges for inclusion of assessments on property tax bills, and other incidental costs.

2. If approved, the existing Fund 134 balance (approximately $73,260 as of April 2026)  will  be  transferred  to  the  new  Ponderosa‐Del  Prado  Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1.

3. As  determined  in  the  Benefit  Findings  section,  at  least  24.51%  of  the expenditures  must  be  funded  from  sources  other  than  the  assessments  to cover any general benefits. Therefore, out of the total cost of $84,224, the City  must  contribute  at  least  24.51%  from  other  sources.  The  City  will contribute in‐kind, non‐monetary contributions conservatively estimated at 50% of the total district cost, which more than covers any general benefits from  the  expenditures.  For  additional  information,  see  ‘Source  of Contributions from Other Funds’ on page 23.

4. The  rate  shown  here  is  for  a  single‐family  home  or  its  equivalent.  For  the definition of the term Single‐Family Equivalent (SFE) and rates for other types of property, see the section titled, “Method of Assessment” and the sections following it in this report.

5. The Act requires that proceeds from the assessments must be deposited into a special fund that has been set up for the revenues and expenditures of the Maintenance  District.  Moreover,  funds  raised  by  the  assessment  shall  be used only for the purposes stated within this Report. Any balance remaining at the end of the Fiscal Year, June 30, must be carried over to the next Fiscal Year.   The  District  may  also  establish  a  reserve  fund  for  contingencies  and special projects as well as a capital improvement fund for accumulating funds for  larger  capital  improvement  projects  or  capital  renovation  needs.  Any remaining  balance  would  either  be  placed  in  the  reserve  fund,  the  capital improvement fund, or would be used to reduce future years' assessments.

The proposed Assessment District reserve/replacement funds will be held in an interest bearing account until needed for repairs to the irrigation system, landscaping or other District features.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Method  of  Apportionment
This  section  includes  an  explanation  of  the  special  benefits  to  be  derived  from  the maintenance,  operations,  and  repair  activities,  the  criteria  for  the  expenditure  of assessment  funds  and  the  methodology  used  to  apportion  the  total  assessments  to properties within the Assessment District. The proposed Assessment District area consists of all Assessor Parcels included within the District No. 1984‐1 boundary.

Pursuant to Proposition 218, the method used for apportioning the assessment is based upon the proportional special benefits conferred to the properties over and above the general benefits conferred to real property in the proposed Assessment District, or to the public  at  large.  Special  benefit  is  calculated  for  each  parcel  in  the  District  using  the following process:

1.) Identification of all benefit factors derived from the Improvements.

2.) Calculation of the proportion of these benefits that are general.

3.) Determination of the relative special benefit within different areas (zones of benefit) of the Assessment District.

4.) Determination of the relative special benefit per property type.

5.) Calculation of the specific assessment for each individual parcel based upon special  vs.  general  benefit,  zones,  property  type  and  other  supporting attributes.

The District consists of certain assessor parcels within the boundaries as defined by the Assessment Diagram referenced in this report and the parcels identified by the Assessor Parcel Numbers listed with the levy roll. The parcel list includes all privately and publicly owned  parcels  as  shown.  The  method  used  for  apportioning  the  Assessment  is  based upon the relative special benefits to be derived by the properties in the District over and above  general  benefits  conferred  on  real  property  or  to  the  public  at  large.  The Assessment is apportioned to lots and parcels in proportion to the relative special benefit from the improvements.

The apportionment of special benefit is a two‐step process: the first step is to identify the types of special benefit arising from the improvements and the second step is to allocate the Assessments to property based on the estimated relative special benefit for each type of property.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Discussion  of  Benefit
In summary, the Assessments can only be levied based on the special benefit to property.

This benefit is received by property over and above any general benefits. With reference to the requirements for assessments, Section 22573 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 states:
"The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements."

Proposition 218, as codified in Article XIIID of the California Constitution, has confirmed that assessments must be based on the special benefit to property and that the value of the special benefits must exceed the cost of the assessment:
"No assessment shall be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel."

The following benefit categories summarize the types of special benefits to residential and other lots and parcels resulting from the installation, maintenance, and servicing of landscaping, irrigation systems, and fencing funded by the Assessment. These types of special benefits are summarized as follows:

1. Access  to  the  Arroyo  de  la  Laguna  trail  and  Centennial  Trail  corridor maintained within or adjacent to the Assessment District.

2. Views  of  improved  and  maintained  landscaping  within  the  Assessment District.

3. Security and sound reduction provided by the maintenance of the landscape adjacent  to  the  soundwalls  along  Interstate  680  within  the  Assessment District.

4. Creation  of  individual  lots  for  residential  use  that,  in  absence  of  the Assessments, would not have been created.

In  this  case,  the  SVTA  decision  provides  enhanced  clarity  to  the  definitions  of  special benefits to properties from similar improvements in three distinct areas:
 Proximity
 Expanded or improved access

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

 Views
The SVTA decision also clarifies that a special benefit is a service or improvement that provides  a  direct  advantage  to  a  parcel  and  that  indirect  or  derivative  advantages resulting  from  the  overall  public  benefits  from  a  service  or  improvement  are  general benefits. The SVTA decision also provides specific guidance that park improvements are a  direct  advantage  and  special  benefit  to  property  that  is  proximate  to  a  park  that  is improved by an assessment:
“The characterization of a benefit may depend on whether the parcel receives a direct advantage from the improvement (e.g. proximity to a park) or receives an indirect,  derivative  advantage  resulting  from  the  overall  public  benefits  of  the improvement (e.g. general enhancement of the district’s property values).” Proximity,  improved  access,  and  views,  in  addition  to  the  other  special  benefits  listed above further strengthen the basis of these assessments.

Moreover, the Dahms decision further clarified that certain services and improvements funded by assessments, that are over and above what otherwise would be provided and that other property in general and the public do not share or receive are 100% special benefit.  The  assessment‐funded  services  upheld  by  Dahms  included  streetscape maintenance and security services.

Benefit  Factors
The special benefits from the improvements are further detailed below:

Views  of  improved  and  maintained  landscaping
Only the specific properties within close proximity to the improvements are included in the Assessment District. Therefore, property in the Assessment District enjoys unique and valuable proximity to and views of the improvements that the public at large and property outside the Assessment District do not share in the same manner.

In  absence  of  the  assessments,  the  improvements  and  the  landscaping  areas  in  the Assessment  District  would  be  degraded  due  to  insufficient  funding  for  maintenance, upkeep, and repair. Therefore, the assessments provide improvements that are over and above  what  otherwise  would  be  provided.  When  combined  with  the  unique  proximity and  views  enjoyed  by  parcels  in  the  Assessment  District,  the  maintained  landscaping provides a direct advantage and special benefit to property in the Assessment District.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

All  343  residential  parcels  in  the  Assessment  District  receive  the  view  benefit  from maintained landscaping along Paseo Santa Cruz and the Arroyo trail corridor. This benefit is  received  to  the  same  degree  by  all  parcels  in  the  District  and  therefore  does  not differentiate among zones. The view benefit is the most broadly and uniformly received special benefit in the Assessment District.

Access  to  the  Arroyo  de  la  Laguna  Trail  and  Centennial  Trail  Corridor The  landscaping  and  improvements  maintained  along  the  Arroyo  de  la  Laguna  trail corridor provide the properties in the Assessment District with improved access to the trail  and  Centennial  Trail  system.  The  City,  by  maintaining  permanent  public improvements funded by the Assessments in the District, provides maintained trail access and landscaping to properties in the District.

The degree of access benefit varies materially by proximity to trail access points. Parcels with direct or proximate access to the trail corridor receive the highest access benefit.

Parcels  at  greater  distance  receive  a  reduced  access  benefit  commensurate  with  their distance from trail access points. This variation in access benefit is a primary driver of the zone structure established in this Report.

Security  and  Sound  Reduction
Parcels  adjacent  to  the  landscaping  along  the  soundwall  which  is  along  Interstate  680 receive  a  direct  and  tangible  benefit  from  the  maintenance  of  this  landscaping.  This landscaping provides noise attenuation and a security buffer between those residential properties  and  the  trail/canal/freeway  corridor.  This  elevated  special  benefit  is  direct, proximate,  and  particular  to  those  parcels  that  are  immediately  adjacent  to  this maintained landscaping.

Parcels not adjacent to the soundwall landscaping do not receive the same level of special benefit from this landscaping. The security and sound reduction benefit therefore varies by zone and is reflected in the zone scores established in this Report.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Creation  of  Individual  Lots  for  Residential  Use  that,  in  Absence  of  the Assessments,  Would  Not  Have  Been  Created
The residential parcels within the Assessment District were created through a subdivision and  development  process  that  required  the  installation  of  landscaping,  trail improvements,  irrigation  systems,  and  other  public  improvements  as  conditions  of approval.  These  Improvements  were  not  optional  enhancements  but  mandatory prerequisites for the subdivision to be approved and the individual lots to be created. The proposed Assessments provide the necessary funding for the continued maintenance of these Improvements, which support the ongoing safety and habitability of those parcels.

As parcels are sold, new owners are informed of the Assessment through title reports and Department of Real Estate disclosure reports indicating that the parcels are subject to assessment. Purchase of property within the Assessment District constitutes notice of the Assessment obligation.

In the absence of the proposed Assessments, the continued maintenance and servicing of the Improvements associated with the residential lots within the Assessment District would  not  be  adequately  funded.  These  parcels,  and  the  Improvements  that  were constructed  to  serve  them,  receive  a  direct  advantage  and  special  benefit  from  the Assessments.

Summary  of  Relative  Weight  of  Benefit  Factors
The  relative  weight  assigned  to  each  benefit  factor  reflects  the  primacy  of  views  and landscaping  as  the  most  broadly  received  and  highest‐value  benefit  to  all  properties within the Assessment District. The maintained landscaping along Paseo Santa Cruz and the  Arroyo  trail  corridor  provides  aesthetic  and  quality‐of‐life  benefits  to  all  343 residential parcels and is accordingly assigned a weight of 60% of the total benefit.

Access to the Arroyo de la Laguna trail and Centennial Trail corridor is assigned a weight of  30%,  reflecting  the  direct  and  ongoing  advantage  of  proximity  to  and  use  of  the maintained trail system. This is a significant benefit that varies by proximity to trail access points and is the primary driver of zone differentiation within the Assessment District.

Security  and  sound  reduction  is  assigned  a  weight  of  5%,  reflecting  the  direct  but geographically limited benefit conferred to parcels adjacent to the landscaping along the soundwall along Interstate 680.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

The Creation of Individual Lots is assigned a weight of 5%. While this benefit is real and legally  recognized,  it  is  foundational  rather  than  ongoing.  The  lots  were  created  once under conditions of approval that required these Improvements, and the Assessment now funds  the  continued  maintenance  that  supports  their  habitability.  The  relative  benefit levels used in this Report are shown below. The relative benefit levels used in this Report are shown in Table 2 below.

Table 2 ‐ Relative Benefit Levels

Creation of Lots
Views of
Improved
Landscaping
Access to
Centennial Trail
Security/Sound
Reduction
5%  60%  30%  5%

General  versus  Special  Benefit
Article  XIIID,  Section  4(a)  of  the  California  Constitution  requires  any  local  agency proposing to increase or impose a benefit assessment to “separate the general benefits from the special benefits conferred on a parcel.” The rationale for separating special and general benefits is to ensure that property owners subject to the benefit assessment are not paying for general benefits. An assessment can fund special benefits but cannot fund general benefits. Accordingly, a separate estimate of the special and general benefit is given in this section.

Article XIIID never defines the term “general benefit.” The definition of special benefit in Section 2(i) includes the statement that general enhancement of property value does not constitute a special benefit. A general benefit may be described as an “indirect, derivative advantage” resulting from the improvements.

In other words:

Total
Benefit  =  General
Benefit  +  Special
Benefit

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

There is no widely accepted or statutory formula for general benefit. General benefits are benefits from improvements or services that are not special in nature, are not “particular and distinct” and are not “over and above” benefits received by other properties. SVTA provides  some  clarification  by  indicating  that  general  benefits  provide  “an  indirect, derivative advantage” and are not necessarily proximate to the improvements.

In this Report, the general benefit is liberally estimated and described, and then budgeted so that it is funded by sources other than the Assessment.

A formula to estimate the general benefit is listed below:

General
Benefit  =
Benefit to Real
Property Outside
the Assessment
District
+
Benefit to Real
Property Inside the
Assessment District
that is Indirect and
Derivative
+
Benefit to
the Public
at Large

Special benefit, on the other hand, is defined in the California Constitution as "a particular and distinct benefit over and above general benefits conferred on real property located in the district or to the public at large." The SVTA decision indicates that a special benefit is conferred to a property if it "receives a direct advantage from the improvement (e.g., proximity to a park)." In this Assessment, properties in the District have close and unique proximity, views, and access to the Improvements that other properties and the public at large do not share. Therefore, the overwhelming proportion of the benefits conferred to property within the District is special, and only minimal benefit is received by property outside the District or the public at large.

Benefit  Finding
Quantification  of  General  Benefit
The starting point for evaluating general and special benefits is the current baseline level of service. In the absence of the Assessment, no alternative funding source exists for the maintenance of the Improvements within the Assessment District. The baseline level of service without the Assessment is therefore the absence of funded maintenance, and all Improvements funded by the Assessment are over and above that baseline. The general benefits estimated in this section are measured against that baseline.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Benefit  to  Property  Nearby  and  Outside  the  Assessment  Districts Properties  within  the  District  receive  almost  all  of  the  special  benefits  from  the Improvements because properties in the District enjoy unique close proximity and access to  the  Improvements  that  is  not  enjoyed  by  other  properties  or  the  public  at  large.

However, certain properties within the proximity/access radius of the Improvements, but outside  of  the  boundaries  of  the  District,  may  receive  some  benefit  from  the Improvements.  Since  this  benefit  is  conferred  to  some  properties  outside  the  District boundaries, it contributes to the overall general benefit calculation and will not be funded by the Assessments. The general benefit to property outside of the District is calculated with the parcel and data analysis performed by SCI Consulting Group.

Since  certain  properties  outside  the  District  enjoy  close  proximity  and  access  to  the improvements cannot be assessed by the District, this is a form of general benefit to other property.  There  are  62  parcels  outside  the  District  that  are  directly  adjacent  to  areas where  pathways  and  landscaped  areas  are  maintained  by  the  District.  The  benefits conferred to these properties do not include the Lot Creation benefit factor, therefore the benefit is reduced to 95%. The general benefit to property outside of the District is calculated as follows.

Table 3 – Benefit to Property Outside the Assessment District Benefit to Property Outside the Assessment District
Assumptions:

Parcels outside and adjacent to the District  62
Parcels in the Maintenance District  344
Calculation: ((62 / (62 + 344)) * Factor applied
Factor applied  95%
General Benefit to Property outside the District  14.51%

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Benefit  to  Property  Inside  the  Assessment  Districts  that  is  Indirect  and Derivative
The “indirect and derivative” benefit to property within the District is particularly difficult to  calculate.  A  solid  argument  can  be  presented  that  all  benefit  within  the  District  is special because the other improvements are clearly “over and above” and “particular and distinct”  when  compared  with  the  baseline  level  of  service  and  the  unique  proximity, access  and  views  of  the  other  improvements  enjoyed  by  benefiting  properties  in  the District.

Nevertheless,  the  SVTA  decision  indicates  there  may  be  general  benefit  “conferred  on real property located in the district.” A measure of the general benefits to property within the Assessment area is the percentage of land area within or directly abutting the District that is publicly owned and used for regional purposes such as regional parks, major roads, rail lines and other regional facilities because such properties used for regional purposes could  provide  indirect  benefits  to  the  public  at  large.  The  Assessment  boundaries  are narrowly drawn to include only the residential parcels within Tracts 4986, 5093, 5160‐ 5163,  5224,  5256,  5257,  and  5281  and  there  are  no  regional  facilities  within  the Assessment District. Therefore, the indirect and derivative general benefits to property within the Assessment District are zero.

General Benefit Inside the District (Indirect and Derivative) = 0.0% Benefit  To  The  Public  At  Large
The general benefit to the public at large can be estimated by the proportionate amount of time that the Assessment’s improvements are used and enjoyed by individuals who are not residents or property owners in the Assessment District. These improvements do not attract the public at large in the same way as park improvements, and they confer far less benefit to the public at large than do similar park improvements. In essence, the public does not visit an area to enjoy outdoor and landscaped area improvements in the same way as they may visit a park.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

However,  the  Arroyo  de  la  Laguna  trail  corridor  maintained  in  connection  with  the Assessment District does attract some beneficial use by individuals who are not residents of the District, (and not including nearby individual associated parcels discussed above).

Based on surveys and research in which visitors to similar landscape, open space, and trail areas were asked to identify whether they lived or worked within the assessment area, and factoring in the relative convenience of access by District parcels, approximately  10% of the benefit of the use of similar landscape, open space, and trail improvements is by the public at large. When people outside the Assessment District use landscape and trail improvements, they diminish the benefit of such facilities for people within the District and  this  further  supports  the  determination  that  10%  of  the  benefits  from  the Improvements are general benefits to the public at large.

Summary  of  General  Benefit
Using  a  sum  of  these  three  measures  of  general  benefit,  we  find  that  approximately

24.51%  of  the  benefits  conferred  by  the  improvements  may  be  general  in  nature  and should be funded by sources other than the assessment.

Table 4 – Summary of General Benefit
General Benefit Component  Percentage
Benefit to property outside the Assessment District  14.51% Indirect and derivative benefit to property inside the District  0.00% Benefit to the public at large  10.00%
Total General Benefit  24.51%

Source  of  Contributions  from  Other  Funds
The general benefit of 24.51% must be funded by sources other than the Assessment. The City of Pleasanton satisfies this requirement through the following in‐kind, non‐monetary contributions to the Assessment District.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

The City of Pleasanton owns, maintains, rehabilitates, and replaces the curb and gutter along  the  border  of  the  Assessment  District.  This  infrastructure  serves  to  support  and contain  the  Improvements  and  manage  irrigation  flow.  The  contribution  from  the  City toward  the  maintenance,  rehabilitation,  and  replacement  of  curb  and  gutter  is conservatively estimated at 10%. In other words, if the Assessment District were required to construct and maintain the local curb and gutter, the budget would increase by at least 10%.

The City of Pleasanton owns and maintains a storm drainage system along the border of the Assessment District. This system serves to prevent flooding and manage urban runoff from  the  Improvements.  The  contribution  from  the  City  toward  the  maintenance, rehabilitation,  and  replacement  of  the  local  storm  drainage  system  is  conservatively estimated at 10%.

The  City  of  Pleasanton  owns  and  maintains  local  public  streets  throughout  the Assessment  District.  These  streets  provide  access  to  the  Improvements  for  their enjoyment  and  efficient  maintenance.  The  contribution  from  the  City  toward  the maintenance,  rehabilitation,  and  replacement  of  local  public  streets  is  conservatively estimated at 10%.

The value of the initial Improvements constructed by the Developer can be quantified and monetized as an annuity to be amortized. Since the initial Improvements were performed and  paid  for  by  non‐assessment  funds,  this  annuity  is  conservatively  estimated  to contribute 20% toward the general benefit requirement.

In  addition  to  the  infrastructure  contributions  described  above,  the  City  of  Pleasanton provides ongoing staff support for the administration of the Assessment District that is not reimbursed through the assessment and is not included in the percentage estimates above.  The  City's  Landscape  Architect  dedicates  time  throughout  the  year  to  the preparation  of  bid  documents,  contractor  selection  and  monitoring,  property  owner inquiries, site inspections, coordination with other City departments, and general district administration. The City administration fee collected through the assessment is $1,800 per year. The value of the City Landscape Architect's time dedicated to the Assessment District exceeds this amount, meaning the City absorbs the difference as a further in‐kind contribution  toward  the  general  benefit  requirement.  This  unreimbursed  staff  time represents an ongoing financial contribution by the City to the Assessment District that is separate from and in addition to the infrastructure contributions described above, and further demonstrates that the City's total contributions to the District more than satisfy the general benefit requirement.

In total, the City of Pleasanton's in‐kind contributions represent 50% of the total district cost, which more than satisfies the 24.51% general benefit requirement.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Table 5 – City In‐Kind General Benefit Contributions
City In‐Kind Contribution  Percentage
Curb and gutter maintenance, rehabilitation, and
replacement  10.0%
Storm drainage system maintenance, rehabilitation, and
replacement  10.0%
Local public streets maintenance, rehabilitation, and
replacement  10.0%
Amortized value of initial Improvements constructed by
Developer  20.0%
Total City In‐Kind Contributions  50.0%

Zones  of  Benefit
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 was formed to provide a funding source for the maintenance and services of landscaping improvements within the boundaries of the Assessment District. The boundaries of the Assessment District have been  narrowly  drawn  to  include  only  properties  that  will  specially  benefit  from  the maintenance  and  services  and  would  receive  a  declining  level  of  service  if  the Assessments were not approved.

The SVTA decision indicates:

In a well‐drawn district —  limited to only parcels receiving special benefits from the  improvement  —   every  parcel  within  that  district  receives  a  shared  special benefit. Under section 2, subdivision (i), these benefits can be construed as being general benefits since they are not “particular and distinct” and are not “over and above” the benefits received by other properties “located in the district.”

We do not believe that the voters intended to invalidate an assessment district that  is  narrowly  drawn
to  include  only  properties  directly  benefiting  from  an improvement.  Indeed,  the  ballot  materials  reflect  otherwise.  Thus,  if  an assessment  district  is  narrowly  drawn,  the  fact  that  a  benefit  is  conferred throughout  the  district  does  not  make  it  general  rather  than  special.  In  that circumstance, the characterization of a benefit may depend on whether the parcel receives  a  direct  advantage  from  the  improvement  (e.g.,  proximity  to  park)  or receives  an  indirect,  derivative  advantage  resulting  from  the  overall  public

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

benefits of the improvement (e.g., general enhancement of the district’s property values).

The Engineer determined that, based on proximity to the Improvements and the nature of the benefits received, the Assessment District shall consist of five zones of benefit. The zones reflect material differences in the degree of trail access and soundwall landscaping adjacency  received  by  different  properties  within  the  District.  All  zones  receive  the Creation of Lots benefit (5% weight) and the Views of Improved Landscaping benefit (60% weight) equally. The zones differ with respect to the Access to Centennial Trail benefit (30% weight) and the Security and Sound Reduction benefit (5% weight).

Base Level
Zone  1  is  the  Base  Level,  which  includes  the  majority  of  residential  parcels  in  the Assessment District. These parcels receive the full view and landscaping benefit from the maintained improvements along Paseo Santa Cruz and the Arroyo trail corridor, and the Creation of Lots benefit. Zone 1 parcels are at greater distance from the trail access points and are not adjacent to the soundwall landscaping along Interstate 680. They receive a trail access score of 70 out of 100, reflecting that while they are within the District and benefit from the maintained trail corridor, they do not have direct proximate access to trail  entry  points.  They  receive  a  security/sound  reduction  score  of  0,  as  they  are  not adjacent to the soundwall landscaping.

Central Wall
Zone 2 is the Central Wall area which includes parcels located along the interior semi‐ circle adjacent to the soundwall with landscaping maintained along the sidewalk edges.

In addition to the view, landscaping, and lot creation benefits received by all zones, these parcels  receive  a  direct  and  tangible  security  and  sound  reduction  benefit  from  the maintained landscaping. Central Wall parcels receive the same trail access score as Base Level (70 out of 100) and a security/sound reduction score of 80 out of 100, reflecting their  proximity  to  and  benefit  from  the  maintained  landscaping  along  the  interior soundwall.

Adjacent to Trail
Zone 3 is called Adjacent to Trail and includes parcels that are directly adjacent to the Arroyo  de  la  Laguna  trail  and  the  maintained  landscaping  along  the  soundwall  along Interstate 680. These parcels receive both an enhanced   landscaping benefit and a trail adjacency benefit. Adjacent to Trail parcels receive a trail access score of 70 out of 100 and a security/sound reduction score of 100 out of 100, reflecting their direct adjacency to the maintained landscaping (along the soundwall).

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Proximate Trail Access
Zone 4 or Proximate Trail Access includes parcels located in close proximity to trail access points along the Arroyo de la Laguna trail corridor. These parcels receive the highest trail access benefit of any zone that is not also adjacent to the maintained landscaping along the soundwall. Proximate Trail Access parcels receive a trail access score of 100 out of 100, reflecting their direct and convenient access to the trail system, and a security/sound reduction score of 0, as they are not adjacent to the soundwall landscaping.

Proximate Trail Access and Adjacent to Trail
Zone 5 is called Proximate Trail Access and Adjacent to Trail includes parcels that receive both  the  maximum  trail  access  benefit  and  the  maximum  soundwall  landscaping adjacency benefit. These are parcels located in close proximity to trail access points and also adjacent to the maintained landscaping along the soundwall. Proximate Trail Access and  Adjacent  to  Trail  parcels  receive  a  trail  access  score  of  100  out  of  100  and  a security/sound reduction score of 100 out of 100, and therefore receive the highest total benefit score of any zone in the Assessment District.

The relative benefit scores for each zone, weighted by the benefit factors established in this Report, are shown in Table 6 below.

Table 6 ‐ Relative Benefit Levels By Zone
Zone  Creation of
Lots (5%)
Views of
Improved
Landscaping
(60%)
Access to
Centennial
Trail (30%)
Security/
Sound (5%)
Weighted
Score
Relative Zone
Factor
Relative Weight  5%  60%  30%  5%
Base Level  100  100  70  0  8,600  1.000
Central Wall  100  100  70  80  9,000  1.046
Adjacent to Trail  100  100  70  100  9,100  1.058
Proximate Trail Access  100  100  100  0  9,500  1.104
Proximate Trail +
Adjacent  100  100  100  100  10,000  1.162

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Method  of  Assessment
The  assessments  are  apportioned  to  properties  within  the  Assessment  District  in proportion to the relative special benefit each property receives from the Improvements.

As  established  in  the  Zones  of  Benefit  section,  the  Assessment  District  consists  of  five zones  reflecting  materially  different  levels  of  special  benefit.  Zone  1  parcels  receive  a normalized benefit score of 100% and the other Zones have normalized benefit scores based  on  the  weighted  benefit  factor  analysis  in  Table  6.  This  zone  differential  is  the primary basis for the difference in assessment rates between the Zones.

Within  each  zone,  assessments  are  further  apportioned  on  the  basis  of  Single‐Family Equivalents (SFE). The SFE methodology is commonly used to distribute assessments in proportion to estimated special benefit and is generally recognized as providing a fair and appropriate  basis  for  apportionment.  For  the  purposes  of  this  Engineer's  Report,  all properties are designated an SFE value representing each property's relative benefit in relation  to  a  single‐family  home  on  one  parcel.  The  benchmark  property  is  the  single‐ family detached dwelling, which equals one Single‐Family Equivalent or one SFE.

The special benefits conferred by the Assessments are benefits to property and are not based  on  a  specific  property  owner's  use  of  the  Improvements,  occupancy  of  the property,  or  demographic  status.  The  method  of  apportionment  is  further  described below.

Residential  Properties
In  the  Assessment  District,  there  is  only  one  type  of  residential  property  present:  the single‐family home.  Other types of residential property, such as multifamily, apartments and condominiums, are not present. Furthermore, the property in the Assessment District is fully developed, has been stable since its original development in the early 1980s, and is zoned such that a change in that dominate land use is not expected in the future. As a result,  there  is  no  need  for  a  detailed  analysis  of  population  densities  to  determine relative  benefit  for  other  types  of  residential  properties.  Each  single‐family  residential property is assigned one SFE.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Other  Properties
Article XIIID stipulates that publicly owned properties must be assessed unless there is clear and convincing evidence that those properties receive no special benefit from the assessment.

The  City  of  Pleasanton  owns  one  parcel  within  the  Assessment  District,  which  is  the location of Del Prado Park. Del Prado Park is a neighborhood park that benefits from the maintained  landscaping  and  improvements  within  the  Assessment  District,  including proximity to the maintained trail corridor and improved views of landscaped areas. Del Prado Park is assessed within Base Level at a rate of $241.44 per year, without the county collection fee.

Miscellaneous,  public  right‐of‐way  parcels  and  common  area  parcels  typically  do  not generate  employees,  residents,  customers,  or  guests.  Such  parcels  do  not  receive  a special benefit from the Improvements and are not assessed.

Table 7 ‐ Assessment Rate Determination by Estimate of Costs

Zone  No. Parcels  SFE Factor  Total SFEs
Annual
Assessment
Rate
Total
Assessment
Base Level  278  1.000  278.000  $241.44   $67,120
Central  24  1.046  25.104  $252.55   $6,061
Adjacent to Trail  20  1.058  21.160  $255.44   $5,109
Proximate Trail
Access  17  1.104  18.768  $266.55   $4,531
Proximate Trail
Access + Adjacent
to Trail
5  1.162  5.810  $280.55   $1,403
TOTAL 344     348.842    $84,224

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Consumer  Price  Index  Adjustments
The maximum assessment rate within the Assessment District may be increased by an amount equal to the annual change in the San Francisco Bay Area Consumer Price Index (“CPI”), not to exceed 3%. In the event that the actual assessment rate for any given year is not increased by an amount equal to the CPI change, any such deferred assessment increase  may  be  added  to  the  total  amount  assessed  in  any  subsequent  year.  In  such event,  the  maximum  authorized  assessment  amount  shall  be  equal  to  the  base  year assessment  as  adjusted  by  the  increase  to  the  CPI,  plus  any  and  all  CPI  adjustments deferred in any and all prior years.

Government  Code  § 53759.1  and  53759.2
AB 2257, effective January 1, 2025, is codified at Government Code Sections 53759.1 and 53759.2 and establishes an exhaustion of administrative remedies framework applicable to Proposition 218 property‐related fees and assessments.

Government  Code  Section  53759.1  authorizes  public  agencies  to  implement  an exhaustion  of  administrative  remedies  requirement  in  connection  with  a  proposed Proposition 218 property‐related fee or assessment. Where a local agency complies with the  requirements  of  that  section,  property  owners  are  required  to  submit  a  written objection  during  the  ratemaking  process  by  a  specified  deadline,  no  less  than  45  days after mailing of the Proposition 218 notice, and are prohibited from challenging the fee or assessment in litigation if they did not submit a timely written objection. The agency is required to prepare written responses to timely submitted objections and present them to the governing body, which must make certain specified determinations prior to the close  of  the  Proposition  218  protest  hearing.  This  process  runs  concurrently  with  the Proposition 218 timeline and does not affect a property owner's right to submit a protest pursuant to Proposition 218.

Government  Code  Section  53759.2  specifies  the  scope  of  judicial  review  of  the administrative record of the underlying ratemaking proceeding where the local agency complied with Section 53759.1 in adopting the fee or assessment being challenged.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

The City of Pleasanton has implemented the requirements of Government Code Section 53759.1  through  Ordinance  No.  2292,  codified  at  Pleasanton  Municipal  Code  Section

1.04.120. The City intends to comply fully with Government Code Section 53759.1 with respect to the proposed Assessment. Property owners will be informed of the deadline and process to submit a written objection, and all other dates and requirements related to  the  City's  compliance  with  this  provision,  in  the  ballot  notice  mailed  pursuant  to Proposition 218.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Assessment  Statement
The City Council of the City of Pleasanton, County of Alameda, California, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (collectively “the Act”), directed the formation of the Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape  Maintenance  District  2026‐1,  which  replaces  the  Ponderosa‐Del  Prado Landscape Maintenance District 1984‐1;
The  Council  directed  the  undersigned  Engineer  of  Work  to  prepare  and  file  a  report presenting an estimate of costs, a diagram for the Assessment District and an assessment of the estimated costs of the maintenance and services upon all assessable parcels within the Assessment District;
The undersigned, by virtue of the power vested in me under the Act and the order of the City Council of the City of Pleasanton, hereby makes the following assessment to cover the  portion  of  the  estimated  cost  of  the  maintenance  and  services,  and  the  costs  and expenses incidental thereto to be paid by the Assessment District.

The amount to be paid for said Improvements and the expenses incidental thereto, to be paid by the Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 for Fiscal Year 2026‐27 is generally as follows:

Table 8 – Summary of Combined Cost Estimate
Budget Item     Budgeted Cost
Installation, Maintenance & Servicing Costs    $78,492
Incidental and Administration Costs    $5,732
Total Budget     $84,224

As  required  by  the  Act,  an  Assessment  Diagram  is  hereto  attached  and  made  a  part hereof  showing  the  exterior  boundaries  of  the  Ponderosa‐Del  Prado  Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1. The distinctive number of each parcel or lot of land in the Assessment is its Assessor Parcel Number appearing on the Assessment Roll.

And I do hereby assess and apportion the net amount of the cost and expenses of the improvements, including the costs and expenses incident thereto, upon the parcels and lots of land within the City of Pleasanton, Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1, in accordance with the special benefits to be received by each parcel or lot,  from  the  improvements,  and  more  particularly  set  forth  in  the  Cost  Estimate  and Method of Assessment hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

The assessment is made upon the parcels or lots of land within the Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape  Maintenance  District  2026‐1  in  proportion  to  the  special  benefits  to  be received by the parcels or lots of land, from the improvements.

The assessment is subject to an annual adjustment tied to the Consumer Price Index for the  San  Francisco  Bay  Area  as  of  December  of  each  succeeding  year  (the  CPI),  with  a maximum annual increase not to exceed 3%. In the event that the actual assessment rate for  any  given  year  is  not  increased  by  an  amount  equal  to  the  CPI  change,  any  such deferred  assessment  increase  may  be  added  to  the  total  amount  assessed  in  any subsequent year. In such event, the maximum authorized assessment amount shall be equal to the base year assessment as adjusted by the increase to the CPI, plus any and all CPI adjustments deferred in any and all prior years.

Each parcel or lot of land is described in the Assessment Roll by reference to its parcel number as shown on the Assessor's Maps of the County of Alameda for Fiscal Year 2026‐

27. For a more particular description of the property, reference is hereby made to the deeds and maps on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder of the County.

I  hereby  place  opposite  the  Assessor  Parcel  Number  for  each  parcel  or  lot  within  the Assessment Roll, the amount of the assessment for Fiscal Year 2026‐27 for each parcel or lot of land within the Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1.

Dated: April 21, 2026

Engineer of Work

By
John W. Bliss, License No. C052091

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Assessment  Diagram
The boundaries of the Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 in the  City  of  Pleasanton,  Alameda  County,  California,  are  displayed  on  the  following Assessment Diagram.

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

City of Pleasanton
Ponderosa‐Del Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 Engineer’s Report

Assessment  Roll
An  Assessment  Roll  (a  listing  of  all  parcels  assessed  within  the  Ponderosa‐Del  Prado Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐1 and the amount of the assessment) has been filed with the City Clerk and is, by reference, made part of this report and will be available for public inspection during normal office hours.

Each  lot  or  parcel  listed  on  the  Assessment  Roll  is  shown  and  illustrated  on  the  latest County Assessor records and these records are, by reference made part of this report.

These records shall govern for all details concerning the description of the lots or parcels.

ASSESSMENT
DIAGRAM NO.

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER

ASSESSMENT
AMOUNT

COLLECTION
CHARGE (0.017)TOTAL
1 946-4556-010 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
2 946-4556-009 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
3 946-4556-008 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
4 946-4556-007 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
5 946-4556-006 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
6 946-4556-005 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
7 946-4556-004 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
8 946-4556-003 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
9 946-4556-011 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
10 946-4556-012 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
11 946-4556-013 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
12 946-4556-014 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
13 946-4556-015 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
14 946-4556-016 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
15 946-4556-017 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
16 946-4556-018 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
17 946-4556-019 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
18 946-4556-020 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
19 946-4556-021 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
20 946-4556-031 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
21 946-4556-032 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
22 946-4556-033 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
23 946-4556-034 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
24 946-4556-035 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
25 946-4556-036 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
26 946-4556-037 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
27 946-4556-038 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
28 946-4556-039 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
29 946-4556-040 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
30 946-4556-041 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
31 946-4556-042 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
32 946-4556-043 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
33 946-4556-044 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
34 946-4556-045 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
35 946-4556-046 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
36 946-4556-047 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
PROPOSED 2026-27 ASSESSMENT ROLL
PONDEROSA - DEL PRADO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 2026-1

CITY OF PLEASANTON

ASSESSMENT
DIAGRAM NO.

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER

ASSESSMENT
AMOUNT

COLLECTION
CHARGE (0.017)TOTAL
PROPOSED 2026-27 ASSESSMENT ROLL
37 946-4556-048 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
38 946-4556-049 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
39 946-4556-050 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
40 946-4556-051 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
41 946-4556-052 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
42 946-4556-053 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
43 946-4556-054 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
44 946-4556-055 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
45 946-4556-056 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
46 946-4556-057 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
47 946-4556-058 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
48 946-4556-059-2 $275.78 $4.77 $280.55
49 946-4556-060-2 $275.78 $4.77 $280.55
50 946-4556-061 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
51 946-4556-062 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
52 946-4556-063 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
53 946-4556-064 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
54 946-4556-065 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
55 946-4556-066 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
56 946-4556-030 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
57 946-4556-029 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
58 946-4556-028 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
59 946-4556-067 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
60 946-4556-068 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
61 946-4556-069 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
62 946-4556-070 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
63 946-4556-071 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
64 946-4556-072 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
65 946-4556-073-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
66 946-4556-074-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
67 946-4556-075 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
68 946-4556-076 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
69 946-4556-077 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
70 946-4556-078 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
71 946-4556-079 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
72 946-4556-027 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
73 946-4556-026 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
74 946-4556-025 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44

ASSESSMENT
DIAGRAM NO.

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER

ASSESSMENT
AMOUNT

COLLECTION
CHARGE (0.017)TOTAL
PROPOSED 2026-27 ASSESSMENT ROLL
75 946-4556-082 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
76 946-4556-083 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
77 946-4556-084 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
78 946-4556-085 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
79 946-4556-086 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
80 946-4556-087-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
81 946-4556-088-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
82 946-4556-089 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
83 946-4556-090 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
84 946-4556-091 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
85 946-4556-092 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
86 946-4556-093 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
87 946-4556-024 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
88 946-4556-023 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
89 946-4556-022 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
90 946-4556-094 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
91 946-4556-097 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
92 946-4556-098 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
93 946-4556-099 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
94 946-4556-100 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
95 946-4556-101 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
96 946-4556-102-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
97 946-4556-104-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
98 946-4556-105 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
99 946-4556-106 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
100 946-4556-107 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
101 946-4556-108 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
102 946-4562-040-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
103 946-4562-039 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
104 946-4562-038 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
105 946-4562-037 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
106 946-4562-036 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
107 946-4562-004 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
108 946-4562-003 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
109 946-4562-001 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
110 946-4562-005 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
111 946-4562-007 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
112 946-4562-010-1 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44

ASSESSMENT
DIAGRAM NO.

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER

ASSESSMENT
AMOUNT

COLLECTION
CHARGE (0.017)TOTAL
PROPOSED 2026-27 ASSESSMENT ROLL
113 946-4562-011 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
114 946-4562-013 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
115 946-4562-014 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
116 946-4562-015 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
117 946-4562-016 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
118 946-4562-045 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
119 946-4562-044 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
120 946-4562-043 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
121 946-4562-042 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
122 946-4562-041-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
123 946-4562-050-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
124 946-4562-049 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
125 946-4562-048 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
126 946-4562-047 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
127 946-4562-046 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
128 946-4562-017 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
129 946-4562-018 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
130 946-4562-019 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
131 946-4562-020 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
132 946-4562-021 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
133 946-4562-022 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
134 946-4562-023 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
135 946-4562-024 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
136 946-4562-025 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
137 946-4562-055 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
138 946-4562-054 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
139 946-4562-053 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
140 946-4562-052 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
141 946-4562-051-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
142 946-4562-060 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
143 946-4562-059 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
144 946-4562-058 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
145 946-4562-057 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
146 946-4562-056 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
147 946-4562-026 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
148 946-4562-027 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
149 946-4562-028 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
150 946-4562-029 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44

ASSESSMENT
DIAGRAM NO.

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER

ASSESSMENT
AMOUNT

COLLECTION
CHARGE (0.017)TOTAL
PROPOSED 2026-27 ASSESSMENT ROLL
151 946-4562-030 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
152 946-4562-031 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
153 946-4562-032 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
154 946-4562-033 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
155 946-4562-065 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
156 946-4562-064 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
157 946-4562-063 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
158 946-4562-062 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
159 946-4562-061-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
160 946-4562-066 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
161 946-4562-067 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
162 946-4562-068 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
163 946-4562-069 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
164 946-4562-070 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
165 946-4563-001 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
166 946-4563-002-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
167 946-4563-004-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
168 946-4563-005 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
169 946-4563-006 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
170 946-4563-007 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
171 946-4563-008 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
172 946-4563-009 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
173 946-4563-010 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
174 946-4563-011-2 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
175 946-4563-012-1 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
176 946-4563-013 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
177 946-4563-014 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
178 946-4563-015 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
179 946-4563-016 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
180 946-4563-017-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
181 946-4563-018-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
182 946-4563-019 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
183 946-4563-020 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
184 946-4563-021 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
185 946-4563-022 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
186 946-4563-023 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
187 946-4563-024 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
188 946-4563-025 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44

ASSESSMENT
DIAGRAM NO.

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER

ASSESSMENT
AMOUNT

COLLECTION
CHARGE (0.017)TOTAL
PROPOSED 2026-27 ASSESSMENT ROLL
189 946-4563-026 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
190 946-4563-027 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
191 946-4563-028 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
192 946-4563-029 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
193 946-4563-030-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
194 946-4563-031-1 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
195 946-4563-032 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
196 946-4563-033 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
197 946-4563-034 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
198 946-4563-035 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
199 946-4563-036 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
200 946-4563-037 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
201 946-4563-038-1 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
202 946-4563-039-3 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
203 946-4563-040-2 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
204 946-4563-041 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
205 946-4563-042 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
206 946-4563-043 $251.10 $4.34 $255.44
207 946-4563-044 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
208 946-4563-045 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
209 946-4563-046 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
210 946-4563-047 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
211 946-4563-048 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
212 946-4563-049 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
213 946-4563-050 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
214 946-4563-051 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
215 946-4563-052 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
216 946-4563-053 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
217 946-4563-054 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
218 946-4563-055 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
219 946-4563-056 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
220 946-4563-057 $275.78 $4.77 $280.55
221 946-4563-058-3 $275.78 $4.77 $280.55
222 946-4563-060-2 $275.78 $4.77 $280.55
223 946-4563-061 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
224 946-4563-062 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
225 946-4563-063 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
226 946-4563-064 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55

ASSESSMENT
DIAGRAM NO.

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER

ASSESSMENT
AMOUNT

COLLECTION
CHARGE (0.017)TOTAL
PROPOSED 2026-27 ASSESSMENT ROLL
227 946-4563-065 $262.02 $4.53 $266.55
228 946-4563-066 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
229 946-4563-067 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
230 946-4563-068 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
231 946-4563-069 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
232 946-4563-070 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
233 946-4563-071 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
234 946-4563-072 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
235 946-4563-073 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
236 946-4563-074 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
237 946-4563-075 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
238 946-4563-076 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
239 946-4563-077 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
240 946-4563-078-2 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
241 946-4563-079-1 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
242 946-4563-080 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
243 946-4563-082 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
244 946-4563-083 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
245 946-4563-084 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
246 946-4563-085 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
247 946-4563-086 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
248 946-4563-087 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
249 946-4563-088 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
250 946-4563-089 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
251 946-4563-090 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
252 946-4563-091 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
253 946-4563-092 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
254 946-4563-093 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
255 946-4563-094 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
256 946-4563-095 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
257 946-4563-096 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
258 946-4563-097 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
259 946-4563-130 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
260 946-4563-129 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
261 946-4563-128 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
262 946-4563-127 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
263 946-4563-126 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
264 946-4563-140 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44

ASSESSMENT
DIAGRAM NO.

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER

ASSESSMENT
AMOUNT

COLLECTION
CHARGE (0.017)TOTAL
PROPOSED 2026-27 ASSESSMENT ROLL
265 946-4563-141 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
266 946-4563-142 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
267 946-4563-143 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
268 946-4563-182 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
269 946-4563-183 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
270 946-4563-146 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
271 946-4563-147 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
272 946-4563-148 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
273 946-4563-149 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
274 946-4563-150 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
275 946-4563-151 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
276 946-4563-152 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
277 946-4563-153 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
278 946-4563-154 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
279 946-4563-113 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
280 946-4563-112 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
281 946-4563-111 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
282 946-4563-110 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
283 946-4563-109 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
284 946-4563-108 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
285 946-4563-107 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
286 946-4563-106 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
287 946-4563-105 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
288 946-4563-104 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
289 946-4563-103 $248.26 $4.29 $252.55
290 946-4563-102 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
291 946-4563-101 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
292 946-4563-100 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
293 946-4563-099 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
294 946-4563-098 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
295 946-4563-120 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
296 946-4563-121 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
297 946-4563-122 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
298 946-4563-123 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
299 946-4563-134 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
300 946-4563-133 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
301 946-4563-132 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
302 946-4563-131 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44

ASSESSMENT
DIAGRAM NO.

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER

ASSESSMENT
AMOUNT

COLLECTION
CHARGE (0.017)TOTAL
PROPOSED 2026-27 ASSESSMENT ROLL
303 946-4563-139 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
304 946-4563-138 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
305 946-4563-137 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
306 946-4563-136 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
307 946-4563-135 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
308 946-4563-114 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
309 946-4563-115 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
310 946-4563-116 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
311 946-4563-117 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
312 946-4563-118 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
313 946-4563-119 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
314 946-4563-155 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
315 946-4563-156 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
316 946-4563-157 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
317 946-4563-158 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
318 946-4563-159 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
319 946-4563-160 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
320 946-4563-161 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
321 946-4563-162 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
322 946-4563-163 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
323 946-4563-164 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
324 946-4563-165 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
325 946-4563-166 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
326 946-4563-167 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
327 946-4563-168 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
328 946-4563-169 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
329 946-4563-170 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
330 946-4563-171 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
331 946-4563-172 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
332 946-4563-173 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
333 946-4563-174 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
334 946-4563-175 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
335 946-4563-176 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
336 946-4563-177 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
337 946-4563-178 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
338 946-4563-179 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
339 946-4563-180 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
340 946-4562-071 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44

ASSESSMENT
DIAGRAM NO.

ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER

ASSESSMENT
AMOUNT

COLLECTION
CHARGE (0.017)TOTAL
PROPOSED 2026-27 ASSESSMENT ROLL
341 946-4562-072 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
342 946-4562-073 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
343 946-4562-074 $237.34 $4.10 $241.44
CITY 946-4563-125 $241.44 $241.44
344 TOTAL ASSESSMENTS: $82,796.71 $1,427.71 $84,224.42

Attachment 2

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON ADOPTING PROPOSITION 218 ASSESSMENT BALLOT PROCEEDINGS

PROCEDURES FOR THE PROPOSED FORMATION OF PONDEROSA-DEL PRADO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 2026-1

WHEREAS, Proposition 218 was adopted on November 6, 1996, adding Articles XIIIC and XIIID to the California Constitution; and

WHEREAS, Article XIIID of the California Constitution impose certain procedural and substantive requirements relating to assessments (as defined); and

WHEREAS, the City of Pleasanton (“City”) believes it to be in the best interest of the City and its property owners to confirm and memorialize the City’s procedures and guidelines regarding implementation of the provisions of Proposition 218 and pertinent statutes relating to assessments.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING:

SECTION 1. Statement of Legislative Intent. In adopting this resolution, it is the City Council’s intent to adopt assessment ballot proceedings which are consistent and in compliance with Articles XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution, Government Code Sections 53750 through 53754, and Government Code Sections 53759.1 and 53759.2 (AB 2257). It is not the intent of the City Council to vary in any way from the requirements of either the California Constitution or the laws of the State of California. If there is any inconsistency between a provision of this resolution and state law, state law will govern.

SECTION 2. Definition of Assessment. Proposition 218 defines “assessment” as “any levy or charge by an agency upon real property that is based upon the special benefit conferred upon the real property by a public improvement or services, that is imposed to pay the capital cost of the public improvement, the maintenance and operation expenses of the public improvement or the cost of the service being provided.” “Assessment” includes, but is not limited to, “special assessment,” “benefit assessment,” “maintenance assessment,” and “special assessment tax.”

SECTION 3. Assessment Ballot Proceeding. The following procedures shall be used in an assessment ballot proceeding that follows the requirements of California Constitution Article XIIID, Section 4:

A. Amount of Assessment. Only special benefits are assessable. The amount of the assessment shall be each identified parcel’s proportionate share of the cost of the additional landscape maintenance improvements and services based upon that parcel’s special benefit from the improvements and services. The amount shall be proportional to and no greater than the special benefits conferred on the property.

B. Engineer’s Report. The City Council has directed the preparation and filing of an engineer's report that shall comply with the applicable state statute authorizing the assessment and with Article XIIID, Section 4, of the California Constitution. The engineer's report shall explain the special benefits conferred by the improvements

funded by the assessments. The engineer's report shall also provide the evidence upon which the City Council may find that a special benefit exists. If the improvement or service confers a general benefit, the engineer's report shall describe the general benefit and an alternative funding source for any general benefits. The engineer's report shall be prepared by a registered professional engineer certified by the State of California ("Assessment Engineer"). The cost of preparing the engineer’s report shall be included as a cost of the assessment.

C. Notice. The following guidelines shall apply to giving notice of the proposed assessment:

1. The record owner(s) of each parcel to be assessed shall be determined from the last equalized property tax roll. If the property tax roll indicates more than one owner, each owner shall receive notice. Only property owners shall receive notice.

2. The notice shall be sent at least forty-five (45) days prior to the date set for the public hearing on the assessment.

3. The notice provided by this section shall contain the following information:

a. The total amount to be assessed for the entire assessment district; b. The amount to be assessed to the owner’s particular parcel; c. The duration of the payments;
d. The reason for the assessment;
e. The basis upon which the amount of the proposed assessment was calculated;
f. The date, time, and location of the public hearing on the proposed assessment;
g. A summary of the procedures for the completion, return, and tabulation of the assessment ballots;
h. A disclosure statement that the existence of a majority protest will result in the assessment not being imposed; and
i. A ballot to be completed by the owner, as further described in Section D of this resolution.

4. The notice provided by this section and in accordance with Government Code Sections 53753(b) and (c) shall supersede and be in lieu of any other statutes requiring notice to levy or increase an assessment, including but not limited to the notice required by the state statute authorizing the assessment and Government Code section 54954.6.

5. Failure of any person to receive notice shall not invalidate the proceedings.

6. The cost of providing notice shall be included as a cost of the assessment.

D. Assessment Ballot. The following guidelines shall apply to the assessment ballot:

1. The ballot required by Article XIIID, Section 4(d), of the California Constitution shall be mailed to all property owners of record subject to the proposed assessment at least forty-five (45) days prior to the date of the public hearing on the proposed assessment. This ballot shall comply with Government Code Sections 53753(b) and

(c). The ballot shall be designed in such a way that, once sealed, its contents are concealed.

2. All ballots must be returned either by mail or by hand delivery, not later than the close of the public input portion of the public hearing. Mailed ballots must be returned to the City Clerk, City of Pleasanton, PO Box 520, Pleasanton, CA 94566. Ballots may also be hand-delivered to the City Clerk at City Hall, 123 Main Street, Pleasanton, CA 94566, during normal business hours, or submitted in person at the public hearing on July 21, 2026, at 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers, 200 Old Bernal Avenue, Pleasanton, California. Ballots must be received by the City Clerk by the close of the public input portion of the public hearing. Postmarks shall not constitute timely receipt. The City Clerk (the “Tabulator”) shall tabulate the ballots at the conclusion of the public input portion of the public hearing after the final call for ballots.

3. Each ballot must be signed under penalty of perjury. In the event that more than one of the record owners of a parcel submits an assessment ballot, the amount of the proposed assessment to be imposed upon the parcel shall be allocated to each ballot submitted in proportion to the respective record ownership interests or, if the ownership interests are not shown on the record, as established to the satisfaction of the City Council or Assessment Engineer by documentation provided by the record owners. If two or more persons own a parcel subject to the assessment, any one owner may cast an assessment ballot for all owners.

4. If a parcel has multiple owners, any owner may request a proportional assessment ballot. If the ownership interest of the owner is not shown on the last equalized secured property tax assessment roll, such request must include evidence, satisfactory to the City, of the owner’s proportional rights in the parcel. The Assessment Engineer will provide the proportional ballot to the owner at the address shown on the assessment roll. Any request for a ballot to be mailed to another location must include evidence, satisfactory to the City, of the identity of the person requesting the ballot. Each proportional ballot will be marked to identify it as a proportional ballot and to indicate the owner’s proportional rights in the parcel. The Assessment Engineer will keep a record of each proportional ballot provided to an owner.

5. The City will only accept official ballots mailed or otherwise provided to owners by the Assessment Engineer. No facsimile, electronic, mechanically duplicated, copied, or other unofficial ballot will be accepted.

6. If an assessment ballot is lost, withdrawn, destroyed, or never received, the Assessment Engineer will mail or otherwise provide a replacement ballot to the owner upon receipt of a request delivered to the City or the Assessment Engineer.

The replacement ballot will be marked to identify it as a replacement ballot or a replacement proportional ballot. Any request for a replacement ballot to be mailed to another location must include evidence, satisfactory to the City or the Assessment Engineer, of the identity of the person requesting the ballot.

7. If an assessment ballot is returned by the United States Post Office as undeliverable, the Assessment Engineer may mail a redelivered ballot to the current property owner

if updated ownership or owner mailing address can be determined. The redelivered ballot will be marked to identify it as a redelivered ballot.

8. An assessment ballot proceeding is not an election or voting for purposes of Article II of the California Constitution or of the Elections Code.

9. An assessment ballot is a disclosable “public record” as that phrase is defined by Government Code Section 6252, during and after tabulation of the ballots.

10. The California Government Code requires that assessment ballots be signed by property owners. However, property owner names and corresponding votes will remain strictly confidential, except as necessary to count the votes or as disclosure is required by California law.

11. To complete an assessment ballot, the owner of the parcel or his, her, or their authorized representative must (1) mark the appropriate oval supporting or opposing the proposed assessment and (2) sign, under penalty of perjury, the statement on the ballot that the person completing the ballot is the owner of the parcel or the owner's authorized representative. Only one oval may be stamped or marked on each ballot. All incomplete or improperly marked ballots shall be disqualified from balloting. The Tabulator will retain all such invalid ballots.

12. After returning an assessment ballot to the City, the person who signed the ballot may withdraw the ballot by submitting a written statement to the City directing the City to withdraw the ballot. Such statement must be received by the City or the Tabulator prior to the close of the public input portion of the public hearing. When ballots are tabulated, the Tabulator will segregate withdrawn ballots from all other returned ballots and will indicate on the face of such withdrawn ballots that they have been withdrawn.

13. In order to change the contents of a ballot that has been submitted, the person who signed that ballot may: (1) request that such ballot be withdrawn; (2) request that a replacement ballot be issued; and (3) return the replacement ballot fully completed.

Each of these steps must be completed according to the procedures set forth above.

E. Tabulating Ballots. The following guidelines shall apply to tabulating assessment ballots:

1. Assessment ballots shall remain sealed until tabulation commences.

2. The Tabulator shall tabulate the assessment ballots. The Tabulator shall follow the rules and procedures of the laws of the State of California, this resolution, and any other rules and procedures of the City Council. If the Tabulator needs clarification, the City Council is the final arbiter. All ballots shall be accepted as valid except those in the following categories:

a. A photocopy of a ballot, a letter or other form of a ballot that is not an official ballot provided by the District or the Assessment Engineer on behalf of the District;
b. An unsigned ballot, or ballot signed by an unauthorized individual;

c. A ballot which lacks an identifiable mark in the oval for a “yes” or “no” vote or with more than one oval marked, will not be counted;
d. A ballot which appears tampered with or otherwise invalid based upon its appearance or method of delivery or other circumstances; e. A ballot for which the barcode representing the parcel number is damaged or obstructed, unless the parcel number or property ownership information is legible and allows the Tabulator to clearly determine the property(s) identified on the ballot; and
f. A ballot received after the close of the balloting time period.

3. The Tabulator’s decision, after consultation with the City’s legal counsel, that a ballot is invalid shall be final and may not be appealed to the City Council.

4. If more than one of the record owners of a parcel submits an assessment ballot, the amount of the proposed assessment to be imposed upon the parcel shall be allocated to each ballot in proportion to the respective record ownership interests, as shown on the record or as established to the City’s satisfaction by documentation provided by the record owners.

5. In the event of a dispute regarding whether the signer of a ballot is the owner of the parcel to which the ballot applies, the City Council will make such determination from the official County Assessor records and any evidence of ownership submitted to the City Council prior to the conclusion of the public hearing. The City Council will be under no duty to obtain or consider any other evidence as to ownership of property, and its determination of ownership will be final and conclusive.

6. In the event of a dispute regarding whether the signer of a ballot is an authorized representative of the owner of the parcel, the City Council may rely on the statement on the ballot signed under penalty of perjury and any evidence submitted prior to the conclusion of the public hearing. The City Council will be under no duty to obtain or consider any other evidence as to whether the signer of the ballot is an authorized representative of the owner, and its determination will be final and conclusive.

7. A property owner who has submitted an assessment ballot may withdraw the ballot and submit a new or changed ballot up until the conclusion of the public input portion of the public hearing on the assessment.

8. A property owner’s failure to receive an assessment ballot shall not invalidate the proceedings conducted under this section and Article XIIID, Section 4, of the California Constitution.

9. The City shall retain all ballots for a period of two (2) years from the date of the public hearing.

F. Public Hearing. The following guidelines shall apply to the public hearing:

1. The public hearing for the proposed assessment shall be held on Tuesday, July 21, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. at City Council Chambers, 200 Old Bernal Avenue, Pleasanton, California. At the public hearing, the City Council shall hear all public testimony, written objections, and protests regarding the proposed assessment and accept ballots until the close of the public input portion of the public hearing, including

consideration of any timely written objections to the assessment received and the City’s written response thereto pursuant to Government Code Sections 53759.1 and 53759.2. The City Council will determine whether any of the following are warranted following consideration of all public testimony, objections, and protests:

a. Whether the written objections and the agency’s response warrant clarifications to the proposed fee or assessment.
b. Whether to reduce the proposed fee or assessment.
c. Whether to further review before making a determination on whether clarification or reduction is needed.
d. Whether to proceed with the protest hearing or ballot tabulation hearing required under Section 4 of Article XIII D of the California Constitution.

2. Reasonable time limits may be imposed on both the length of the entire hearing and the length of each speaker’s testimony.

3. At the conclusion of the public input portion of the hearing, the Tabulator shall begin tabulation of the ballots at the direction of the City Council, including those received during the public hearing.

4. If it is not possible to tabulate the ballots on the day of the public hearing, or if additional time is necessary for public testimony, the City Council may continue the public hearing to a later date to receive additional testimony, information, or to finish tabulating the ballots.

5. If, according to the final tabulation of the ballots, ballots submitted against the assessment exceed the ballots submitted in favor of the assessment, weighted according to the proportional financial obligation of the affected property, a “majority protest” exists and the City Council shall not impose the assessment.

SECTION 4. Written Objections and Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies (Pleasanton Municipal Code Section 1.04.120; Ordinance No. 2292). The following procedures implement Pleasanton Municipal Code Section 1.04.120 and Government Code Sections 53759.1 and 53759.2:

A. City Obligations — Making Assessment Available. Concurrently with mailing the ballot package, the City shall: (1) make the proposed assessment available to the public no less than 45 days before the deadline for submitting written objections; (2) post on its website the written basis for the proposed assessment, including the Engineer’s Report, Resolution of Initiation, and Resolution of Intention, and include a link to those materials in the public hearing notice; and (3) make the Engineer’s Report and written basis available by mail to any ratepayer or property owner upon request.

B. Submission of Timely Written Objections. A record owner may submit a written objection to the proposed assessment to the City Clerk, City of Pleasanton, 123 Main St, Pleasanton, CA 94566 (by mail, email, fax, or personal delivery), at any time during the a 45-day review period and up through the end of the public comment portion of the public hearing on July 21, 2026. In order for a written objection to be timely and legally sufficient under Pleasanton Municipal Code Section 1.04.120, the objection must: (1) be in writing; (2) identify the name of the record owner and the street address or assessor’s parcel number of the affected property, and be signed by the record owner; and (3)

specify the grounds for alleging the proposed assessment does not comply with Proposition 218 or other applicable law, identifying the substantive requirement alleged to be violated and the factual basis for the claim. A written objection that does not specify such grounds is not legally sufficient.

C. City Council Consideration and Written Response. Before or during the public hearing, the City Council shall consider, and the City shall respond in writing to, any timely written objections received. The City’s written response shall explain the substantive basis for retaining or altering the proposed assessment in response to the written objections, including any reasons to reject requested amendments. The City Council may adjourn the hearing to another date if necessary to respond to comments received after the agenda is posted. Following consideration of timely written objections and the City’s written responses, the City Council shall exercise its legislative discretion and determine whether: (1) the written objections and the City’s response warrant clarifications to the proposed assessment; (2) to reduce the proposed assessment; (3) further review of the proposed assessment is needed before determining whether clarification or reduction is warranted; or (4) to proceed with, continue, or abandon the proposed assessment. Following these determinations, the City Council shall determine whether to proceed with tabulating assessment ballots.

D. Bar to Legal Proceedings. In accordance with Pleasanton Municipal Code Section

1.04.120(C), no person may bring a judicial action or proceeding alleging noncompliance with the California Constitution or other applicable law for the proposed assessment unless that person submitted to the City Clerk a timely written objection specifying the grounds for alleging noncompliance. The issues raised in any such action shall be limited to those raised in such a written objection, unless a court finds the issue could not have been raised in such an objection by those exercising reasonable diligence.

E. Public Record. Any submitted written objection shall be a public record subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act (Government Code Section 7920.000 et seq.).

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Pleasanton at a regular meeting held on May 5, 2026.

I, Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk of the City of Pleasanton, California, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 5th day of May 2026 by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

_____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_______________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Attachment 3

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON

DECLARING THE INTENTION TO FORM BONDE RANCH LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 2026-2; PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ENGINEER’S REPORT; AND SETTING A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING

WHEREAS, on March 17, 2026, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2026-0010 initiating proceedings for the formation of Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026-2 (the “District”) pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (the “Act”), Division 15, Part 2, Chapter 2, Sections 22500 et seq. of the California Streets and Highways Code, for the installation, maintenance, and servicing of landscaping and other improvements; and

WHEREAS, Proposition 218 was adopted on November 6, 1996, adding Articles XIIIC and XIIID to the California Constitution, which impose certain procedural and substantive requirements relating to assessments (as defined).

WHEREAS, an Engineer’s Report (“Report”) has been prepared by SCI Consulting Group, registered, professional engineers (“Assessment Engineer”), and submitted to the City Council, in which an assessment is proposed to fund the cost of the installation, maintenance and servicing of improvements within the District boundaries as described in §3 below. The proposed Landscape Maintenance District shall be described as “Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026-2” of the City of Pleasanton (hereinafter the “Assessment District”).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER THE FOLLOWING:

SECTION 1. The above Recitals are in all respects true and correct.

SECTION 2. Reference to Initiation. In accordance with direction from the City Council, SCI Consulting Group, (“Engineer of Work”), prepared an Engineer’s Report (“Report”) pursuant to the Act and Article XIIID of the California Constitution. The Report has been prepared, filed with the City Clerk, reviewed, and duly considered by the City Council and is hereby deemed sufficient and preliminarily approved. The Report shall stand as the Engineer’s Report for all subsequent proceedings under and pursuant to this Resolution.

SECTION 3. Description of the Improvements. The purpose of the Assessment District shall be for the installation, maintenance, and servicing of improvements. Within the District, the existing and proposed improvements (“Improvements”) are generally described as the installation, maintenance, and servicing of designated landscaped areas, open space slopes, fuel transition zones (fire breaks), entry features, fencing and walls, open space drainage ditches, irrigation and drainage systems, and trees within the open space and designated landscaped areas, together with all appurtenant and incidental expenses within Tract 6483 and Tract 6518, City of Pleasanton. The Improvements include, but are not limited to, landscaping and trees; fire breaks and fuel management areas; entry features and fencing; open space areas; and all appurtenant facilities and incidental expenses associated therewith.

“Installation” means the construction of landscape improvements, including but not limited to land preparation such as grading, leveling, cutting and filling, sod, landscaping, irrigation systems, and drainage. “Maintenance” means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation, and servicing of said Improvements, including: (a)

repair, removal, or replacement of all or any part of any improvement; (b) fuel management and tree pruning and removal, including the management of fuel transition zones and open space slopes to reduce fire risk, performed at minimum on an annual basis or as conditions require; (c) fire break maintenance and weed abatement, performed at minimum once annually; (d) standard landscape maintenance, including pruning, trimming, litter and debris removal, performed two to three times monthly and as conditions require; (e) repair, maintenance, and replacement of irrigation systems, drainage facilities, and open space drainage ditches, including the restoration of inoperable irrigation systems as funding allows; (f) repair and maintenance of fencing, walls, and entry features, including periodic replacement; (g) plant replacement and revegetation, as needed to sustain plantings; and (h) drainage repair and replacement, as needed. “Servicing” means the furnishing of (a) water for the irrigation of any landscaping, the operation of any fountains, or the maintenance of any other improvements, and (b) electric current or energy for the lighting or operation of any improvements. The Improvements also include all labor, materials, supplies, utilities, and equipment necessary or incidental to the foregoing, together with all costs of administration, engineering, legal, and other incidental expenses associated with the District.

SECTION 4. Reference to Engineer’s Report. The Report is hereby incorporated by reference. Reference is hereby made to the Report for a full and detailed description of the Improvements, the boundaries of the Assessment District and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within the Assessment District. Reference is also hereby made to the Report for an estimate of the costs of the Improvements proposed to be financed from the proceeds of the proposed assessment.

SECTION 5. Report of the Assessment Engineer: The Report is available for public review at the City of Pleasanton City Hall, located at 123 Main St, Pleasanton, CA. The Engineer’s Report includes:

A.

A description of the Improvements to be funded with assessment proceeds, services and incidental costs; and

B. An estimate of the annual cost of such Improvements; and

C. A description of the assessable parcels of land within the District and proposed to be subject to the assessment; and

D. A description of the proportionate special and general benefits conferred on property by the proposed assessment; and

E. A description of the boundaries of the proposed Assessment District; and

F. A specification of the amount to be assessed upon various types of assessable land to fund the cost of the Improvements; and

G. The proposed method and formula of assessing the costs and expenses of the Improvements to the properties which will specially benefit from the Improvements.

SECTION 6. Description of Assessment District. The Assessment District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the Assessment District on file with the City Clerk, and reference is hereby made to such map for further particulars.

SECTION 7. Proposed Assessment Rate. It is the intention of this City Council to levy and collect assessments within the Assessment District. The estimated Fiscal Year 2026-27 cost of providing the Improvements is $52,364. Said estimated cost results in a proposed Single-Family Equivalent ("SFE") assessment rate of SIX HUNDRED THIRTY-THREE DOLLARS AND THREE CENTS ($633.03) for Zone A, ONE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED

SIXTY-SIX DOLLARS AND
SIX CENTS ($1,266.06) for Zone A Water Tank and TWO
HUNDRED SEVENTY-EIGHT DOLLARS AND FIFTY-THREE CENTS ($278.53) for Zone B for fiscal year 2026-27. It is the further intention of the City to have the assessment collected on the tax
roll in the same manner, by the same persons, and at the same time as, together with and not
separately from, its general taxes.

S
ECTION 8. Public Hearing. Notice is hereby given that the Public Hearing on the proposed assessment shall be held before the City Council on Tuesday, July 21, 2026, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. at the City Council Chambers, located at 200 Old Bernal Avenue, Pleasanton, California, or soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, for the purpose of this Ci ty C ouncil’s determination of whether the Public interest, convenience, and necessity require the improvements and this City Council’s final action upon the report and the assessments therein.

All interested persons shall be afforded the opportunity to hear and be heard. Any interested person may file a written protest with the City Clerk, or, having previously filed a protest, may file a written withdrawal of that protest, prior to the conclusion of the public input portion of the public hearing. A written protest shall state all grounds of objection. A protest by a property owner shall contain a description sufficient to identify the property owned by the signer thereof.

The City Council shall consider all oral statements and all written protests made or filed by any interested person. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 53759.1 and 53759.2, timely written objections will be duly considered and written responses will be provided to such objections SECTION 9. Notice and Ballot. The City Clerk hereby is authorized and directed to cause Notice of the hearing ordered under Section 8 hereof to be given in accordance with law by United States Mail, and such Notice shall be deemed to have been given when so deposited in the United States Mail. The envelope or cover of the mailing shall include the name of the City. The mailed Notice shall be given to all property owners of assessable parcels within the Assessment District by such mailing by name to those persons whose names and addresses appear on the last equalized secured property tax assessment roll of Alameda County, or in the case of any public entity, the representative of such public entity at the address thereof known to the City Cl erk. The Notice shall include, but not be limited to, the total amount of assessment proposed to be levied in the Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2026-27, the assessment proposed for the owner’s particular parcel(s) and the duration thereof and the reason for the assessment. Each Notice shall also contain the proposed assessment and the basis upon which the amount of the assessment was calculated. Each Notice shall also contain an assessment ballot, a summary of the procedures applicable to the completion, return and tabulation of assessment ballots, the date, time, and location of the public hearing and a statement that the existence of a majority protest will result in the assessment not being imposed. The Notice herein provided shall be mailed not less than forty-five (45) days before the date of the public hear ing.

SECTION 10. Additional Information. To obtain additional information about the proposed assessments, the Assessment District or the proposed Improvements contact: Matt Gruber, Landscape Architect, 123 Main St, Pleasanton, CA, telephone number (925) 931-5672.

The Engineer’s Report and other written material about the Assessment District may also be reviewed at the Office of the City Clerk during regular business hours.

SECTION 11. Annual Assessments. The assessments are proposed to be levied annually. If the proposed assessments are approved and confirmed by the City Council, the assessments will increase in future years by an amount up to the change in the San Francisco Bay Area Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) with a maximum of 3% without a further vote or balloting process. In the event that the actual assessment rate for any given year is not increased by an amount equal to the CPI change, any such deferred assessment increase may be added to the total amount assessed in any subsequent year. In such event, the maximum authorized assessment amount shall be equal to the base year assessment as adjusted by the increase to the CPI, plus any and all CPI adjustments deferred in any and all prior years. In each subsequent year in which the assessments will be levied, an updated Engineer’s Report, including a proposed budget and assessment rate, shall be prepared. The updated Engineer’s Report shall be considered by the City Council at a noticed public hearing. The updated Engineer’s Report shall serve as the basis for the continuation of the assessments.

SECTION 12. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Pleasanton at a regular meeting held on May 5, 2026.

I, Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk of the City of Pleasanton, California, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 5th day of May 2026 by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

_____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_______________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Fiscal Year 2026‐27

ENGINEER’S REPORT
City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch
Landscape and Lighting Maintenance
Assessment District 2026‐2
April 2026

Pursuant to the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 and Article XIIID of the California Constitution

Exhibit A

(This page Intentionally left blank)

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

City  of Pleasanton
Mayor
Jack Balch

City  Council
Matt Gaidos, District 4, Vice Mayor
Jeff Nibert, District 1, Member
Craig Eicher, District 2, Member
Julie Testa, District 3, Member

City  of  Pleasanton  Staff
Siew‐Chin Yeong, Director of Public Works
Adam Nelkie, Assistant Director of Public Works, Engineering/City Engineer Matt Gruber, Landscape Architect

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Table  of Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................................... 4 Overview ...................................................................................................................... 4 Assessment Process ..................................................................................................... 6 Legislative Analysis ....................................................................................................... 8 Plans and Specifications .................................................................................. 11 Estimate of Cost and Budget ........................................................................... 13 Notes for Estimates of Costs ...................................................................................... 15 Method of Apportionment ......................................................................................... 16 Discussion of Benefit .................................................................................................. 17 Benefit Factors ........................................................................................................... 18 General versus Special Benefit ................................................................................... 21 Benefit Finding ........................................................................................................... 22 Source of Contributions from Other Funds ................................................................ 25 Zones of Benefit ......................................................................................................... 28 Method of Assessment ............................................................................................... 29 Residential Properties ................................................................................................ 30 Other Properties ......................................................................................................... 30 Consumer Price Index Adjustments ........................................................................... 31 Government Code § 53759.1 and 53759.2 ................................................................ 31 Assessment Statement ................................................................................... 33 Assessment Diagram ....................................................................................... 35 Assessment Roll .............................................................................................. 37

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

List  of Tables
Table 1 ‐ Fiscal Year 2026‐27 Estimate of Cost and Budget .............................................. 14 Table 2 ‐ Relative Benefit Levels ....................................................................................... 21 Table 3 – Benefit to Property Outside the Assessment District ....................................... 23 Table 4 – Summary of General Benefit ............................................................................. 25 Table 5 – City In‐Kind General Benefit Contributions ....................................................... 27 Table 6 ‐ Relative Benefit Levels by Zone ......................................................................... 29 Table 7 ‐ Assessment Rate Determination by Estimate of Costs ...................................... 31 Table 8 – Summary of Combined Cost Estimate ............................................................... 33

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Introduction
Overview
Landscape Maintenance District No. 1993‐2, Bonde Ranch (“1993‐2 Bonde Ranch LMD”) was established by the City of Pleasanton (“City”) in 1993 as a condition of approval for the  Bonde  Ranch  residential  development  (Tracts  6483  and  6518).  The  1993‐2  Bonde Ranch LMD was formed pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (California Streets  and  Highways  Code,  Sections  22500  et  seq.,  the  “Act”)  to  fund  the  ongoing maintenance  of  landscaping  and  trees,  open  space  areas,  fuel  transition  zones  (fire breaks), entry features, fencing, irrigation systems, drainage systems, and street lighting within the subdivision.

The original assessment was established in 1993, prior to the passage of Proposition 218.

The assessment was set at $386.18 per parcel per year in Fiscal Year 1997‐98 (Resolution No. 97‐83), following Proposition 218’s effective date. Beginning in Fiscal Year 2000‐01, the assessment was reduced to $252.91 per parcel, where it remained through Fiscal Year 2024‐25. With no inflation escalator, assessment revenues have not kept pace with the rising  costs  of  maintenance,  water,  utilities,  and  capital  replacement.  The  resulting funding shortfall has produced a measurable decline in the condition of the landscape and infrastructure. In FY 2025‐26, the City restored the assessment rate to $386.18 per parcel per year, however the rate is insufficient to fund the full scope of maintenance and capital improvements needed in the district.

The  City  Council  has  directed  that  a  new  assessment  be  proposed  and  voted  on  by property owners within the District in accordance with Proposition 218 (Article XIIID of the California Constitution). The intent is to replace the existing District 1993‐2 with a new Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2 (“Assessment District” or “District”) that includes a cost‐of‐living adjustment provision to provide adequate and sustainable funding  for  maintenance  and  services  going  forward.  If  approved  by  property  owner ballot, the existing 1993‐2 Bonde Ranch LMD will be replaced by the Assessment District.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

This  Engineer’s  Report  (“Report”)  was  prepared  to  establish  the  budget  for  the improvements  and  services  (“Improvements”)  that  will  be  funded  by  the  proposed assessments,  to  determine  the  general  and  special  benefits  received  from  the Improvements by property within the Assessment District, and to establish the method of assessment apportionment to lots and parcels. This Report and the assessments have been made pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (the “Act”) and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (the “Article”). The boundaries of the Assessment District are the same as the boundaries of the existing District No. 1993‐2 and include all parcels within the Bonde Ranch subdivision as shown on the Assessment Diagram incorporated in this Report.

Community  Outreach
The  City  of  Pleasanton  engaged  SCI  Consulting  Group  in  2019  to  begin  the  analysis necessary to pursue Proposition 218 compliant assessment increase for the Bonde Ranch LMD. That process was suspended in 2020 due to the COVID‐19 pandemic.

In early 2022, City staff resumed the process of potentially increasing assessments for the District  through  a  Proposition  218  compliant  assessment  ballot  preceding.  A neighborhood  outreach  meeting  was  held  in  February  2022.  Property  owners  who attended or communicated with staff by phone or email expressed strong opposition to increasing the assessment. Staff placed the pursuit of a sustainable assessment on hold at that time.

Prior  to  initiating  Proposition  218  proceedings,  the  City  of  Pleasanton  conducted  an extensive  community  outreach  process  to  inform  property  owners  of  the  District's financial  condition,  solicit  input  on  proposed  maintenance  levels,  and  explain  the Proposition  218  ballot  process.  Prior  to  each  community  meeting,  the  City  mailed  and emailed  informational  flyers  to  all  district  property  owners  summarizing  the  meeting date, location, and topics to be covered.

On November 20, 2025, the City held its first informational community meeting virtually.

City staff and SCI Consulting Group presented information about the District's formation and history, the current state of the landscape and infrastructure, the funding shortfall resulting  from  decades  of  unchanged  assessments,  and  the  Proposition  218  process required  to  increase  the  assessment.  Property  owners  were  invited  to  submit  written feedback to the City. Property owners were invited to submit written feedback to the City and  notified  that  the  City  would  be  holding  another  meeting  in  response  to  the  input received and to present more detailed cost information.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

The  second  neighborhood  meeting  was  held  on  February  18,  2026,  at  St.  Augustine Church  Hall.  That  meeting  presented  three  maintenance  level  options  for  community input and introduced a property owner survey to help the City determine which option to bring forward as the ballot measure.

The informal survey was distributed via mail to all district property owners and email for all  property  owners  that  had  provided  the  City  with  their  email  addresses.  The  survey sought input on preferred maintenance levels, priorities for improvements, and attitudes toward the proposed assessment.

The survey closed on March 16, 2026. Of the 36 unique survey responses received, 65.6% of respondents, weighted by proposed assessment, indicated cumulative support for the Reduced  Maintenance  level.  Survey  results  are  directional  and  are  not  statistically representative of all property owners in the District.

On March 17, 2026, the City Council adopted resolutions initiating proceedings for the formation of the Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2 and designated SCI Consulting Group as Engineer of Work for the proposed district.

The third and final neighborhood meeting was held on April 6, 2026, at the Pleasanton Senior Center. That meeting presented the survey results, the proposed ballot option, a detailed explanation of the Proposition 218 weighted ballot process, and the next steps in the proceedings. The meeting was open to in‐person and virtual attendance.

Throughout the outreach process, the City maintained a dedicated informational website for the District available to property owners at all times. The website includes recordings of all three community meetings, slide decks, meeting Q&A summaries, frequently asked questions, formation documents, and budget information. The website has been updated following each community meeting to reflect the most current information available.

Assessment  Process

This  Engineer’s  Report  establishes  the  budget  for  the  maintenance  and  services  to  be undertaken by the Assessment District that will be funded by the proposed Fiscal Year 2026‐27 assessments and also determines the benefits received from the maintenance and  services  by  property  within  the  Assessment  District  as  well  as  the  method  of assessment  apportionment  to  lots  and  parcels.  This  Report  and  the  proposed assessments have been made pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "Act") and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (the “Article”).

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Following the submittal of this Report to the City of Pleasanton City Council (“Council”) for preliminary approval, the Council  may, by Resolution, call for an assessment  ballot proceeding  and  Public  Hearing  on  the  establishment  of  the  Bonde  Ranch  Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2.

If the Council approves such Resolution and calls for the mailing of notices and ballots, a notice of assessment and assessment ballot will be mailed to property owners at least 45 days prior to the date of the Public Hearing set by the Council. Such notice would include a description of the assessments as well as an explanation of the method of voting on the assessments. Each notice would include a ballot on which the property owner could mark his or her approval or disapproval of the assessments and a ballot return envelope.

After the ballots are mailed to property owners, a minimum 45‐day time period must be provided for the return of the assessment ballots. Following this 45‐day time period, a public hearing must be held for the purpose of allowing public testimony regarding the proposed  assessments  and  services.  At  this  hearing,  the  public  would  have  the opportunity to provide input on this issue and would have a final opportunity to submit ballots. After the conclusion of the public input portion of the hearing, the hearing may be continued to a later time to allow time for the tabulation of ballots.

With the passage of Proposition 218 on November 6, 1996, The Right to Vote on Taxes Act, now Article XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution, the proposed assessments can be levied for Fiscal Year 2026‐27 and future years, only if the ballots submitted in favor  of  the  assessments  are  greater  than  the  ballots  submitted  in  opposition  to  the assessments.  Each  ballot  is  weighted  by  the  amount  of  proposed  assessment  for  the property that it represents.

If  it  is  determined,  when  the  tabulation  results  are  announced,  that  the  assessment ballots  submitted  in  opposition  to  the  proposed  assessments  do  not  exceed  the assessment ballots submitted in favor of the assessments (weighted by the proportional financial obligation of the property for which ballots are submitted) the Council may take action, by resolution, to approve the levy of the assessments for Fiscal Year 2026‐27 and future fiscal years. If the assessments are confirmed and approved, the levies, as outlined in this Engineer’s Report, will be submitted to the Alameda County Auditor for inclusion on the property tax rolls for Fiscal Year 2026‐27. If the assessment ballots submitted in opposition to the proposed assessments do exceed assessment ballots submitted in favor of  the  assessments,  the  assessment  rates  will  be  consistent  with  the  previous  year’s assessment rates as indicated in a separate Engineer’s Report to be submitted at a future date.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Legislative  Analysis
Proposition  218
The Right to Vote on Taxes Act was approved by the voters of California on November 6, 1996  and  is  now  Article  XIIIC  and  XIIID  of  the  California  Constitution.   Proposition  218 provides for benefit assessments to be levied to fund the cost of providing services and improvements, as well as maintenance and operation expenses to a public improvement which benefits the assessed property.

Proposition 218 describes several important requirements, including a property owner balloting, for the formation and continuation of assessments, and these requirements are satisfied by the process used to establish this assessment.

Silicon  Valley  Taxpayers  Association,  Inc.  v Santa  Clara  County  Open  Space Authority  (2008)  44  Cal.  4th  431
In  July  of  2008,  the  California  Supreme  Court  issued  its  ruling  on  the  Silicon  Valley Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (“SVTA”).   This ruling is significant in that the Court clarified how Proposition 218 made changes to the determination of special benefit. The Court also found that:
 Benefit assessments are for special, not general, benefit.  The  services  and/or  improvements  funded  by  assessments  must  be  clearly defined.
 Special  benefits  are  directly  received  by  and  provide  a  direct  advantage  to property in the assessment district.

Dahms  v.  Downtown  Pomona  Property  (2009)  174  Cal.  App.  4th  708 In Dahms v. Downtown Pomona Property (“Dahms”) the Court upheld an assessment that was 100% special benefit (i.e. 0% general benefit) on the rationale that the services and improvements  funded  by  the  assessments  were  directly  provided  to  property  in  the assessment  district.  The  Court  also  upheld  discounts  and  exemptions  from  the assessment for certain properties.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Bonander  v.  Town  of  Tiburon  (2009)  180  Cal.  App.  4th  103 Bonander v. Town of Tiburon (“Bonander”), the 1st District Court of Appeal overturned a benefit assessment approved by property owners to pay for placing overhead utility lines underground in an area of the Town of Tiburon.  The Court invalidated the assessments primarily  on  the  grounds  that  the  assessments  had  been  apportioned  to  assessed property based on the costs within sub‐areas of the assessment district instead of the overall cost of the improvements and the overall proportional special benefits.

Beutz  v.  County  of  Riverside  (2010)  184  Cal.  App.  4th  1516 Steven Beutz v. County of Riverside (“Beutz”) the Court overturned an assessment for park maintenance in Wildomar, California, primarily because the general benefits associated with improvements and services were not explicitly calculated, quantified and separated from the special benefits.

Golden  Hill  Neighborhood  Association  v.  City  of  San  Diego  (2011)  199  Cal.

App.  4th  416
On September 22, 2011, the 4th District Court of Appeal issued a decision on the Golden Hill  Neighborhood  Association  v.  City  of  San  Diego  (“Greater  Golden  Hill”)  appeal.  This decision overturned an assessment for street and landscaping maintenance in the Greater Golden  Hill  neighborhood  of  San  Diego,  California.  The  court  described  two  primary reasons for its decision. First, like in Beutz, the court found the general benefits associated with services were not explicitly calculated, quantified, and separated from the special benefits. Second,  the  court  found  that  the  City  had  failed  to  record  the  basis  for  the assessment on its own parcels.

Compliance  with  Current  Law
This Engineer’s Report is consistent with the requirements of Article XIIIC and XIIID of the California  Constitution  and  with  the  SVTA  decision  because  the  assessments  are  for special,  not  general,  benefit;  the  improvements  to  be  funded  are  clearly  defined;  the improvements  are  directly  available  to  and  will  directly  benefit  property  in  the Assessment District; and the improvements provide a direct advantage to property in the Assessment District that would not be received in absence of the Assessments.

This  Engineer’s  Report  is  consistent  with  Dahms  because,  similar  to  the  Downtown Pomona assessment validated in Dahms, the services will be directly provided to property in the Assessment District. Moreover, while Dahms could be used as the basis for a finding of 0% general benefits, this Engineer’s Report establishes a more conservative measure of general benefits.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

This Engineer’s Report is consistent with Beutz, Dahms, and Greater Golden Hill because the  improvements  will  directly  benefit  property  in  the  Assessment  District,  and  the general  benefits  have  been  explicitly  calculated  and  quantified  and  excluded  from  the Assessments. The  Engineer’s  Report  is  consistent  with  Bonander  because  the Assessments have been apportioned based on the overall cost of the improvements and proportional special benefit to each property.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Plans  and  Specifications
The City of Pleasanton maintains landscaping and other improvements in locations within the Assessment District's boundaries. The work and improvements to be undertaken by the Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2, and the cost thereof paid from the  levy  of  the  annual  Assessment,  provide  special  benefit  to  parcels  within  the Assessment District as defined in the Method of Assessment herein. In addition to the definitions provided by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (the "Act"), the work and  improvements  are  generally  described  as  designated  landscaping  and  trees,  open space areas, fuel transition zones (fire breaks), entry features, fencing, irrigation systems, street lighting and drainage systems within Tracts 6483 and 6518 in the City of Pleasanton.

The  Assessment  Diagram  shows  the  location  and  extent  of  the  Improvements  to  be installed, maintained, or serviced by the proceeds from this Assessment District.

Installation, maintenance, and servicing of Improvements may include, but are not limited to,  landscaping,  ground  cover,  shrubs  and  trees,  irrigation  systems,  fencing,  entry monuments, open space drainage ditches, fuel transition zones (fire breaks), and labor, materials,  supplies,  utilities,  and  equipment,  as  applicable,  at  each  of  the  locations owned, operated, or maintained by the Assessment District.

As applied herein, "Installation" means the construction of Improvements, including, but not  limited  to,  land  preparation  (such  as  grading,  leveling,  cutting  and  filling),  sod, landscaping, irrigation systems, walkways, and drainage facilities. "Maintenance" means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation, and servicing of any improvement, including repair, removal, or replacement of all or any part of any improvement; providing for the life, growth, health, and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris, and other solid waste; and the clearing and management of vegetation within fuel transition zones for fire risk reduction purposes.
"Servicing"  means  the  furnishing  of  water  for  the  irrigation  of  any  landscaping  or  the maintenance of any other improvements.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

"Incidental  expenses"  include  all  of  the  following:  (a)  the  costs  of  preparation  of  the report, including plans, specifications, estimates, diagram, and assessment; (b) the costs of  printing,  advertising,  and  the  giving  of  published,  posted,  and  mailed  notices;  (c) compensation payable to the County for collection of assessments; (d) compensation of any  engineer  or  attorney  employed  to  render  services  in  proceedings  pursuant  to  this part; (e) any other expenses incidental to the construction, installation, or maintenance and servicing of the Improvements; (f) any expenses incidental to the issuance of bonds or notes pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 22662.5; and (g) costs associated with any elections held for the approval of a new or increased assessment (Streets and Highways Code § 22526).

All assessment proceeds will be used exclusively for the Improvements described herein and incidental expenses within the Assessment District.

Landscape plans and specifications for the Improvements to this Assessment District are those prepared by Samson Associates, dated July 1992. These plans and specifications have been filed with the City Clerk and are incorporated in this Report by reference.

Note on District Boundary: The Assessment District boundary reflects the area established at the formation of the original Bonde Ranch LMD in 1993. The property directly behind the Ventana Hills neighborhood was excluded from the Bonde Ranch assessment area at formation in 2017 and is incorporated into the Bonde Ranch Open Space. That exclusion is carried forward into this Assessment District.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Estimate  of Cost  and  Budget
The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 provides that the total costs for providing the maintenance and services of the Assessment District, including incidental expenses, can be recovered through the assessment. An estimate of Assessment District costs for Fiscal Year 2026‐27 is provided in Table 1 on the following page.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Table 1 ‐ Fiscal Year 2026‐27 Estimate of Cost and Budget

Budget
Installation, Maintenance & Servicing Costs
Landscaping (maintenance)
Basic maintenance    $6,000.00
Extra Work
tree pruning and removal    $23,323.45
cleaning out v‐ditches (3x per year)  $1,500.00
repair backflow preventers/irrigation  $4,400.00
planting    $2,500.00
Water  $1,500.00
Fuel Transition Zones (Firebreak) 287,000 sq.ft.

Weed abatement    $7,972.00
Total for Installation, Maintenance & Servicing    $47,195.45

Incidental and Administration Costs 1
City administration fees    $1,800.00
County Collection Costs    $868.67
Annual Engineer's Report    $2,500.00
Total Incidental and Administration Costs    $5,168.67

Amount to/(from) Reserve Fund 2
Reserve/Long‐Term Replacement Fund for scheduled
Long‐term replacement of various district improvements    $0 $0
City's Contribution for General Benefit3

TOTAL COSTS

$52,364.12
BUDGET ALLOCATION TO PROPERTY

Number of
Parcels/Units
Single Family
Equivalent
Units (SFE) 4
Proposed
Assessment
Rate
Total
Assessment 5

103  82.72  $633.03  $52,364.12

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Notes  for  Estimates  of  Costs

1. Incidental  and  administration  cost  estimates  include  City  staff  hours dedicated to the administration of the assessment (including staff time to bid work,  monitor  contracts  and  contractors,  respond  to  residents’  inquiries, etc.), county charges for inclusion of assessments on property tax bills, and other incidental costs.

2. If approved, the Fund 136 balance (approximately $35,155 as of April 2026) for the 1993 Bonde Ranch LMD will be transferred to the new Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2.

3. As  determined  in  the  Benefit  Findings  section,  at  least  36.94%  of  the expenditures  must  be  funded  from  sources  other  than  the  assessments  to cover any general benefits. Therefore, out of the total cost of $52,364, the City  must  contribute  at  least  36.94%  from  other  sources.  The  City  will contribute in‐kind, non‐monetary contributions conservatively estimated at 60% of the total district cost, which more than covers any general benefits from  the  expenditures.  For  additional  information,  see  ‘Source  of Contributions from Other Funds’ on page 23.

4. The  rate  shown  here  is  for  a  single‐family  home  or  its  equivalent.  For  the definition of the term Single‐Family Equivalent (SFE) and rates for other types of property, see the section titled, “Method of Assessment” and the sections following it in this report.

5. The Act requires that proceeds from the assessments must be deposited into a special fund that has been set up for the revenues and expenditures of the Maintenance  District.  Moreover,  funds  raised  by  the  assessment  shall  be used only for the purposes stated within this Report. Any balance remaining at the end of the Fiscal Year, June 30, must be carried over to the next Fiscal Year.   The  District  may  also  establish  a  reserve  fund  for  contingencies  and special projects as well as a capital improvement fund for accumulating funds for  larger  capital  improvement  projects  or  capital  renovation  needs.  Any remaining  balance  would  either  be  placed  in  the  reserve  fund,  the  capital improvement fund, or would be used to reduce future years' assessments.

The proposed Assessment District reserve/replacement funds will be held in an interest bearing account until needed for repairs to the irrigation system, landscaping or other District features.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Method  of  Apportionment
This  section  includes  an  explanation  of  the  special  benefits  to  be  derived  from  the maintenance,  operations,  and  repair  activities,  the  criteria  for  the  expenditure  of assessment  funds  and  the  methodology  used  to  apportion  the  total  assessments  to properties within the Assessment District. The proposed Assessment District area consists of all Assessor Parcels included within the Bonde Ranch LMD 1993 boundary.

Pursuant to Proposition 218, the method used for apportioning the assessment is based upon the proportional special benefits conferred to the properties over and above the general benefits conferred to real property in the proposed Assessment District, or to the public  at  large.  Special  benefit  is  calculated  for  each  parcel  in  the  District  using  the following process:

1.) Identification of all benefit factors derived from the Improvements.

2.) Calculation of the proportion of these benefits that are general.

3.) Determination of the relative special benefit within different areas (zones of benefit) of the Assessment District.

4.) Determination of the relative special benefit per property type.

5.) Calculation of the specific assessment for each individual parcel based upon special  vs.  general  benefit,  zones,  property  type  and  other  supporting attributes.

The District consists of certain assessor parcels within the boundaries as defined by the Assessment Diagram referenced in this report and the parcels identified by the Assessor Parcel Numbers listed with the levy roll. The parcel list includes all privately and publicly owned  parcels  as  shown.  The  method  used  for  apportioning  the  Assessment  is  based upon the relative special benefits to be derived by the properties in the District over and above  general  benefits  conferred  on  real  property  or  to  the  public  at  large.  The Assessment is apportioned to lots and parcels in proportion to the relative special benefit from the improvements.

The apportionment of special benefit is a two‐step process: the first step is to identify the types of special benefit arising from the improvements and the second step is to allocate the Assessments to property based on the estimated relative special benefit for each type of property.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Discussion  of  Benefit
In summary, the Assessments can only be levied based on the special benefit to property.

This benefit is received by property over and above any general benefits. With reference to the requirements for assessments, Section 22573 of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 states:
"The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements."

Proposition 218, as codified in Article XIIID of the California Constitution, has confirmed that assessments must be based on the special benefit to property and that the value of the special benefits must exceed the cost of the assessment:
"No assessment shall be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel."

The following benefit categories summarize the types of special benefits to residential and other lots and parcels resulting from the installation, maintenance, and servicing of landscaping,  fuel  transition  zones,  open  space  areas,  irrigation  systems,  fencing,  entry features, and drainage systems funded by the Assessment. These types of special benefits are summarized as follows:

1. Proximity to improved landscaped areas, open space, and other permanent public improvements within the Assessment District

2. Access to improved landscaped areas within the Assessment District

3. Improved views within the Assessment District

4. Reduction of the wildland fire risk by the maintenance of fuel transition zones and  fire  breaks  within  or  immediately  adjacent  to  a  Moderate  Fire  Hazard Severity Zone

5. Creation of individual lots for residential and commercial use that, in absence of the Assessments, would not have been created.

In  this  case,  the  SVTA  decision  provides  enhanced  clarity  to  the  definitions  of  special benefits to properties from similar improvements in three distinct areas:
 Proximity
 Expanded or improved access

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

 Views
The SVTA decision also clarifies that a special benefit is a service or improvement that provides  a  direct  advantage  to  a  parcel  and  that  indirect  or  derivative  advantages resulting  from  the  overall  public  benefits  from  a  service  or  improvement  are  general benefits. The SVTA decision also provides specific guidance that park improvements are a  direct  advantage  and  special  benefit  to  property  that  is  proximate  to  a  park  that  is improved by an assessment:
“The characterization of a benefit may depend on whether the parcel receives a direct advantage from the improvement (e.g. proximity to a park) or receives an indirect,  derivative  advantage  resulting  from  the  overall  public  benefits  of  the improvement (e.g. general enhancement of the district’s property values).” Proximity,  improved  access,  and  views,  in  addition  to  the  other  special  benefits  listed above further strengthen the basis of these assessments.

Moreover, the Dahms decision further clarified that certain services and improvements funded by assessments, that are over and above what otherwise would be provided and that other property in general and the public do not share or receive are 100% special benefit.  The  assessment‐funded  services  upheld  by  Dahms  included  streetscape maintenance and security services.

Benefit  Factors
The special benefits from the improvements are further detailed below:

Proximity  to  improved  landscaped  areas  within  the  Assessment  District Only the specific properties within close proximity to the improvements are included in the Assessment District. Therefore, property in the Assessment District enjoys unique and valuable proximity and access to the improvements that the public at large and property outside the Assessment District do not share.

In  absence  of  the  assessments,  the  improvements  and  the  landscaping  areas  in  the Assessment  District  would  be  degraded  due  to  insufficient  funding  for  maintenance, upkeep, and repair. Therefore, the assessments provide improvements that are over and above what otherwise would be provided. Improvements that are over and above what otherwise  would  be  provided  do  not  by  themselves  translate  into  special  benefits  but when  combined  with  the  unique  proximity  and  access  enjoyed  by  parcels  in  the Assessment District, they provide a direct advantage and special benefit to property in the Assessment District.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Access  to  improved  outdoor  and  landscaped  areas  within  the  Assessment District
Since the parcels in the Assessment District are the primary parcels that enjoy close access to  the  improvements,  they  directly  benefit  from  the  unique  close  access  to  improved landscaping areas that are provided by the Assessments. This is a direct advantage and special benefit to property in the Assessment District.

Improved  views  within  the  Assessment  District
The City, by maintaining permanent public improvements funded by the Assessments in the District, provides improved views to properties in the District. The properties in the District enjoy close and unique proximity, access and views of the specific improvements funded  in  the  District;  therefore,  the  improved  and  protected  views  provided  by  the Assessments are another direct and tangible advantage that is uniquely conferred upon property in the District.

Wildland  Fire  Risk  Reduction
The Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District was formed in large part to protect the subdivision  from  wildland  fire  risk.  The  district's  fuel  transition  zones  (fire  breaks)  and open space slopes were required as conditions of approval for the development and have served  as  the  primary  buffer  between  the  residential  properties  and  the  surrounding wildland interface since the district's formation in 1993.

In 2025, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (“CAL FIRE”) updated its fire hazard severity zone map, and the eastern portion of the Assessment District is now designated within a Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The maintenance of fuel transition zones and open space slopes within the Assessment District directly reduces the risk of wildland fire ignition and spread to properties within the Assessment District.

This fire risk reduction is a direct, tangible benefit that is particular and distinct to property within  the  Assessment  District,  as  properties  outside  the  District  boundaries  do  not receive the same proximate protection from the District's fire management activities.

The degree of fire risk reduction benefit varies materially by proximity to the maintained fuel  transition  zones.  Zone  A  parcels  are  directly  adjacent  to  the  LMD  landscape maintenance  areas  and  fuel  transition  zones  and  receive  the  full  fire  risk  reduction benefit. These parcels sit within or immediately proximate to the Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone designation and are the properties most directly protected by the District's fuel management activities.

City of Pleasanton
Bonde Ranch Landscape Maintenance District 2026‐2
Engineer’s Report

Zone  B  parcels  are  located  across  Bernal  Avenue  and  at  substantially  greater  distance from  the  maintained  fuel  transition  zones.  While  Zone  B  parcels  remain  within  the Assessment District boundary and receive some indirect benefit from the District's fire management activities, the direct protective effect of the fuel transition zones diminishes significantly with distance. The CAL FIRE hazard mapping confirms that Zone B parcels lie at the periphery of or outside the Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone, further reflecting their reduced exposure and the correspondingly reduced protective benefit conferred by the District's fuel management program. On a scale of 1 to 10, Zone B parcels receive a fire  risk  reduction  benefit  score  of  2,  compared  to  a  score  of  10  for  Zone  A  parcels, reflecting this material difference in proximate protection.

Creation  of  Individual  Lots  for  Residential  Use  that,  in  Absence  of  the Assessments,  Would  Not  Have  Been  Created
The residential parcels within the Assessment District were created through a subdivision and  development  process  that  required  the  installation  of  landscaping,  open  space improvements,  fuel  transition  zones,  and  other  public  improvements  as  conditions  of approval.  These  Improvements  were  not  optional  enhancements  but  mandatory prerequisites for the subdivision to be approved and the individual lots to be created. The proposed Assessments provide the necessary funding for the continued maintenance of these Improvements, which support the ongoing safety and habitability of those parcels.

As parcels are sold, new owners are informed of the Assessment through title reports and Department of Real Estate disclosure reports indicating that the parcels are subject to assessment. Purchase of property within the Assessment District constitutes notice of the Assessment obligation.

In the absence of the proposed Assessments, the continued maintenance and servicing of the Improvements associated with the residential lots within the Assessment District would  not  be  adequately  funded.  These  parcels,  and  the  Improvements  that  were constructed  to  serve  them,  receive  a  direct  advantage  and  special  benefit  from  the Assessments.

Summary  of  Relative  Weight  of  Benefit  Factors
The relative weight assigned to each benefit factor reflects the primacy of wildland fire risk reduction to the safety and habitability of properties within the Assessment District.

The fuel transition zones and open space slopes maintained by the District were required as  conditions  of  subdivision  approval  and  serve  as  the  primary  buffer  between  the residential properties and the surrounding wildland interface. Wildland fire risk reduction is accordingly assigned a weight of 70% of the total benefit.