Agenda packet — Shasta Lake City Council, October 21, 2025

CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA October 21, 2025

CITY OF SHASTA LAKE

CITY COUNCIL

MEETING AGENDA
October 21, 2025
6:00 P.M.

Shasta Lake City Council Chambers
4488 Red Bluff Street  Shasta Lake, CA 96019
Mayor: Pamelyn Morgan
Vice Mayor: Justin Jones
Council Members: Toni Coates, Dan Ringwelski, Greg Watkins

OTHER WAYS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING
• Watch a livestream of the meeting online or view the recording any time after the meeting concludes at the following: cityofshastalake.gov/meetings • Submit public comment electronically before the meeting to:
[email protected]. Public comment by email will be read into the record during consideration of the item the comment addresses. Each public comment will be limited to three minutes of reading. Include the item number you are commenting on in the subject line of the email. Once the vote has taken place on an item, no additional public comments will beaccepted.
• Submit public comment by mail addressed to City Clerk, City of Shasta Lake, PO Box 777, Shasta Lake, CA 96019. Mailed comments must be received one day prior to the meeting to be included.

1.0 CALL TO ORDER – REGULAR MEETING:

1.1 Call to order (please place electronic devices on silent)

1.2 Statement for the record of Council Members present or absent

1.3 Pledge of Allegiance

1.4 Invocation

2.0 AWARDS & RECOGNITIONS:

2.1 None

3.0 PRESENTATIONS:

3.1 James Takehara – Legislative Update

4.0 COMMISSION, COMMITTEE, AND OUTSIDE AGENCY REPORTS:

4.1 Shasta Lake Fire Protection District, Quarterly Report. (pg. 5) 1 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA October 21, 2025

5.0 PUBLIC COMMENT:

This time is set aside for citizens to address the City Council on matters listed on the Consent Agenda as well as other items not included on the Regular Agenda. If your comments concern an item noted on the regular agenda, please address the Council when that item is open for public comment. Each speaker is allocated three (3) minutes to speak. Speakers may not cede their time. Comments should be limited to matters within the jurisdiction of the City. Council discussion or action cannot be taken on items not listed on the agenda other than to receive comments. Speaker forms are available from the City Clerk, 4477 Main Street, Shasta Lake, on the City’s website, or at the back of the meeting hall. If you have documents to present to members of Council, please provide a minimum of seven copies. Pursuant to The Brown Act, the City Council cannot take action on Public Comment Items.

6.0 CONSENT AGENDA:

The items listed under the Consent Agenda are considered routine business and will be voted on together by one motion unless a Council Member requests a specific item to be removed and discussed separately.

6.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 7, 2025. (pg. 7)

6.2 Payrolls: (pg. 9)
Period Ending: 10/11/2025 Paid Date: 10/17/2025 $179,124.73

6.3 Checks, E-payments, and wires: (pg. 10)
9/11/2025 $362.00
9/18/2025 $2,304,026.18

6.4 Monthly Report of Investment Transactions: (pg. 15) LAIF:

September $12,863,941.66
Chandler:

September $36,900,484.28

6.5 Discussion and possible action to approve a Resolution awarding a contract to Park Associates, Inc., dba: Park Planet, for the demolition, site preparation, and installation of new playground equipment, surfacing, and amenities at City playgrounds. (pg. 19)

6.6 Discussion and possible action to approve a Resolution declaring Mountain Enterprises, Inc., the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, and awarding a construction contract for the Shasta Lake Electric Utility Tree Trimming (Bid No. 2025-14). (pg. 23)
2 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA October 21, 2025

7.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS:

7.1 None

8.0 REGULAR AGENDA:

8.1 Discussion and possible action on Animal Control Operations and a Trap-NeuterReturn (TNR) Program Evaluation (pg. 29)

8.2 Discussion and possible action to approve a Resolution adopting the City of Shasta Lake Affirmative Fair Housing Market Plan (AFHMP) (pg. 37)

8.3 Discussion and possible action to approve a Resolution initiating the Proposition 218 Notification and Protest process for proposed solid waste rate adjustments and setting the Public Hearing date for December 16, 2025. (pg. 79)

8.4 Discussion and possible action on Proposition 50, changes to Congressional District Maps. (pg. 87)

9.0 STAFF COMMENTS:

10.0 CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REPORTS:

This is the time set aside for Council Members, who may so desire, to give brief comments or reports concerning City matters. The City Council may not enter into discussion on matters reported. Statements made by individual Council Members should not be interpreted as a statement of the City Council. The City Council only takes action by majority vote. • Brief reports by members of the Council regarding correspondence, events and/or meetings attended, and upcoming meetings/events.
• Suggestions/motions for future agenda items.
• In compliance with Assembly Bill 1234, Council will report on attendance at conferences/meetings/events where expenses are reimbursed by the City.

ADJOURNMENT:

Meetings are broadcast on the Wednesday following the meeting at 6:00 PM and the following Friday at 2:00 PM on Charter Channel 181. Videos of meetings are also available through the City website: www.cityofshastalake.org In Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please call (530) 275-7407. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting is requested to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II). 3 4
Shasta Lake Fire Protection District
4126 Ashby Ct., Shasta Lake, CA 96019 (530) 275-7474 Fax (530) 275-6502 www.shastalakefpd.org

PREVENTION OFFICER REPORT
 Weed Abatement:

July 6 notices
August 6 notice
September 2 notices
 Youth Program: N/A
 Plans/ Inspections:

July, completed one residential pipe inspection and two residential final inspections.

August, completed B-side residential fire flows, fire alarms, and final for Cascade Village.

September, completed two residential pipe inspections, one residential flow inspection, and one residential final inspection.
 Fires:

In July, there was one vegetation fire in the district that resulted in the loss of a structure and affected 0.5 acres. The cause was determined to be accidental, occurring while someone was working on a weed eater. Additionally, there was one vehicle fire in the district, the cause of which is still under investigation. Our team assisted with several other fires in the county, including the Grove incident, where we were able to stop the fire before it spread further into the district. The crew has been doing an excellent job of controlling these fires while they are still small.

In August, there was one fire due to negligence in the district, and a suspect was arrested at the scene. I have since filed charges with the Shasta County District Attorney's Office.

We also responded to a shed fire, which was quickly contained by our crew; the cause is currently undetermined.

In September, there was one vegetation fire in the city caused by a blown transformer.

Additionally, there was a false alarm at Mountain Lakes High School due to a student spraying a smoke detector with body spray. I have been collaborating with the Shasta County Sheriff’s Office on illegal campfire patrols, and we are beginning to observe some activity in the city again.

Respectfully Submitted,
Devin M Owens
Devin M Owens
Fire Marshal/ Prevention Officer
5 6

CITY OF SHASTA LAKE

CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
HELD TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2025, AT THE
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 4488 RED BLUFF ST, SHASTA LAKE, CALIFORNIA

1.0 CALL TO ORDER – REGULAR MEETING:.

1.1 Mayor Morgan convened the regular meeting at 6:00 PM

1.2 Council Members present: Coates, Morgan, Jones, Ringwelski, Watkins

1.3 Pledge of Allegiance was led by Vice Mayor Jones

1.4 Invocation was led by Councilman Watkins

2.0 AWARDS & RECOGNITIONS:

2.1 None

3.0 PRESENTATIONS:

3.1 None

4.0 COMMISSION, COMMITTEE, AND OUTSIDE AGENCY REPORTS:

4.1 None

5.0 PUBLIC COMMENT:

Stephanie Labra, read into the record by the City Clerk Ann Morningstar, Shasta Lake resident
Christian Gardner, Shasta County resident
Jim Mark, Shasta Lake resident
Cheryle Yednak, Shasta Lake resident

6.0 CONSENT AGENDA:

6.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 16, 2025.

6.2 Payrolls:

Period Ending: 9/13/2025 Paid Date: 9/19/2025 $181,181.40 Period Ending: 9/27/2025 Paid Date: 10/03/2025 $179,028.97

6.3 Resolution CC-2025-64 designating “Authorized Agents” to engage with Federal Emergency Management Administration and the California Office of Emergency Services.

6.4 Resolution CC-2025-65 accepting and approving the submission of the Power Source Disclosure Report and Power Content Label for calendar year 2024. 7 Motion/Vote
By motion made/seconded (Watkins/Jones), and carried unanimously, the Consent Agenda, was approved.

7.0 PUBLIC HEARINGS:

7.1 None

8.0 REGULAR AGENDA:

8.1 Resolution CC-2025-66 establishing a policy to support housing development in High Fire Severity Zones.

Public Comment
Jim Mark, Shasta Lake resident
Motion/Vote:

By motion made/seconded (Watkins/Coates), and carried unanimously, Item 8.1 was approved.

9.0 STAFF COMMENTS:

City Manager, Jessaca Lugo announced that Prop 218 notices for Wastewater Rates have been mailed, and if the public has any questions, please call City Hall.

The Cascade Village project is starting to wrap up with a possible move-in for November.

Trap Neuter Release (TNR) presentation and discussion will be on the October 21, 2025 Regular Agenda.

10.0 CITY COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REPORTS:

Councilman Watkins proposed the City Council Agendize a discussion on Prop 50.

Mayor Morgan and a majority of the City Council agreed, and asked City Manager Jessaca Lugo to add the discussion item to the next Regular Agenda.

ADJOURNMENT:

With no further business, Mayor Morgan adjourned the meeting at 7:05 PM. ____________________________
CHARITY TATLOW, City Clerk
8 10/15/2025 10:15:58 AM Page 6 of 6
Payroll Check Register
City of Shasta Lake Report Summary
Pay Period: 9/28/2025-10/11/2025
Packet: PYPKT00676 - PE 10.11.2025
Payroll Set: City of Shasta Lake - 01
Type
3 Count
0 6,240.08

0.00 Regular Checks
Manual Checks
0 0.00
0 0.00
Amount
82 172,884.65
Total 85 179,124.73
Reversals
Voided Checks
Direct Deposits
9 10
11 12
13 14
Report and Recommendations 6.4 Reviewed and Approved

City Manager

AGENDA ITEM
City Council
____________________________________________________________ TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Wendy Howard, Finance Director
Jason Peterson, Finance Manager

DATE: October 21, 2025
SUBJECT: INFORMATION ITEM – MONTHLY REPORTS OF INVESTMENT FOR THE PERIODS ENDING September 30, 2025
FILE NO.:

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council receive a report of the Cash and Investment Report for the period ending September 2025.

BACKGROUND
Pursuant to the City of Shasta Lake’s Adopted Investment Policy and Government Code Section 53607, the Finance Director will submit a report of investment transactions to the City Council monthly.

Staff requests the City Council or the public to submit questions regarding the reports prior to the City Council Meeting to permit time to research the question.

FISCAL IMPACTS
There will be no fiscal impact as a result of this information item.

ATTACHMENTS
LAIF Statement
Chandler Investment Summary Report
External Link: Monthly Investment Reports (Full Report)

DISTRIBUTION
City Council
City Attorney
15 Local Agency Investment Fund
P.O. Box 942809
Sacramento, CA 94209-0001
(916) 653-3001
October 01, 2025
LAIF Home
PMIA Average Monthly
Yields

CITY OF SHASTA LAKE

FINANCE DIRECTOR
4477 MAIN STREET
SHASTA LAKE, CA 96019
Account Number: 98-45-868
September 2025 Statement
Tran Type Definitions
Account Summary
Total Deposit: 0.00 Beginning Balance: 12,863,941.66
Total Withdrawal: 0.00 Ending Balance: 12,863,941.66
16 MONTHLY ACCOUNT STATEMENT
City of Shasta Lake | Account #10203 | As of September 30, 2025 CHANDLER ASSET MANAGEMENT | chandlerasset.com
Information contained herein is confidential. We urge you to compare this statement to the one you receive from your qualified custodian. Please see Important Disclosures at the end of the statement.

Chandler Team:

For questions about your account, please call (800) 317-4747, or contact [email protected]
Custodian:

PORTFOLIO SUMMARY
Portfolio Characteristics
Sector Allocation
Performance Review
Account Summary
Maturity Distribution
Top Issuers
Credit Quality*
Total Rate of Return** 1M 3M YTD 1YR 2YRS 3YRS 5YRS 10YRS Since Inception (01/01/14)
City of Shasta Lake 0.34% 1.25% 4.30% 4.23% 5.67% 4.77% 1.96% 2.00% 1.92% Benchmark Return 0.31% 1.12% 3.93% 3.88% 5.29% 4.35% 1.58% 1.69% 1.58% Average Modified Duration 1.83
Average Coupon 4.11%
Average Purchase YTM 4.35%
Average Market YTM 3.89%
Average Credit Quality* AA
Average Final Maturity 2.16
Average Life 1.88
End Values as of
08/31/2025
End Values as of
09/30/2025
Market Value 37,074,915.97 37,239,949.86
Accrued Interest 326,535.28 288,437.60
Total Market Value 37,401,451.24 37,528,387.46
Income Earned 98,235.55 165,938.98
Cont/WD 0.00 0.00
Par 36,892,869.03 37,057,554.46
Book Value 36,731,255.20 36,900,484.28
Cost Value 36,536,810.07 36,708,034.61
United States 39.11%
FHLMC 9.92%
Federal Home Loan Banks 9.46%
First American Govt Oblig fund 2.83%
Farm Credit System 2.12%
Bank of America Credit Card Trust 1.80%
PACCAR Inc 1.72%
John Deere Owner Trust 1.47%
**Periods over 1 year are annualized.

Benchmark: ICE BofA 1-3 Year US Treasury & Agency Index *The average credit quality is a weighted average calculation of the highest of S&P, Moody’s and Fitch. 18 Report and Recommendations 6.5 Reviewed and Approved

City Manager

AGENDA ITEM
City Council
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Whitney Zeller, Community and Economic Development Manager

DATE: October 21, 2025
SUBJECT: EXECUTION OF CONTRACT WITH PARK ASSOCIATES, INC.

DBA PARK PLANET FOR THE PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT

PROJECT
FILE NO.:

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute a contract with Park Associates, Inc. DBA Park Planet, not to exceed $2,500,000 for demolition, site preparation, and installation of new playground equipment, surfacing, and amenities at eight (8) City playgrounds.

BACKGROUND
In 2024, the City of Shasta Lake was awarded $2,500,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding for the Playground Replacement Project. The purpose of the project is to replace outdated equipment, install improved surfacing, and provide new amenities at 8 parks across the city, including Akard Park, Claire Engle Park, Wynne Price Park, Blue Canyon Park, Shasta Park, Margaret Polf Park (2-5 playground and 5- 12 playground), and Bizz Johnson Park.

Community Engagement
Public input and community engagement began in January 2025, with a public workshop to gather input on design preferences and a community survey, which received 312 responses. The community’s feedback was consistent with requests for natural themes and neutral colors, accessible, inclusive play spaces, unique features differentiating at each site, an emphasis on slides, swings, climbers, and zip lines, and a need for shade and fencing where appropriate. Conceptual designs were prepared by Park Planet to reflect community input and site-specific conditions, which were brought to the Parks and 19 Recreation Commission for review in August 2025. Final designs have been provided by Park Planet, as well as a quote for demolition, site prep, and installation of new playground equipment, surfacing, and amenities.

Procurement and Contracting
To streamline procurement and ensure competitive pricing, staff proposes contracting with Park Associates, Inc., DBA Park Planet, through the California Multiple Award Schedules (CMAS) Program. CMAS is a cooperative purchasing agreement administered by the State of California. CMAS offers products and services at prices assessed as fair, reasonable, and competitive. The program creates a pre-qualified pool of suppliers, allowing local agencies to avoid lengthy bid processes while ensuring compliance with State procurement standards. The use of CMAS for this project ensures that the City obtains the best value for equipment, surfacing, and installation services, while maintaining efficiency in project delivery. The Park Planet quote covers the full project scope of demolition, site prep, equipment, surfacing, and amenities.

Council Action Requested
Staff requests that the City Council authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute a contract with Park Associates, Inc., DBA Park Planet, utilizing CMAS cooperative purchasing, for an amount not to exceed $2,500,000 for the demolition, site preparation, and installation of playground equipment, surfacing, and amenities at eight City playgrounds.

FISCAL IMPACTS:

Contract is funded entirely through CDBG grant funds, not to exceed $2,500,000

ATTACHMENTS
Resolution

DISTRIBUTION
City Council
20 RESOLUTION CC 2025-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHASTA LAKE

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER, OR DESIGNEE, TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH PARK ASSOCIATES, INC. DBA PARK PLANET FOR THE PLAYGROUND REPLACEMENT PROJECT, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $2,500,000 WHEREAS, the City of Shasta Lake was awarded $2,500,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding for the Playground Replacement Project to replace outdated equipment, install new surfacing, and add amenities at multiple City parks; and
WHEREAS, the project was reviewed with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission for public input on design and amenities; and WHEREAS, Park Associates, Inc. DBA Park Planet has provided a proposal for demolition, site preparation, and installation of equipment, surfacing, and amenities at eight (8) City playgrounds; and
WHEREAS, the California Multiple Award Schedules (CMAS) program is a State of California cooperative purchasing vehicle that creates a pool of suppliers offering products and services at prices assessed as fair, reasonable, and competitive; and WHEREAS, use of CMAS for this procurement complies with applicable City and grant procurement requirements for cooperative purchasing and will facilitate timely delivery of improvements at multiple sites; and
WHEREAS, the total contract amount shall not exceed $2,500,000 funded by the City’s awarded CDBG allocation.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Shasta Lake hereby authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to execute a contract with Park Associates, inc. DBA Park Planet for the Playground Replacement Project, in an amount not to exceed $2,500,000.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 21st day of October, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
_________________________________
PAMELYN MORGAN, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________

CHARITY TATLOW, CMC
City Clerk
21 22
Report and Recommendations 6.6 Reviewed and Approved

City Manager

AGENDA ITEM
City Council
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Kevin Estabrook, Electric Operations Manager

DATE: October 21, 2025
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION DECLARING MOUNTAIN ENTERPRISES, INC.

THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE, RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, AND

AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE SHASTA
LAKE ELECTRIC UTILITY TREE TRIMMING (BID NO. 2025-14)
FILE NO.:

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff requests City Council award City of Shasta Lake Electric Utility Tree Trimming Contract to Mountain Enterprises, Inc. of Folsom, CA, in the amount of $219,755.00. The contract is for one year, with a clause to extend the contract each year, up to a maximum of 4 more years (5 Total), with each year not to exceed five percent (5%) of the previous year.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Shasta Lake has approximately 60 miles of overhead electric distribution lines and 15 miles of electric transmission lines. We are required by statute to ensure that trees and other vegetation are clear of City electric lines by specified distances per the City Vegetation Management Plan. This ensures public safety, reduces fire hazards, and helps eliminate potential power outages. It is our practice to have a private line clearance contractor bid to perform the tree trimming. This work is completed annually.

In September, the City went out for bids, and seven (7) bids were received on October 7, 2025. The bids ranged from a low responsive bid of $219,755.00 to a high responsive bid of $836,362.00. The lowest responsive bid was about 36% lower than the Engineer’s Estimate of $300,000.00. A Bid Summary is attached.
23 FISCAL IMPACTS:

This contract is funded through currently budgeted Maintenance Agreements (520-320- 5375).

ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution
Bid Summary
DISTRIBUTION:

City Council
24 RESOLUTION CC 2025-XX
______________________________________________________________________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHASTA LAKE CITY COUNCIL TO DECLARE MOUNTAIN ENTERPRISES, INC. THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE, RESPONSIBLE BIDDER, AND ENTER INTO A CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $219,755.00, WITH

OPTION FOR RENEWAL EACH YEAR FOR UP TO FOUR MORE YEARS
______________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, the City advertised competitive bids starting September 10, 2025; and WHEREAS, the City opened seven (7) competitive bids on October 7, 2025; and WHEREAS, the lowest responsive, responsible bidder was Mountain Enterprises, Inc. of Folsom, CA, with a bid of $219,755.00.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Shasta Lake City Council hereby declares Mountain Enterprises, Inc. of Folsom, CA, the lowest responsive bidder and authorizes staff to award the City of Shasta Lake Electric Utility Tree Trimming Contract to Mountain Enterprises, Inc., with an option for renewal each year for up to four more years.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 21st day of October, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
_______________________________
PAMELYN ANNE MORGAN, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________

CHARITY TATLOW, CMC
City Clerk
25 26
License No. 842929 License No. 1028028
DIR No. 1000005328 DIR No. 1000050957
Item # Description Est. Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Unit Price Total Unit Price Total 1 1 Year Tree Trimming Contract with a clause to extend contract each year, up to a maximum of 4 more years with each year not to exceed 5% of previous year. 1 LS $300,000.00 $300,000.00 $219,755.00 $219,755.00 $219,880.00 $219,880.00 Subcontractor(s): None None
License No. 1100816 License No. 903751 License No. 879689 DIR No. 1000007267 DIR No. 1000462457 DIR No. 1000454967 Item # Description Est. Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Unit Price Total Unit Price Total 1 1 Year Tree Trimming Contract with a clause to extend contract each year, up to a maximum of 4 more years with each year not to exceed 5% of previous year. 1 LS $291,200.00 $291,200.00 $329,156.00 $329,156.00 $373,998.00 $373,998.00 Subcontractor(s): None None None
License No. 1063954 License No. 1138637
DIR No. 1000582541 DIR No. 2000015491
Item # Description Est. Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Unit Price Total 1 1 Year Tree Trimming Contract with a clause to extend contract each year, up to a maximum of 4 more years with each year not to exceed 5% of previous year. 1 LS $510,943.39 $510,943.39 $836,362.80 $836,362.80 Subcontractor(s): None None
Shasta Lake Electric Tree Trimming Contract
Bid No. 2025-14
Bid Opening Date: October 07, 2025
Mountain F Enterprises, Inc.

Tree Service King, Inc. Skyline Tree Enterprise
Engineers Estimate
Good Fellers Tree Service
Community Tree Service, LLC.

Arbor Pros, LLC.

Utility Tree Service, LLC.
27 28
Report and Recommendations 8.1 Reviewed and Approved

City Manager

AGENDA ITEM
City Council
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Shadrack Boone, Animal Control Supervisor
DATE: October 21, 2025
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION – ANIMAL CONTROL

OPERATIONS AND TRAP-NEUTER-RETURN (TNR) PROGRAM

EVALUATION
FILE NO.:

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council review the information provided on feral cat management and Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) practices, and offer direction to staff regarding any future City policies or program modifications. Based on current analysis, City staff does not recommend implementing a Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) program within the City of Shasta Lake.

BACKGROUND
City staff previously presented a report to the City Council on February 7, 2023, outlining the Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) program, including its potential benefits, drawbacks, and staff’s recommendation at that time not to proceed with program implementation. The City Council unanimously concurred with staff’s recommendation. On July 15, 2025, in response to citizen concerns, the City Council requested that staff revisit and present the topic of TNR for further discussion.

TNR programs are promoted as humane methods for controlling community cat populations. The process involves trapping, sterilizing, and vaccinating feral cats before returning them to their outdoor habitats. Some studies have reported reductions of up to 66% in colony size and 77% in shelter euthanasia rates when TNR is performed intensely and continuously over several years.

However, recent evidence and regional outcomes indicate that the effectiveness of TNR depends heavily on long-term funding, intensive colony monitoring, and strict 29 enforcement, all of which present significant operational and ecological challenges for smaller jurisdictions such as the City of Shasta Lake.

REGIONAL EXPERIENCE
Neighboring agencies, including the City of Anderson, have reported substantial difficulties managing feral cat populations despite TNR activity. Anderson staff documented that feral cats and associated feeding sites have created public nuisance conditions—particularly at Anderson River Park—including unsanitary accumulations of waste, attraction of wildlife, and increased public complaints.

Local rescue groups also reported a rapid rise in cat dumping, with up to eight new cats per day appearing at high-traffic areas, overwhelming available rescue resources. These findings suggest that TNR programs can unintentionally enable population growth when abandonment and feeding continue unchecked.

NATIONAL DATA AND ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS
As of 2025, experts estimate between 60 and 100 million stray and feral cats live in the United States—up from approximately 44 million in 2014.

Key ecological and biological factors include:
• Reproduction: A single intact female can produce ~1.4 litters annually, averaging three kittens each, though many do not survive beyond six months. • Lifespan: The average feral cat lives 2–3 years, compared to 12–15 years for domesticated cats.
• Predation: Feral cats kill an estimated 1.4–3.7 billion birds and 6.9–20.7 billion small mammals each year in the U.S. and have been linked to the decline of at least 27 native species.
• Disease Transmission: Feral cats are the definitive host for the parasite Toxoplasma gondii, which poses risks to wildlife and human health through fecal contamination.
• Long-term ecological studies show that free-roaming cat colonies disrupt native ecosystems, alter predator-prey balances, and reduce biodiversity.

FIVE-YEAR COST ESTIMATE
Based on operational data and typical service rates for the Shasta region, the estimated five-year municipal cost of managing a structured TNR program for approximately 356 cats per year is summarized below:

Category Five-Year Estimate
Spay/Neuter Procedures $106,800
Vaccinations $21,360
30 Category Five-Year Estimate
Staffing (Animal Control Officers) $145,132
Supervisor Oversight $203,684
Transportation (Vet Care/Transfers) $49,680
Total Estimated Cost $526,656
Note: This estimate excludes wage escalation, emergency veterinary expenses, and after-hours responses. Actual costs exceed $600,000 over a five-year period.

STAFF ANALYSIS
While TNR may lower shelter intake under ideal conditions, staff identifies the following concerns for City implementation:
• Environmental Impact: Feral cats significantly harm native birds and small mammal populations. Their ongoing presence in sensitive areas could threaten local biodiversity and disrupt ecological balance.
• Public Nuisance: Feeding and colony sites often attract additional wildlife, generate odor and sanitation complaints, and create conflict among residents and businesses.
• Fiscal Sustainability: A City-managed TNR program would require long-term funding, staffing, and oversight commitments exceeding available Animal Control resources.
• Legal and Property Issues: Colony management on private property presents enforcement and access challenges. TNR on public land requires clear governance and liability protection.
• Disease and Health Risks: Outdoor colonies may increase the transmission of zoonotic diseases (e.g., toxoplasmosis, rabies) to wildlife, pets, and humans.

Given these factors, staff concludes that TNR would not provide a balanced or sustainable solution for the City of Shasta Lake’s animal control objectives. Additionally, the City does not currently have a budget to deploy such a program. Therefore, staff does not recommend implementing a TNR program at this time.

FISCAL IMPACTS:

There is no fiscal impact associated with providing this report. However, if the City Council directs staff to implement a TNR program within the City of Shasta Lake, a detailed fiscal impact analysis would be required. Program implementation would likely necessitate ordinance amendments and could require additional staffing resources.

ATTACHMENTS
None
31 DISTRIBUTION
City Manager
City Attorney
Finance Department
32 Pros of T.N.R
• With the average female cat having at least three litters a year with an average litter size of five. Gestation is only about two months. Cats can become pregnant as early as four to six months of age. Kittens born in the spring can have their own litters by fall. Spay, neuter, vaccination and ear tipping of community feral cats help stabilize and improve the health of outdoor cat populations. The key benefit of TNR is preventing the birth of the growing population of community cats thus reducing the burden on rescues, shelters, and the community. o Nationally, 900,000 cats were brought into animal shelters in 2020, of which 11% were euthanized, due to a lack of space and adoptable homes. Feral Cats, that are surrendered to shelters, face nearly 100% euthanasia because they are generally not adoptable. The benefits of a TNR’d community cat colony include healthy vaccinated cats, a stable colony size, a controlled population with no new kittens, cat-provided rodent control, and increased lifesaving of cats across the county. TNR reduces the population of community cats in the area and creates a healthier environment for the cats living in the colonies.
• TNRM is the method of humanely trapping community cats, having them spayed or neutered and vaccinated against rabies, and then returning them to their managed location to live out their lives. TNRM also involves a cat caretaker who provides food and monitors the cats' wellbeing as well as identifying and quickly trapping new intact cats. TNRM has been shown to be the most humane, efficient way of stabilizing community cat populations. By sterilizing at least 75% of cats in a group within a six-month period (and continuing to sterilize at least 75% of the remaining intact cats), TNRM helps stabilize the population of community cats and, over time, reduce the number of cats. The goal is to sterilize all cats present and monitor the location for any intact newcomers. Nuisance behaviors such as spraying, excessive noisemaking and fighting are also largely eliminated and no additional kittens are born
• By stabilizing the population, cats will naturally have more space, shelter and food and fewer risks of disease. After being spayed or neutered, cats living in a managed group tend to gain weight and live healthier lives. Spayed cats are less likely to develop breast cancer and will not be at risk for ovarian or uterine cancer, while neutered males will not get testicular cancer.

Neutering male cats also reduces the risk of injury and infection, since intact males have a natural instinct to fight with other cats. Spaying also means female cats do not go into heat. That means they attract fewer tom cats to the area, which reduces fighting and mating.
o San Francisco Bay Area, a total of 258 cats were recorded in the program area during the 16-year program period ending in June 2020. Approximately half (130/259) of the cats resided in Zone A, 9.7% (25/259) in Zone B, and

40.2% (104/259) in Zone C; one cat spent time living in two zones, migrating from Zone B to Zone C after 1.8 years. Overall, of cats whose sex was identified, 50.5% (107/212) were male and 49.5% (105/212) were female; the sex of 46 cats (17.8%) was undocumented. Of cats for whom an age category was assigned at enrollment, 74% (154/208) were adults and 26% (54/208) were kittens; no age category was recorded for 50 cats (19.4%). o The average number of cats enrolled in the program per year was 15.2 (median: 3; range: 0–175); however, when the 175 cats included as part of the initial census are excluded, the average number of cats enrolled on an annual basis was 5.2 (median: 3; range: 0–27). Of the 83 cats who were enrolled after the initial census, 63% (41/65) of 33 those for which an age category was recorded were adults and 37% were kittens (24/65); no age category was recorded for 18 of these cats.
o As of June 2020, 1 of the 258 cats enrolled in the program (<1%) remained on-site (Figure 1); 107 (41%) had been adopted; 10 (4%) were admitted into foster care; 10 (4%) were relocated to barns or other sites as part of working cat programs; 60 (23%) disappeared; 35 (14%) were euthanized due to serious illness or injury; 31 (12%) were confirmed to have died from causes other than euthanasia (e.g., struck by a vehicle and body recovered); and 4 (2%) were known to have migrated out of the program area (3 such cats were drawn to the trail for a short time in 2019— a matter of a week or two—by an unauthorized feeder, but left the program area once the unsanctioned feeding was stopped)
Cons of T.N.R
• The average life expectancy of an outdoor cat is just 1 to 5 years, compared to 12 to 20 years for a cat kept indoors. So when people turn cats loose, they aren’t doing them any favors. Some worry that animals sent to shelters may be euthanized, but the very definition of euthanasia is “good death.” On the streets, cats’ deaths are inevitably bad, filled with pain and suffering. They die slowly of untreated illness, injury, infection, dehydration, or exposure. They get hit by cars, attacked by predators (including cruel humans), poisoned, or shot or meet other terrible fates. o As “subsidized predators” (i.e., predators fed by humans), cats can far exceed the carrying capacity of a habitat, making them even more lethal than native predators. Feeding them doesn’t stop them from hunting, something tacitly acknowledged by those who promote releasing cats to serve as “mousers” (while downplaying that cats will also hunt, maim, terrorize, and kill birds and other animals). o And then there’s the inconvenient truth that TNR doesn’t even work. On the contrary, it actually encourages more people to abandon their cats because they think the animals will be cared for. The food set out for “managed” colonies also attracts more cats (as well as wildlife, including rabies-vector species). As many people who put out food for cats know, new cats (as well as possums, foxes, raccoons, and even rats) often show up at mealtimes.
• Horrific fates await most homeless cats—they do not die of old age. If you have a cat at home, you know that veterinary care is a necessity. Cats get heart disease, leukemia, bladder problems, ear infections, and more. Imagine if your cat were outdoors and you did not know that he or she was in trouble. Or imagine if, upon seeing an obvious symptom, you could not catch your cat to provide treatment. Contagious diseases such as rhinotracheitis, feline AIDS, and rabies are common in “outdoor cats,” who also sustain puncture wounds, broken bones, brain damage, or loss of an eye or limb after they are attacked by other animals or hit by cars.
o Although altering feral cats prevents future generations from suffering, it does not protect cats from the litany of other problems that they may encounter. Allowing feral cats to continue their daily struggle for survival in a hostile environment is rarely a humane option.
o We believe that it can be marginally acceptable to trap, vaccinate, alter, and release feral cats when the cats are isolated from roads, people, and animals who could harm them, are regularly attended to by people who not only feed them but also provide them with veterinary care, and are kept in areas where they do not have access to wildlife and the weather is temperate. The biggest problem is that most cats, once they are caught to be sterilized, will not be able to be lured by traps again when they are sick or injured 34 • Free-roaming cat populations have been identified as a significant public health threat and are a source for several zoonotic diseases including rabies, toxoplasmosis, cutaneous larval migrants because of various nematode parasites, plague, tularemia and murine typhus. Several of these diseases are reported to cause mortality in humans and can cause other important health issues including abortion, blindness, pruritic skin rashes and other various symptoms. o A recent case of rabies in a young girl from California that likely was transmitted by a free-roaming cat underscores that free-roaming cats can be a source of zoonotic diseases. Increased attention has been placed on trap–neuter– release (TNR) programs as a viable tool to manage cat populations. However, some studies have shown that TNR leads to increased immigration of unneutered cats into neutered populations as well as increased kitten survival in neutered groups.
o These compensatory mechanisms in neutered groups leading to increased kitten survival and immigration would confound rabies vaccination campaigns and produce naive populations of cats that can serve as source of zoonotic disease agents owing to lack of immunity.

Biodiversity Impact Review
• The most direct way in which domestic cats influence wildlife is through predation. This is perhaps also the most significant way, given the high numbers and densities of cats in many areas, coupled with their hunting instinct, which can be strong even in well-fed pet cats (Coman & Brunner, 1972). Cats are opportunistic hunters, and prey items include a wide range of animals, including birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish, and invertebrates like butterflies and dragonflies. To illustrate, the 14,370 prey items brought home by a sample of 986 British pet cats in a 5-month survey period in 2003 included 20 mammal species (e.g. mice, voles, shrews, squirrels, stoats, rabbits and bats), 44 bird species, four reptile and three amphibian species and some invertebrates (Woods, McDonald, & Harris, 2003). To provide another example, a recent citizen science survey in Italy rendered records of 2,042 animals killed by 145 cats, involving no less than 207 different species (Mori et al., 2019). Whereas most cat prey tends to consist of small animals, domestic cats have been documented to prey on medium-sized animals weighing up to 4 kg (e.g. Fancourt, 2015).
• An indirect way in which prey species can be affected by free-ranging domestic cats is through disturbance or fear effects caused by the cats’ mere appearance, presence or scent. As documented in a range of studies reviewed by Loss and Marra (2017), such fear or intimidation effects can influence foraging and defence behaviours, stress responses, energy income and body condition, vulnerability to other predators, and reproductive investment and output. For instance, Bonnington, Gaston, and Evans (2013) found that even briefly confronting blackbirds Turdus merula with a taxidermied cat near their nest reduced subsequent feeding of the young by one-third, and significantly increased the risk of subsequent nest predation by corvids. Another indirect impact is competition, 35 which occurs when domestic cats exploit the same food, space and/or shelter as other species. For example, every mouse eaten by a cat cannot be eaten by a hawk (George, 1974). Domestic cats can, furthermore, impact wildlife through disease transmission. A broad range of vertebrates can be affected by cat-transmitted diseases like toxoplasmosis, rabies or feline leukaemia (Dubey, 2002; Gerhold & Jessup, 2013; Hartley & Dubey, 1991; Loss & Marra, 2017; Work et al., 2000).
https://humanesocietycc.org/services/trap-neuter-return/benefits-of-trap-neuter-return.html https://humanepro.org/page/community-cats-scientific-studies-and-data https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/10/11/2089
https://www.peta.org/features/does-tnr-really-save-cats/ https://www.peta.org/about-peta/why-peta/feral-cats/
https://abcbirds.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Gerhold-and-Jessup-2012-Zoonotic-diseases-and-free-roaming-cats.pdf https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10073 36 Report and Recommendations 8.2 Reviewed and Approved

City Manager

AGENDA ITEM
City Council
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Whitney Zeller, Community and Economic Development Manager

DATE: October 21, 2025
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO ADOPT THE CITY OF

SHASTA LAKE AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING MARKETING

PLAN (AFHMP)
FILE NO.:

RECOMMENDATION
Staff is requesting City Council review and adopt the City of Shasta Lake Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan (AFHMP), maintaining the City’s good standing with HCD, and compliance with the City’s Housing Element.

BACKGROUND
In August 2025, the City’s Housing Element was reviewed by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for implementation status and compliance. After working with staff, and completion of the review, HCD issued a Letter of Inquiry with their findings. HCD’s review found that the City has made exceptional progress in meeting its Housing Element goals – with many more to be addressed in the ongoing Development Code Update – and identified adoption of an Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan as the remaining item necessary to bring the City into full compliance.

The AFHMP was prepared by staff in alignment with HCD and HUD guidance. The plan formalizes the City’s approach to promoting fair housing choice, ensuring access to housing opportunities, and affirmatively furthering fair housing consistent with Assembly Bill 686.
37 Key Topics of the AFHMP
The Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan outlines the City’s proactive strategies to expand access to housing information and opportunities for all residents – particularly those who have been historically underrepresented or “least likely to apply” without targeted outreach.

Key sections of the document include:

Purpose and Scope – Establishes the city’s commitment to fair and equal housing access for all residents.

Targeted Marketing & Outreach Plan – identifies outreach strategies, including multilingual materials, digital and print media, and partnerships with local service providers.

Limited English Proficiency (LEP) & Accessibility Plan – Describes translation, interpretation, and accessibility procedures to ensure meaningful participation.

Promoting Affordable Development – Documents zoning tools and ordinances that expand affordable housing opportunities, including the City’s enhanced Density Bonus Ordinance and ADU policies.

Community Contacts – Lists partnerships with organizations, including Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California, the Far Northern Regional Center, and Northern Valley Catholic Social Services.

Staff Training & Compliance – Establishes a framework for collaboration and internal compliance oversight.

Collectively, these components satisfy the requirements of Government Code 65583 and HUD’s fair housing marketing standards.

Consequences of Noncompliance
As noted in HCD’s correspondence, failure to adopt and implement an Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan may result in the City’s Housing Element being deemed out of compliance. Potential consequences could include ineligibility or delay in receiving State housing and infrastructure funds, referral to the California Office of the Attorney General for enforcement, and Court-imposed financial penalties.

Adoption of the AFHMP demonstrates the City’s continued compliance and reinforces its commitment to best housing practices.

FISCAL IMPACTS:

No fiscal impact
38 ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
Draft Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing
Plan

DISTRIBUTION
City Council
39 RESOLUTION CC 2025-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHASTA LAKE

ADOPTING THE CITY OF SHASTA LAKE AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING

MARKETING PLAN
WHEREAS, the State of California requires that each jurisdiction adopt and implement a Housing Element that complies with California Government Code Sections 65580 through 65589.11, demonstrating a local commitment to plan for and facilitate the development of housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community; and WHEREAS, the City of Shasta Lake adopted its 2020-2028 Housing Element, which was found in substantial compliance with State Housing Element Law by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on September 11, 2020; and
WHEREAS, HCD completed a follow-up Housing Element Implementation Review on August 27, 2025, identifying Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing as a remaining program action required to maintain compliance, directing the City to develop and adopt an Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan consistent with State and Federal fair housing standards; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan establishes clear procedures and ensures that housing opportunities are accessible to all residents, regardless of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, disability, income, or language proficiency, and that information about housing programs is communicated through equitable means; and
WHEREAS, adoption of the Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan demonstrates the City’s continued leadership in housing policy implementation and ensures the City remains eligible for State funding programs administered by HCD and other state agencies.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Shasta Lake hereby adopts the City of Shasta Lake Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan, as the City’s official policy for fair housing outreach and compliance.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 21st day of October, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
_______________________________
PAMELYN ANNE MORGAN, Mayor
40 ATTEST:
____________________________

CHARITY TATLOW, CMC
City Clerk
41 42

CITY OF SHASTA LAKE

AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING MARKETING PLAN - DRAFT
OCTOBER 2025
43 CITY OF SHASTA LAKE - AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING MARKETING PLAN 2

PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The City of Shasta Lake has prepared this AFHMP to ensure that all residents – regardless of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, disability, age, sexual orientation, or source of income – have fair and equal access to housing opportunities within the City.

This plan covers City-administered housing programs and applies to any City-funded or Cityfacilitated affordable-housing developments.

The AFHMP fulfills the City’s duty to affirmatively further fair housing (AB 686) and aligns with the Housing Element goals of reducing disparities in access to opportunity and preventing displacement.
44 CITY OF SHASTA LAKE - AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING MARKETING PLAN 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
• City Background and Market Area…………………………………………………………………… 4 • Demographics…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
• Programs……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8
• Targeted Marketing and Outreach Plan……………………………………………………………. 9 • Limited English Proficiency (LEP) and Accessibility Plan……………………………………. 10 • Promoting Affordable Development………………………………………………………………… 10 • Community Contacts……………………………………………………………………………………. 11 • Staff Training and Compliance…………………………………………………………………......... 12 • Public Access and Updates……………………………………………………………………………. 12

APPENDICIES
• Shasta Lake 2020 – 2028 Housing Element
45 CITY OF SHASTA LAKE - AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING MARKETING PLAN 4

CITY BACKGROUND & MARKETING AREA
The City of Shasta Lake is located just north of the City of Redding, in Shasta County. The City originated from five small communities: Central Valley, Project City, Pine Grove, Summit City, and a federal government-built community called Toyon. These communities were established during the construction of Shasta Dam, beginning in 1938. The workers at Shasta Dam built these communities to provide low-cost homes for their families while working on the dam. Homes built during this era (1930s/1940s) are often referred to as “dam houses”.

Through the 1960s and 1970s, the population grew at a slow pace. Population figures for the unincorporated communities in the 1980s consisted of 3,824 people in Central Valley, 1,659 people in Project City, and 1,139 people in Summit City. With increasing growth in each area, discussions of city-wide incorporation began to materialize in 1993. On July 2, 1993, 60 percent of the residents voted for incorporation, and the five small communities were merged to establish the city of Shasta Lake. Today, the City has a population of approximately 10,000 and has a total area of 10.8 square miles.

The City of Shasta Lake continues to look for ways to enable affordable housing opportunities for our residents. As a boomtown, our housing was created as workers' housing, not intended for long-term use. Some of the old Dam houses are still being occupied today. It is a challenge for our city to create safe housing when many homes are approaching 50+ years old.

MARKETING AREA
The City’s marketing area is defined as the area within Shasta Lake City Limits, mapped below. 46 CITY OF SHASTA LAKE - AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING MARKETING PLAN 5

DEMOGRAPHICS
Age Distribution Total %
0-4 546 5.41
5-9 638 6.32
10-19 1243 12.31
20-29 1063 10.53
30-39 1466 14.52
40-49 1285 12.72
50-59 1222 12.1
60-64 733 7.26
65+ 1905 18.86
Median Age

39.65 Sex Total %
Male 5016 49.67
Female 5083 50.33
Ethnicity Distribution Total %
White (non-hispanic) 7902 78.25
Black (non-hispanic) 87 0.86
American Indian (non-hispanic) 168 1.66
Asian (non-hispanic) 285 2.82
Pacific Islander (non-hispanic) 8 0.08
Other (non-hispanic) 28 0.28
Multirace (non-hispanic) 552 5.47
Hispanic 1069 10.59
Race Distribution Total %
White 8342 82.6
Black 90 0.89
American Indian 217 2.15
Asian 291 2.88
Pacific Islander 10 0.10
Other 254 2.52
Multirace 895 8.86
Population 10,099
47 CITY OF SHASTA LAKE - AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING MARKETING PLAN 6 Education Attainment Total %
< Grade 9 184 2.57
Grade 9-12 440 6.14
High School 2172 30.29
Some College 2375 33.12
Assoc Degree 884 12.33
Bach Degree 843 11.76
Grad Degree 272 3.79
Labor Force Status Total %
Labor Force 4938 n/a
Employed 4604 93.24
Unemployed 334 6.76
In Armed Forces 0 n/a
Not In Labor Force 3188 n/a
Total Households Total %
Households 3983
Families 2730 68.54
Median Household Income Shasta Lake County
Median Household Income $65,650 $101,800
Household Income Distribution Total %
<$10 K 275 6.90
$10-$20K 292 7.33
$20-$30K 513 12.88
$30-$40K 259 6.50
$40-$50K 268 6.73
$50-$60K 239 6.00
$60-$75K 388 9.74
$75-$100K 634 15.92
> $100K 1114 27.97
Total Number of Housing Total %
Total Dwellings 4394
Owner-Occupied Dwellings 2746 68.94
Renter-Occupied Dwellings 1237 31.06
Housing Units Occupied 3983 90.64
48 CITY OF SHASTA LAKE - AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING MARKETING PLAN 7 Size of Household Total %
1 Person 918 23.05
2 Person 1638 41.12
3 Person 573 14.39
4 Person 398 9.99
5 Person 258 6.48
6+ Person 110 2.76
Means of Transportation to Work Total %
Drove alone 3640 79.04
Carpool 556 12.07
Bus or trolley bus 56 1.12
Long-distance train or commuter rail 0 NA
Light rail or streetcar or trolley car 0 NA
Ferryboat 0 NA
Taxicab 0 NA
Motorcycle 17 0.37
Bicycle 36 0.78
Walked 53 1.15
Other means 37 0.80
Worked at home 210 4.56
49 CITY OF SHASTA LAKE - AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING MARKETING PLAN 8

PROGRAMS
The City aggressively seeks funding for ongoing programs to increase affordable housing stock and improve existing housing stock for low and moderate-income persons. With the elimination of the Redevelopment Agency, the City has had to rely on State and Federal funding sources to continue program operations. The City has continued to leverage these funding sources to operate programs dedicated to the improvement of housing for low and moderate-income households, including the following:

FIRST TIME HOMEBUYER PROGRAM
The Homebuyer Program (HP) promotes homeownership for low-income, first-time homebuyers. Assistance is in the form of a deferred loan (second mortgage), due and payable when the property is sold, transferred, or at the end of the loan term.

Funding Opportunities: CalHOME, HOME, and City RDA Program Income Administrative Opportunities: The City has a longstanding relationship with Shasta County Housing and will work with them to leverage opportunities to fund and administer homebuyer programs available to Shasta Lake residents.

HOUSING REHABILITATION PROGRAM
The Housing Rehabilitation is intended to preserve the quality of housing owned and occupied by low and moderate-income families and to continue to expand and revitalize neighborhoods within the City. The City of Shasta Lake Owner-Occupied and Tenant-Occupied Rehabilitation Program provides low-interest loans to qualified low and moderate-income homeowners.

Funding Opportunities: CalHOME, CDBG, and City RDA Program Income Administrative Opportunities: The City has a longstanding relationship with Shasta County Housing and will work with them to leverage opportunities to fund and administer housing rehabilitation programs available to Shasta Lake residents.

All Program materials contain the following fair housing symbol and message:

This program is available to all persons regardless of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, handicap, or familial status.
(Reasonable accommodation will be made for those with disabilities). 50 CITY OF SHASTA LAKE - AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING MARKETING PLAN 9

TARGETED MARKETING & OUTREACH PLAN
The City is committed to ensuring that information about its housing programs and opportunities reaches all members of the community – especially those who have been historically underserved or are least likely to apply without targeted outreach. The City’s outreach strategy focuses on building awareness, trust, and participation among diverse populations by using a combination of traditional and digital media, multilingual materials, and collaboration with local service providers, advocacy organizations, and community leaders. Each effort is designed to affirmatively further fair housing by reducing barriers, expanding access to opportunity, and promoting participation in City programs and housing opportunities.

MEDIA PLAN
A variety of media outlets will be used to ensure broad distribution of housing information. This plan outlines how the City will publicize housing opportunities through print, radio, digital, and community-based channels.

Channel Outlet/Platform Language Frequency
Print Intermountain News English/Spanish Quarterly (As programs/projects are available)
Radio KRRX 106 X FM, KZRO
Z100.1 FM, and Q97
English Quarterly (As programs/projects
are available)
Digital City Website, Facebook,
Instagram, and
Newsflash Alerts
English/Spanish
Caption
Quarterly (As programs/projects
are available)
Transit/Flyers Local Bulletin Boards and
RABA Route 1
English/Spanish Quarterly (As programs/projects
are available)

COMMUNITY AND PARTNER OUTREACH
The city partners with trusted local organizations to expand the reach and impact of its housing programs. By collaborating with service providers, advocacy groups, cultural organizations, and community leaders, the City ensures that housing information is shared through familiar and accessible channels.

Partner Organization Target
Population
Outreach Method Frequency
Fair Housing
Advocates of Northern
CA
General Public
& Tenants
Cross-promote
flyers, referrals
Quarterly (as programs/projects
are available)
Far Northern Regional
Center
Persons with
Disabilities
Direct mail, case
manager distribution
Quarterly (as programs/projects
are available)
Redding
Rancheria/Wintu Tribe
Native
American
Households
Tribal newsletter,
events
Quarterly (as programs/projects
are available)
Northern Valley
Catholic Social
Services (NVCSS)
LEP Spanishspeaking
families &
General Public
Flyers, classes, ESL
events
Quarterly (as programs/projects
are available)
Veterans Resource
Center of Shasta
County
Veterans Tabling, brochure
distribution
Quarterly (as programs/projects
are available)
51 CITY OF SHASTA LAKE - AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING MARKETING PLAN 10

LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY (LEP) &

ACCESSIBILITY PLAN
The City recognizes that meaningful access to housing information and services must be made available to all residents, regardless of language or ability. This section outlines the City’s commitment to providing translated materials, interpretation services, and accessible formats to ensure that individuals with limited English proficiency and persons with disabilities can fully understand, apply for, and participate in City housing programs. To achieve this, the following strategies will be implemented:

Translate core marketing materials into any language spoken by ≥ 5 percent or 1,000 residents, whichever is less, within the service area.

Primary languages currently identified: English, Spanish, Hmong, etc.

Interpretation services will be available upon request.

Materials will be provided in large print, screen-reader-friendly PDFs, and alternative formats upon request.

PROMOTING AFFORDABLE DEVELOPMENT
The City has implemented the following mechanisms to eliminate barriers and promote affordable development:

DENSITY BONUS ORDINANCES THAT EXPAND ON STATE REPLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS In July, 2019, the City of Shasta Lake amended Chapter 17.81 Affordable Housing, Section 050 Density Bonus – Allowing an Increased Bonus Limit: - This change allowed the City to remove the upper limit of density bonuses granted to affordable housing projects with the approval of a use permit per California Government Code Section 65915(n). This change also fulfilled portions of Implementation Programs 1.10 and 1.13 of the City of Shasta Lake’s Housing Element, which has been certified by the State of California’s Housing and Community Development Department.

Government Code (GC) Section 65915(n) allows cities to grant density bonuses to affordable housing projects above what is mandated by the GC. It states, “if permitted by local ordinance, nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a city, county, or city and county from granting a density bonus greater than what is described in this section for a development that meets the requirements of this section or from granting a proportionately lower density bonus than what is required by this section for developments that do not meet the requirements of this section.”
The ordinance change allowed the City to increase the density bonus above what is required by the Government Code, where a project meets the City’s Housing Element goals and policies. 52 CITY OF SHASTA LAKE - AFFIRMATIVE FAIR HOUSING MARKETING PLAN 11

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
The City of Shasta Lake adopted accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinances and other mechanisms that reduce barriers for property owners to create ADUs beyond the requirements outlined in GC Section 65852.2, including:
a. Parking reductions to 0.75 or fewer spaces per accessory dwelling unit in areas not already exempt from parking, pursuant to GC Section 65852.2; The City of Shasta Lake adopted that no additional parking shall be required if the ADU is part of a proposed or existing primary residence or accessory structure. b. Processing and Impact fee waivers or reductions of 50 percent or more; the City of Shasta Lake does not require impact fees for ADUs.
c. The City of Shasta Lake authorizes ministerial approval in fewer than 45 days. d. The City of Shasta Lake allows reduction or modifications of development standards for side yard backsets to five feet or less.
e. The City of Shasta Lake allows for reduction or modification of development standards to two-story heights; The City of Shasta Lake does not prohibit two-story ADU, and additionally, in 2019, by ordinance, increased the residential accessory building height limits to 22’ or more. f. The City of Shasta Lake requires 20 percent open space on a lot; therefore, 80 percent is developable, which is above the state standard of 60 percent or more lot coverage. g. The City of Shasta Lake does not have any minimum lot size. h. The City of Shasta Lake does not record an affordability covenant on ADU’s, by reducing barriers and not charging impact fees, the City encourages the development of ADU’s to increase our available housing stock.

COMMUNITY CONTACTS
The City will work with the following community contacts, as appropriate, to facilitate outreach to targeted populations:

Targeted Population Community Contact
Section 8 Housing Choice
Voucher Holders

SHASTA COUNTY HOUSING & COMMUNITY ACTION
1450 COURT STREET, STE. 108, REDDING, CA 96001,
(530) 225-5160; CO.SHASTA.CA.US

THE COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY HAS A HISTORY OF

WORKING WITH THE TARGETED POPULATION
Persons with Limited English
Proficiency
SHASTA COUNTY HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES –

COMMUNITY HEALTH ADVOCATES
2460 BRESLAUER WAY, REDDING, CA, 96001;
(530) 225-5164; [email protected]
CHAs ARE PART OF A HHS OUTREACH UNITS WITHIN

REGIONAL SERVICES THAT PROVIDE SUPPORT AND
53 i

PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK
6 54
ii

PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK
7 55
iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 3. Housing Element.................................................................................................................3-1

3.1. Why is Housing Important? ................................................................................................................................................................ 3-1

3.2. Statutory Requirements ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3-1

3.3. Quantified Objectives..............................................................................................................................................................................3-2

3.4. New Construction.......................................................................................................................................................................................3-2

3.5. Affordable Housing...................................................................................................................................................................................3-3

3.6. Preservation and Rehabilitation......................................................................................................................................................3-3

3.7. Adequate Infrastructure and Services.......................................................................................................................................3-3

3.7.1. Energy Conservation...........................................................................................................................................................................................3-3

3.8. Special Needs Housing.........................................................................................................................................................................3-4

3.9. Equal Opportunity Housing................................................................................................................................................................3-5

3.10. Housing Goals, Policies, and Implementation Actions.................................................................................................3-7 8 56
iv

PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK
9 57
3-1
SECTION 3. HOUSING ELEMENT
Note: Section numbers will change based upon overall General Plan update.

The City of Shasta Lake’s Housing Element serves to understand and analyze the City’s housing needs and to develop programs and policies that can help meet those identified needs. The Housing Element is a component of the City’s 2040 General Plan, which demonstrates that the City is adequately planning to meet the housing needs of everyone in the community and that the Housing Element is consistent with other elements of the General Plan.

This Housing Element includes seven goal statements. Under each goal statement, the Element sets out policies that amplify each goal statement. Implementation programs are listed at the end of the corresponding group of policies and describe briefly the proposed action, the City department with primary responsibility for carrying out the program, the funding source, and the time frame for accomplishing the program. Implementation programs also identify quantified objectives.

3.1. Why is Housing Important?
Providing adequate housing for all residents is a
priority for the City of Shasta Lake as to
California as a whole. The State has declared
that “the availability of housing is a matter of
vital statewide importance and the attainment
of decent housing and a suitable living
environment for all Californians is a priority of
the highest order.” (Cal. Gov’t Code §65580)
The ability of a city to provide housing for all its
residents centers on affordability. Affordability
often measures housing cost in relation to gross
household income: households spending more
than 30 percent of their income, including
utilities, are generally considered to be overpaying or cost burdened. Severe overpaying occurs when households pay 50 percent or more of their gross income for housing. See the Housing Element Background Report for more information on affordability in Shasta Lake. Cities can play an important role in ensuring adequate housing for all residents in their communities, through planning, regulatory, and incentivizing means.

3.2. Statutory Requirements
State law requires local government plans to address the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community through their housing elements. The purpose of the housing element is to identify the community’s housing needs, to state the community’s goals and objectives with regard to housing production, rehabilitation, and conservation to meet those needs, and to define the policies and programs that the community will implement to achieve the stated goals and objectives.

Figure 3-1. Construction of New Housing, photo by Andrew Bowen, KPBS.org 10 58
3-2
Under California law, Cal. Gov’t Code § 65583(a), the housing element must include the community's goals, policies, quantified objectives and housing programs for the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing. State law requires cities and counties to address the needs of all income groups in their housing elements. The official definition of these needs is provided by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for each city and county within its geographic jurisdiction. Beyond these income-based housing needs, the housing element must also address special needs groups, such as persons with disabilities and homeless persons. See the Housing Element Background Report for more information on state requirements.

3.3. Quantified Objectives
The information for the Quantified Objectives table is based primarily on trends in building permit activity as modified by the economic climate. The City will be implementing new policies designed to accelerate housing production and expects a small increase in development during the planning period.

Housing element law recognizes that in developing housing policy and programs, identified housing needs may exceed available resources and the community's ability to satisfy these needs. The quantified objectives of the housing element, therefore, need not be identical to the identified housing need, but should establish the maximum number of housing units that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved, or households assisted over an eight-year time frame.

Table 3-1. Quantified Objectives for the Planning Period Income Level
New
Construction Rehabilitation Conservation/Preservation Totals Extremely Low-Income 6 4 2 12
Very Low-Income 6 4 1 11
Low-Income 12 12 2 26
Moderate-Income 14 15 0 29
Above-Moderate 6 12 0 18
Total 44 47 5 96

3.4. New Construction
Every city and county in California is required to plan for its “fair share” of the statewide housing need.

The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is required to allocate each region’s share of the statewide housing need to Councils of Governments (COG) based on California Department of Finance (DOF) population projections and regional population forecasts used in preparing regional transportation plans. This process promotes the following objectives: increase the housing supply and mix of housing types, tenure, and affordability in all cities and counties within the region in an equitable manner; promote infill development and socioeconomic equity; protect environmental and 11 59
3-3
agricultural resources; encourage efficient development patterns; and promote an improved intraregional balance between jobs and housing.
1 The RHNA for Shasta Lake for the 2018 to 2028 projection period is 238 new housing units, including 28 extremely low-income units, 28 very low-income units, 39 low-income units, 42 moderate-income units, and 101 above moderate-income units. The City will strive to provide opportunities for a variety of housing types to be built to accommodate the RHNA. Based on existing zoning and General Plan designations, there is capacity to accommodate housing at a range of different densities.

3.5. Affordable Housing
Although Shasta Lake’s housing stock is considered relatively affordable by California standards, there is still a sizable demand for quality, affordable housing for a significant portion of Shasta Lake’s population. There is no best strategy for providing affordable housing in Shasta Lake. Most affordable housing projects require multiple subsidies to bridge the affordability gap. The City can address this need for affordable housing through obtaining State grant funding, by providing regulatory incentives for developers, and by forming partnerships with both the public and private sectors.

3.6. Preservation and Rehabilitation
While it is important to encourage the development of new affordable housing, reinvestment in the existing housing supply is equally important when financially feasible. It is often more cost effective and environmentally friendly to improve the existing housing stock, rather than demolishing a structure and rebuilding from scratch. It is also less disruptive to the neighborhood and preserves neighborhood character.

3.7. Adequate Infrastructure and Services
An essential foundation for housing development is adequacy of infrastructure and services, namely streets, water, sewer, drainage and dry utilities. This is particularly a concern in rural communities.

Demonstrating that a site has existing, or planned infrastructure and services is a foremost concern when evaluating potential housing development sites.

3.7.1. ENERGY CONSERVATION
Energy efficiency has direct application to affordable housing. The more money spent on energy, the less there is available for rent or mortgage payments. High energy costs have particularly detrimental effects on low-income households that do not have enough income or cash reserves to absorb energy cost increases and must choose between basic survival needs of food, clothing, and shelter. 1 Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 65580, 65583, 65585.
12 60
3-4

3.8. Special Needs Housing
Within the general population there are several groups of people who have special housing needs. These special needs can make it difficult for members of these groups to locate suitable housing. State law2 requires the Housing Element to address the needs of the following special needs groups:

Seniors. With the overall aging of society, the senior population (persons over 65 years of age) will increase in most communities. Consequently, the need for affordable and specialized housing for older residents will grow. Typical housing types that meet the needs of seniors include smaller attached or detached housing for independent living (both market-rate and affordable), mobile homes, second units, shared housing, age-restricted below-market-rate rental developments, congregate care facilities, life-care facilities, residential care homes, and skilled nursing homes.

Homeless Persons. Homeless individuals and families have the most immediate housing need of any group. They also have the most difficult housing needs to meet, due to both the diversity and complexity of the factors that lead to homelessness and the lack of dedicated State and Federal funding for homeless shelters and transitional housing.

Single-Parent Households. Single-parent households need affordable housing with childcare onsite or nearby, in proximity to schools, and with access to services. Large households with single parents may have difficulty finding appropriately sized housing. And despite fair housing laws and programs, discrimination against households with children may make it more difficult for this group to find adequate housing.

People with Disabilities. People with disabilities have a wide range of differing housing needs, depending on the type and severity of their disability as well as personal preference and lifestyle. “Barrier-free design” housing, accessibility modifications, proximity to services and transit, and group living opportunities represent some of the types of considerations and accommodations that are important in serving this need group. State law requires the Housing Element to consider the housing needs of residents with developmental disabilities.

Large Households. Large households, defined by State law as households with five or more persons, may have difficulties purchasing housing because large housing units are rarely affordable and rental units with three or more bedrooms may not be common in many communities.

Extremely Low-Income Households. Extremely low-income households are defined as households with incomes under 30 percent of the area median income. Extremely low-income households typically consist of minimum wage workers, seniors on fixed incomes, the disabled, and farmworkers. This income group is likely to live in overcrowded and substandard housing conditions. This group of households has specific housing needs that require greater government subsidies and assistance, housing with supportive services, and/or rental subsidies or vouchers. 2 Cal. Gov’t Code § 65583(a).
13 61
3-5
Farmworkers. Farmworkers tend to be relatively young, predominantly male, and Hispanic. While many of farmworkers are single men, some have family members accompanying them. Most farmworkers have high rates of poverty, live in overcrowded housing units, and have a low homeownership rate.

3.9. Equal Opportunity Housing
State and Federal laws ensure all households have the right to rent or purchase housing without discrimination. The City has continued to ensure equal housing opportunity through the enforcement of fair housing practices and the dissemination of fair housing information. The City’s support for the Shasta County Housing Authority and other housing organizations in the operation of its fair housing counseling services has proven to be an effective means for addressing housing issues and ensuring fair housing in the county.
14 62
3-6

PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK
15 63
3-7

3.10. Housing Goals, Policies, and Implementation Actions GOAL HE-1 To provide for a broad range of housing types to meet the needs of all residents. (Source: Existing Goal HE-1, modified)
POLICY-HE-1.1 Adequate Housing Sites. The City shall ensure that there are adequate sites available to meet its regional housing needs allocation of 238 units (28 extremely low, 28 very low, 39 low, 42 moderate, and 101 above moderate). (Source: New) POLICY-HE-1.2 Current Site Inventory. The City shall maintain an up-to-date site inventory of available sites for residential development. (Source: New) POLICY-HE-1.3 Infill Development. The City shall support infill residential development on underutilized or vacant infill sites to facilitate production of housing units while also prioritizing minimal displacement of existing residents. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-7, modified)
POLICY-HE-1.4 Parcel Consolidation. The City shall encourage the consolidation of underutilized or vacant parcels to facilitate residential development where appropriate. (Source:

Existing Policy H-P-7, modified)
POLICY-HE-1.5 Governmental Constraints. The City shall minimize governmental constraints to the development, improvement, and maintenance of its housing stock, such as reducing setbacks, height limitations, coverage ratios, parking requirements, and other development regulations. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-14, modified) POLICY-HE-1.6 Accessory Dwelling Units. The City shall encourage the construction of accessory dwelling units. The City shall also consider new housing construction methods and dwelling unit types that encourage affordability through innovative design. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-15, modified)
POLICY-HE-1.7 Connectivity. The City shall encourage circulation improvements and subdivision layouts that promote community connectivity and livability. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-19, modified)
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.1 Vacant Land Inventory to Accommodate Future Housing Needs. The City shall take the completed land inventory for the City, update it with the parcels created during the last planning period, and integrate it with the City’s GIS system. The City will develop a process to update both the inventory and the GIS layers that relate to the inventory (including infrastructure) annually. The City will assemble Information in a form useful for marketing the properties. (Source: Existing Program HE 1.1, modified)
Responsibility: Development Services, Public Works Dep’ts Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
Time Frame: Annually
Funding: City (Staff Time)
Quantified Objective: Updated vacant land inventory, available upon public request. 16 64
3-8
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.2 Scattered Site Development. The City will map the single vacant lots, their sizes, and other characteristics using GIS data where available. The City will make this information available to the General Public. (Source: Existing Program HE 1.3, modified)
Responsibility: Development Services Dep’t, Planning Commission, City Council Time Frame: Annually
Funding: City (Staff time)
Quantified Objective: Publish vacant land inventory map to the City website IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.3 Residential Property Development Project Identification. City staff will identify residential properties with impediments for development and help identify outside funding for projects that benefit the City. (Existing Program HE 1.5, modified) Responsibility: Development Services and Program Manager Time Frame: Annually
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Publish residential properties with impediments for development, make GIS map available to public upon request IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.4 State and Federal Funding. The City shall complete a report addressing potential sources of funding to help fund City needs and prioritize use of City or grant funds for projects. The City shall pursue appropriate State and Federal funding sources to support the efforts of non-profit and for-profit developers to meet new construction and rehabilitation needs of low- and moderate-income households.

The City shall periodically update and review available housing programs to identify appropriate funding sources to meet the City’s housing needs. (Existing Program HE 1.6, modified)
Responsibility: All Departments, City Council
Time Frame: Annually
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Successful grant funding for affordable housing and/or infrastructure related to affordable housing for five projects during the planning period
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.5 Objective Mixed Use and Multi-Family Residential Design Standards. The City shall establish clear objective design standards for mixed use and multi-family housing projects. Once the objective design standards are adopted, multifamily and mixed-use projects will be allowed by right and approved through a ministerial, staff-level review process (Source: Existing Program HE 1.7, modified) Responsibility: Development Services Department, City Manager, Planning Commission, City Council
Time Frame: FY 2020/21
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Reduced review periods to 90 days 17 65
3-9
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.6 Development Agreements. The City will enter into development agreements where appropriate to meet State law and provide for the City’s interests in promoting quality land use development, and if applicable, long term housing affordability. (Source: Existing Program HE 1.8, modified) Responsibility: Development Services Department, City Manager, Planning Commission, City Council
Time Frame: Ongoing
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: 25 affordable housing units during the planning period IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.7 Homebuyer Assistance. The City shall continue the Homebuyer Program that promotes homeownership for low income, first time homebuyers using HOME and CalHome as funding is available. (Source: Existing Program HE 1.9, modified) Responsibility: City Manager, Planning, City Council
Time Frame: Annually
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Annual review of specific number of homebuyer loans for low and moderate income levels; analysis of strengths and weaknesses in delivery to income levels; assistance to 10 low-income first-time home buyers.

IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.8 Collaboration with Affordable Housing Providers. The City will continue to seek out affordable housing partners. The City will initiate one-on-one discussions about how to access funding. (Source: Existing Program HE 1.10) Responsibility: City Manager, City staff and Council
Time Frame: Annually
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Completed projects with affordable housing partner(s); compilation of a list of potential partners; an assessment of potential projects that can be completed
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.9 Address Housing Opportunities and Constraints. The City shall evaluate the Municipal Code to determine what standards may need revision in order to encourage housing production. The revisions may include reducing parking standards, setbacks, height, or ability to use clustering without having to re-zone property to the Planned Development Zone, as well as addressing restrictive aspects of the grading and tree preservation ordinances as appropriate and consistent with this General Plan. (Source: Existing Program HE 1.13) Responsibility: Development Services Dep’t, Planning Commission, and City Council Time Frame: Anually
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Revision of Municipal Code to reduce development constraints for affordable housing by January 2023; adoption and implementation of new standards by January 2024.
18 66
3-10
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.10 Annual Report on Housing Element Implementation. The City will complete an Annual Housing Report to submit to HCD and OPR by April 1st of each year, consistent with State law. (Source: Existing Program HE 1.14) Responsibility: Development Services Department, City Manager, City Council Time Frame: Annually
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Eight Annual Housing Element Implementation Reports to HCD IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.11 Online Web-based Mapping. The City shall hire a GIS staff person to maintain a web-based map of available housing sites. The web-based map will be made accessible to the public on the City website. (Source: New Program, Implements HE

1.2).

Responsibility: Development Services Department
Time Frame: Annually
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: A publicly accessible web-based mapping tool identifying available housing sites, updated annually; made available to the public by March 1 of each calendar year, beginning in 2022.

IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.12 Mixed-Use Development. The City will evaluate commercial parcels and structures as part of the update to the General Plan. The evaluation will include identifying parcels/lots that are most appropriate for mixed commercial and residential uses. (Source: Existing Program HE 4.1)
Responsibility: Development Services, Planning Commission, and City Council Time Frame: Annually
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: 40 low or moderate housing units during the planning period IMPLEMENTATION-HE-1.13 Zoning Plan Consistency with State Law. The City shall continually review the Zoning Plan to address changes in State law pertaining to the streamlining of housing production including accessory dwelling units, SB 35 streamlining, and allowability of mobile home parks, employee housing (consistent with Cal. Gov’t Codes §§ 17021.5 and 17021.6), and low barrier navigation centers. (Source: New) Responsibility: Planning, City Manager, Planning Commission, City Council Time Frame: FY 2020/21
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: 24 accessory dwelling units during the planning period; updated Zoning Plan
19 67
3-11
GOAL HE-2 To promote the construction and maintenance of quality affordable housing projects for extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households. (Source: New) POLICY-HE-2.1 Federal and State Funding. The City shall continue to support applications for Federal and State funding programs to assist in the development of affordable housing. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-9, modified)
POLICY-HE-2.2 Homeownership. The City shall promote homeownership opportunities by providing support and available grant funds to lower-income first-time homebuyers. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-5, modified)
POLICY-HE-2.3 Development Distribution. The City shall encourage distribution of development of affordable housing throughout the city to avoid over concentration in a particular area, excluding areas lacking necessary infrastructure or services. (Source: New)
POLICY-HE-2.4 Permit Processing Priority. The City shall give highest priority for permit processing to affordable housing projects. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-1) POLICY-HE-2.5 Proximity to services and Facilities. The City shall encourage affordable multifamily residential developments to be located within walking distance of key services and facilities (e.g., public transit, childcare facilities, schools, parks, neighborhood shopping centers, and other amenities). (Source: Existing Policy H-P6, modified) IMPLEMENTATION-HE-2.1 Development Standards. The City shall review bi-annually and amend land use regulations, development standards, permitting procedures, and fees as needed, and where feasible, remove impediments to and reduce the cost of affordable residential development. In addition, to comply with AB 21623, the City will amend the Zoning Plan to allow supportive housing as a permitted use in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses. (Source: New)
Responsibility: Planning, City Manager, Planning Commission, City Council Time Frame: Bi-annual; initial Zoning Plan update pursuant to AB 2162 in FY21/22.

Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: 16 affordable or supportive housing units during the planning period
3 Amended Cal. Gov’t Code § 65583 and § 65650 – 65656.
20 68
3-12
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-2.2 Pursue State and Federal Funding. The City shall actively pursue appropriate Federal and State funding sources, including HOME, CDBG, AHSC, and CalHome funds, to support the efforts of nonprofit and for-profit developers to meet new construction and rehabilitation needs of extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. The City shall periodically review available housing programs to identify additional funding sources. (Source: New) Responsibility: All Departments, City Council
Time Frame: Ongoing
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Pursue Federal and State funds to facilitate the development of 32 housing units for extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate-income families and workers during the planning period
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-2.3 Assisting Affordable Housing Developers. The City shall work with the Housing Authority to provide technical and/or financial assistance to affordable housing developers, such as site identification, site acquisition, and identification of subsidy sources including HOME and AHSC funds and CDBG monies. The City shall also make this information available on its website. (Source: New) Responsibility: City Manager, City staff and Council
Time Frame: Ongoing
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Expedite site identification and acquisition processes for affordable housing developers; promote the financial feasibility of development affordable to 16 lower-income households during the planning period IMPLEMENTATION-HE-2.4 First-time Homebuyers. The City shall support workshops/educational classes on the benefits of homeownership and resources for first-time homebuyers. (Source:

New)
Responsibility: Development Services Department
Time Frame: Annually
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Promote the financial benefits of homeownership by providing information (online and at City Hall) regarding resources and workshops available to first-time homebuyers
21 69
3-13
GOAL HE-3 To maintain and rehabilitate the existing housing stock to preserve community character and housing units affordable to a mix of income levels. (Source: Existing Goal HE-2, modified)
POLICY-HE-3.1 Neighborhood Revitalization. The City, within its financial capabilities, shall support the revitalization of older neighborhoods by keeping streets, sidewalks and other municipal systems in good repair and providing neighborhood improvements, such as street lighting, landscaping, and recreation amenities that contribute to stable, quality neighborhoods. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-20) POLICY-HE-3.2 Mobile Home Upkeep. The City shall promote the upkeep of existing mobile home parks. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-23, modified)
POLICY-HE-3.3 Enforcement. The City shall continue code enforcement efforts. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-21)
POLICY-HE-3.4 Abatement. The City shall require the abatement of unsafe structures, giving property owners adequate opportunities to correct deficiencies. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-22, modified)
POLICY-HE-3.5 Encourage Private Investment. The City shall encourage private reinvestment in older residential neighborhoods and private rehabilitation of housing. (Source:

Existing Policy H-P-25)
POLICY-HE-3.6 Retain Affordable Housing. The City shall work with other agencies and nonprofit organizations to prevent the conversion of subsidized, affordable housing to market-rate housing. (Source: New)
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-3.1 Housing Rehabilitation (Single-family). To conserve existing housing stock that currently needs substantial rehabilitation, including substandard homes initially built as Shasta Dam worker housing, the City will review the Housing Stock Inventory to assess potential rehabilitation needs, identify potential loan applicants, and initiate a program to serve those needs. This program can be operated in conjunction with the proposed energy efficiency program (HE 5.1) to maximize use of funds and accommodation of energy efficient measures lowering the overall operational costs for a home. (Source: Existing Program HE 2.1, modified) Responsibility: Program Manager, City Manager, City Council Time Frame: Planning Period
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Three units of very low, six units of low, and 10 units of moderate housing rehabilitated during the planning period 22 70
3-14
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-3.2 Housing Rehabilitation (Multifamily). The City will address the rehabilitation of multi-family units as a priority when applying for funding. (Source: Existing Program HE 2.2)
Responsibility: Program Manager, City Manager, City Council Time Frame: Planning Period
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Successful funding for rehabilitation of a minimum of 10 units over the planning period
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-3.3 Foreclosure Impact Mitigation. The City shall communicate with banks in ownership of foreclosed homes to ensure the units are maintained, unoccupied until rented or sold, and do not become a fire hazard due to overgrown landscaping. The City shall partner with deed holders to inform the public about units available for sale or conversion to long-term rental housing.

Responsibility: Development Services Department, City Manager, City Council Time Frame: Ongoing
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Maintain contact with deed holders; assist with the sale or conversion to long-term rental housing of 10 units by 2028.

IMPLEMENTATION-HE-3.4 Code Enforcement Procedures. The City shall amend Section 1.17.50 of the City Municipal Code to require administrative citations to include a list of potential resources available to property owners to correct violations, (New Program) Responsibility: Program Manager, City Manager, City Council Time Frame: FY 21/22
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Updated Municipal Code
23 71
3-15
GOAL HE-4 To provide adequate infrastructure and services for residential development. (Source: Existing Goal HE-3, modified)
POLICY-HE-4.1 Public service Maintenance. The City shall maintain an adequate level of public services, infrastructure, and park and recreational facilities to meet the needs of existing and projected development within the fiscal capacity of the City. (Source:

Existing Policy H-P-26)
POLICY-HE-4.2 Public services for New Development). The City shall ensure that housing developments pay their fair share of public facilities and service costs. For affordable housing, the City shall secure funding wherever possible for the replacement or installation of off-site infrastructure. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-28, modified)
POLICY-HE-4.3 Infrastructure Funding. The City shall seek federal, state, and local grants to fund infrastructure improvements. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-10, modified) IMPLEMENTATION-HE-4.1 Local, State, and Federal Funding for Infrastructure. The City will pursue funding for infrastructure that will support infill properties that can be used for residential development. (Existing Program HE 3.1, modified).

Responsibility: Public Works Department, City Manager, City Council Time Frame: Annually
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Four applications for funding for infrastructure during the planning period
24 72
3-16
GOAL HE-5 To support energy efficiency improvements and appropriate weatherization for all new and existing housing units. (Source: Existing Goal HE-5, modified) POLICY-HE-5.1 New Construction Efficiency. The City shall require new construction to meet Title 24 energy conservation requirements. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-30, modified)
POLICY-HE-5.2 Conservation Programs & Measures. The City shall promote energy efficiency measures and energy conservation programs in accordance with applicable laws, including programs to support low-income households. (Source: Existing Policy HP-31, modified) POLICY-HE-5.3 Passive solar. During the tentative map review process, the City shall encourage new subdivision lots to be oriented to allow for both passive and active solar design to minimize energy losses. (Source: New)
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-5.1 Energy Efficiency Calculations. The City shall require all new construction to demonstrate compliance with Title 24 mandates during the planning and design process using energy efficiency calculations approved by the State. (Source: New)
Responsibility: Development Services Department
Time Frame: Annually
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Title 24 compliance in all new construction IMPLEMENTATION-HE-5.2 Energy Efficiency. The City shall offer programs that comply with applicable laws that provide for weatherization and energy efficiency rebates for residential customers and support low-income households. (Source: Existing Program HE 5.1, modified)
Responsibility: Electric Department
Time Frame: Annually
Funding: Electric Department funds (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Program to use Public Benefit funds to assist 50 affordable housing residents to access rebates, efficient appliances, and weatherization IMPLEMENTATION-HE-5.3 Green Building Incentives. The City shall encourage the implementation of the voluntary (Tier 2) provisions of the Green Building standards. The City will also provide information, on request, regarding green standards currently being applied. (Source: New Program, staff)
Responsibility: Electric Department
Time Frame: Annually
Funding: Electric Department funds (staff time)
Quantified Objective: 24 affordable housing units that comply with Tier 2 provisions during the planning period
25 73
3-17
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-5.4 Community Solar. The City shall explore locations and projects for “community solar,” or utility-scale solar photovoltaic systems with supporting programs to directly serve the City’s end-users’ electricity needs with local renewable energy sources. (Source: New)
Responsibility: Electric Department, Development Services Department Time Frame: FY 2022/23
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Support the development of large scale community solar facilities; identify parcels appropriate for use; amend zoning code, where necessary, to eliminate constraints to solar facility development
26 74
3-18
GOAL HE-6 To provide a range of housing types and services for special needs groups. (Source:

New)
POLICY-HE-6.1 Special Needs Populations. The City shall work with non-profit agencies, Shasta County, neighboring cities, and developers on regional approaches to providing housing and services to special needs populations, including the elderly, persons with physical and mental disabilities (including developmental disabilities), female-headed households, large families, farmworkers, extremely low-income households, and veterans. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-33, modified) POLICY-HE-6.2 Special Housing Needs. The City shall seek to accommodate housing and emergency shelter for residents with special housing needs through appropriate zoning standards and permit processes. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-32) POLICY-HE-6.3 Homelessness. The City shall continue to support the Shasta County Housing Authority, Shasta County Continuum of Care, Good News Rescue Mission, and all other homeless service providers in their efforts to provide housing and services for homeless persons and persons in need of supportive housing. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-35, modified)
POLICY-HE-6.4 Housing Variety. The City shall encourage the development and rehabilitation of housing with a variety of unit sizes and number of bedrooms to address extremely low-income and large households’ needs. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-34, modified) POLICY-HE-6.5 Transit Needs. The City shall encourage the development of new housing units designed for seniors and persons with disabilities to have readily accessible public transit and community services. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-37, modified) POLICY-HE-6.6 Rental Assistance. The City shall support the continued use of rental assistance opportunities for extremely low-income households, including HUD Housing Choice Vouchers. (Source: Existing Policy H-P-8, modified) POLICY-HE-6.7 Reasonable Accommodation. The City shall ensure equal access to housing by providing a process for individuals with disabilities to make requests for reasonable accommodation in regard to relief from land use, zoning, or building laws, rules, policies, practices, and/or procedures. (Source: New) IMPLEMENTATION-HE-6.1 Reasonable Accommodation. The City shall continue to provide reasonable accommodations through a formal procedure by reviewing and approving requests for modifications to building or zoning requirements in order to ensure accommodations for persons with disabilities. Additionally, the City shall provide both printed information, and information on the City’s website regarding reasonable accommodations by January 2023.. (Source: New) Responsibility: Development Services Department
Time Frame: Ongoing; information available by 2023.

Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Modifications to building requirements or exceptions to the Zoning Plan as necessary to ensure reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities
27 75
3-19
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-6.2 Assistance for Special Needs Populations. In order to assist in the housing needs for special needs populations, including the elderly, persons with physical and mental disabilities (including developmental disabilities), female-headed households, large families, farmworkers, extremely low-income households, and veterans, the City will engage with housing advocates, encourage housing providers to designate a portion of new affordable housing developments for special needs populations, , and pursue funding sources designated for these groups.. The City shall also partner with the Far Northern Regional Center to provide information and services to persons with development disabilities. (Source: New)
Responsibility: Development Services Department, City Manager, City Council Time Frame: Ongoing
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: 10 affordable housing units for special needs populations. 28 76
3-20
GOAL HE-7 To require safe and sanitary housing and quality living environment for all Shasta Lake residents regardless of age, religion, race, ethnicity, creed, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, ancestry, national origin, disability, economic level, and other arbitrary factors. (Source: Existing Goal HE-6, modified) POLICY-HE-7.1 Fair Housing. The City shall prioritize fair housing and require compliance with fair housing laws.4(Source: New)
POLICY-HE-7.2 Discrimination. The City shall cooperate with community-based organizations that provide services or information to victims of housing discrimination, including but not limited to, Shasta County, the Shasta County Housing Authority, and Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California. (Source: New) IMPLEMENTATION-HE-7.1 Section 8 Rental Assistance. The City shall be in regular contact with the Housing Authority in order to obtain data and information about the Section 8 programs.

Information will be made readily available to individuals and affordable housing developers. (Source: Existing Program HE 6.2)
Responsibility: City Program Manager
Time Frame: Ongoing
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Maintain contact with Shasta County Housing Authority for data and other information; provide developers with data regarding housing standards; identify housing standards that are constraints on Shasta Lake housing Section 8 eligibility
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-7.2 Equal Housing Opportunity. The City shall provide information obtained from the Housing Authority (including brochures, flyers, posters, and similar publications) in public locations, including City offices. In addition, the City shall have such information available on the City’s website and for distribution to interested parties who request it. Information shall be provided in languages other than English where appropriate. (Existing Program HE 6.3, modified)
Responsibility: City Program Manager
Time Frame: Ongoing
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Compile and distribute up-to-date information concerning equal opportunity and enforcement on a routine basis.
4 The Fair Employment and Housing Act (Cal. Gov’t. Code §§12900–12996) prohibits discrimination in housing because of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, and disability. 29 77
3-21
IMPLEMENTATION-HE-7.3 Fair Housing. The City shall be a local contact point for fair housing complaints and will refer interested persons to the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (for federally subsidized units) as complaints are received. The City will also display fair housing information at City offices and shall provide links on its website to these entities and their fair housing discrimination references, contacts, and compliance procedures. (Source: New)
Responsibility: City Program Manager
Time Frame: Ongoing
Funding: City (staff time)
Quantified Objective: Maintain contact with the DFEH and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for data and information; compile and display fair housing information in City offices and on the City website by 2021; update informational fair housing materials on a routine basis IMPLEMENTATION-HE-7.4 Affirmatively Further Fair Housing. The City will coordinate with the Shasta County Housing Authority and/or Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California to develop a plan to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH). The AFFH Plan shall take actions to address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability, and other characteristics protected by the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Part

2.8 (commencing with Section 12900) of Division 3 of Title 2), Section 65008, and any other state and federal fair housing and planning law. The City shall pursue funding to provide services through these partnerships including:

1. Distributing educational materials to property owners, apartment managers, and tenants every two years.

2. Making public service announcements via different media (e.g. newspaper ads and public service announcements at local radio and television channels) at least two times a year.

3. Conducting public presentations with different community groups.

4. Responding to complaints of discrimination (e.g. in-taking, investigation of complaints, and resolution).

5. Referring services to appropriate agencies.

Responsibility: Development Services Department
Time Frame: Ongoing
Funding: Community Development Block Grant
Quantified Objective: Assist 20 individuals/households with fair housing issues throughout the planning period.
30 78
Report and Recommendations 8.3 Reviewed and Approved

City Manager

AGENDA ITEM
City Council
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Jessaca Lugo, City Manager
Jason Peterson, Finance and General Services Manager
DATE: October 21, 2025
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF INTENT TO PROCEED WITH PROPOSITION 218 PROCESS – SOLID WASTE RATE ADJUSTMENTS - USA
WASTE OF CALIFORNIA, INC. (WASTE MANAGEMENT – WM)
FILE NO.:

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution of Intent initiating Proposition 218 notification and protest process for proposed solid waste rate adjustments and setting the Public Hearing for December 16, 2025.

BACKGROUND
The City of Shasta Lake provides solid waste collection services to its residents and businesses under the authority of Section 13.16 of the Shasta Lake Municipal Code, through a franchise agreement with USA Waste of California, Inc. (Waste Management – WM). Under this agreement, WM is responsible for the collection, transfer, processing, and disposal of all solid waste, recyclables, and organic waste (e.g., yard trimmings and food waste) generated within the City.

Commercial and multi-family customers are billed directly by WM based on the number and size of their containers and the frequency of weekly service. Single-family residential customers are charged a monthly base rate that includes weekly collection of trash (gray cart), recyclables (blue cart), and organics (green cart), using their existing containers.

The City’s franchise agreement establishes the initial rate structure and includes an inflation-based formula for annual adjustments, which accounts for factors such as the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and disposal cost increases. If the proposed rate schedule 79 is adopted, future annual adjustments may continue for a period of up to five (5) years or until another duly noticed Public Hearing is conducted.

REASON FOR RATE INCREASE
Solid waste rates are established by the City to recover the costs of providing essential collection, recycling, and disposal services that protect public health, safety, and welfare, while ensuring compliance with State mandates. These services are provided through the City’s franchise agreement with USA Waste of California, Inc. (Waste Management – WM), and all related costs are paid through this franchise arrangement.

One of the primary cost drivers behind the proposed rate increase is Senate Bill (SB) 1383—enacted in 2016 by California’s supermajority Legislature—which requires all jurisdictions to reduce the amount of organic materials disposed of in landfills by 75% by 2025. Failure to comply may result in State-imposed penalties of up to $10,000 per day.

It’s important to note that the City of Shasta Lake strongly opposed SB 1383 from the outset, warning Sacramento lawmakers that the law would be costly, difficult to implement, and ill-suited for rural communities. Despite these objections, the State moved forward, and jurisdictions like ours have been required to absorb the substantial financial and operational burdens necessary to comply with the organic waste diversion mandates.

Organic materials, such as food scraps and yard waste, account for approximately half of what Californians dispose of in landfills. To meet these mandates, WM will roll out a comprehensive residential organics program beginning January 1, 2026 (or upon completion of the new landfill facility). The program will include curbside organic waste collection, public education, contamination monitoring, and State-required reporting.

Starting in 2026, residential customers will be able to place materials such as food scraps, food-soiled paper, and coffee grounds in their green waste carts. These services are designed to divert methane-producing materials from the landfill, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and align with the State’s climate-action goals. The new services add to existing collection programs and are reflected in the proposed rate structure.

More information on the statewide organics recycling mandate is available at https://calrecycle.ca.gov/Climate/SLCP/.

PROPOSED RATES AND ADJUSTMENTS
The current and proposed monthly rates for residential and commercial customers are detailed in Exhibit A. Beginning July 1, 2026, and annually thereafter, rates will be adjusted to reflect 100% of the annual percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) – Urban Consumers: Garbage and Trash Collection Index, as published by the U.S.

Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. If the CPI change is negative, no adjustment will be applied for that year.

In accordance with Proposition 218 (Cal. Const. art. XIII D, §6) and Government Code §53755, property-related rate adjustments require:
80 1. Mailing notice to all affected parcels/customers at least 45 days prior to a public hearing;

2. An opportunity for customers to submit written protests; and

3. Council action following the hearing.

Proposition 218 Notice Schedule:
• Mailing Period: October 27–30, 2025 (providing minimum 45 days’ notice ahead of the December 16, 2025 hearing).
• Protest Tabulation: The City Clerk (or designee) will serve as tabulator. Only written protests received before the close of the hearing will be counted. If a majority of affected property owners or customers file protests, the proposed rate adjustment cannot be imposed.

Adoption of this item authorizes the issuance of the Proposition 218 notices and sets the public hearing date. Final rate adoption, if approved, will occur following protest tabulation at the December 16, 2025 City Council meeting.

FISCAL IMPACTS:

There is no fiscal impact for moving forward with a Prop 218 Public Hearing. There may be a fiscal impact depending on the outcome of the Prop 218 process (ballots).

ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
2026 Proposed Solid Waste Rates

DISTRIBUTION
City Council
City Attorney
Finance Department
81 RESOLUTION CC 2025-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHASTA LAKE INITIATING THE PROPOSITION 218 NOTIFICATION AND PROTEST PROCESS

FOR PROPOSED SOLID WASTE RATE ADJUSTMENTS AND SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR DECEMBER 16, 2025
WHEREAS, the City of Shasta Lake (“City”) provides solid waste collection services to its residents and businesses under the authority of Section 13.16 of the Shasta Lake Municipal Code, through a franchise agreement with USA Waste of California, Inc. (Waste Management – WM); and
WHEREAS, under this franchise agreement, WM provides for the collection, transfer, processing, and disposal of all solid waste, recyclables, and organic waste generated within the City; and
WHEREAS, the City’s franchise agreement establishes the initial rate structure and provides an inflation-based formula for annual rate adjustments to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and increases in disposal and operational costs; and WHEREAS, the proposed rate adjustments include new costs associated with compliance with State-mandated organic waste diversion requirements under Senate Bill (SB) 1383 (2016), which requires all jurisdictions to implement organic waste collection and processing programs to achieve a 75% reduction in landfilled organic waste by 2025; and
WHEREAS, Article XIII D, Section 6 of the California Constitution (Proposition 218) and Government Code Section 53755 require that property-related fee and rate increases, such as solid waste collection charges, be subject to mailed notice and a public hearing process, with the opportunity for affected property owners and customers to file written protests; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to initiate the Proposition 218 notification and protest process to consider the proposed solid waste rate adjustments and to set a public hearing date to receive public input and determine whether a majority protest exists; and WHEREAS, notices will be mailed to all affected customers at least forty-five (45) days’ notice prior to the public hearing, as required by law.

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

1. The City Council hereby initiates the Proposition 218 notification and protest process for proposed solid waste rate adjustments, as detailed in the accompanying staff report and Exhibit A (Proposed Rates). 82 2. The City Council hereby sets Tuesday, December 16, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. (or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard) at the Shasta Lake City Council Chambers, 4477 Main Street, Shasta Lake, California, as the date, time, and place for the Public Hearing on the proposed rate adjustments.

3. The City Manager, or her designee, is authorized to prepare, publish, and mail the Proposition 218 notices in compliance with State law and City procedures.

4. Following the conclusion of the protest hearing, if no majority protest exists, the City Council may consider adoption of the proposed solid waste rate schedule.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 21st day of October, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:
_______________________________
PAMELYN ANNE MORGAN, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________

CHARITY TATLOW, CMC
City Clerk
83 RESIDENTIAL Rates Eff.
7/1/2025
Rates Eff.
1/1/2026
Cart Services
64 Gallon Bundle** $24.96 $29.21
64 Gallon Bundle**- Senior (65 and older)**** $15.33 $21.91 96 Gallon Bundle** $26.83 $31.12
Additional 64 gallon recycling cart $9.51
Additional 96 gallon organics cart $9.51
Ancillary Services
Container Overage Charge - per cart, per incident - when material exceeds the container's intended capacity $9.14 $10.32
Side Yard Assisted Service $13.69 $13.96
Bad Check/EFT Charge $39.71 $40.50
Finance Charge past due greater than 30 days 2.50% 2.50% Finance Charge past due greater than 30 days - minimum charge $5.00 $5.00 Replacement Cart-if due to customer negligence Market Rate $109.66 Extra Pick up - 64 Gallon on service day $6.22 $6.34
Extra Pick up - 96 Gallon on service day $6.66 $6.79
Extra Pick up - 64, 96 Gallon on non-route day $16.53 $16.86 Contamination in Recycling or Organics Cart - per cart, per incident $35.12 $31.12 ** Bundle includes 1 64 gallon recycling cart and 1 96 gallon organics cart ****Senior rate is 75% of the 64G bundle rate
COMMERCIAL Rates Eff.
7/1/2025
Rates Eff.
1/1/2026
Trash Services ***
64 gallon 1xWeek $24.96 $43.82
96 gallon 1xWeek $26.83 $46.68
1 Yard - 1xWeek $86.97 $103.01
1 Yard - 2xWeek $174.03 $196.13
1 Yard - 3xWeek $261.09 $289.25
1 Yard - 4xWeek $348.06 $382.26
1 Yard - 5xWeek $435.10 $475.35

1.5 Yard - 1xWeek $124.34 $142.99

1.5 Yard - 2xWeek $248.58 $275.86

1.5 Yard - 3xWeek $372.99 $408.93
2 Yard - 1xWeek $157.55 $180.50
2 Yard - 2xWeek $315.10 $349.01
2 Yard - 3xWeek $472.66 $517.53
2 Yard - 4xWeek $630.19 $686.02
2 Yard - 5xWeek $787.74 $854.52
3 Yard - 1xWeek $190.96 $216.23
3 Yard - 2xWeek $381.86 $420.42
3 Yard - 3xWeek $572.89 $624.72
3 Yard - 4xWeek $763.88 $829.00
3 Yard - 5xWeek $954.75 $1,033.14
4 Yard - 1xWeek $236.75 $268.22
4 Yard - 2xWeek $473.43 $521.35
4 Yard - 3xWeek $710.19 $774.57
4 Yard - 4xWeek $946.85 $1,027.70
4 Yard - 5xWeek $1,183.60 $1,280.90

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF SHASTA LAKE

RATE SCHEDULE
EFFECTIVE DATE JANUARY 1, 2026
84 COMMERCIAL (continued) Rates Eff.
7/1/2025
Rates Eff.
1/1/2026
6 Yard - 1xWeek $311.78 $348.46
6 Yard - 2xWeek $623.64 $682.01
6 Yard - 3xWeek $935.44 $1,015.49
6 Yard - 4xWeek $1,247.30 $1,349.04
6 Yard - 5xWeek $1,559.13 $1,682.55
Recycling Bin Services
1 Yard - 1xWeek $65.23 $77.26
1 Yard - 2xWeek $130.52 $147.10
1 Yard - 3xWeek $195.82 $216.94

1.5 Yard - 1xWeek $93.26 $107.24

1.5 Yard - 2xWeek $186.44 $206.90

1.5 Yard - 3xWeek $279.74 $306.70
2 Yard - 1xWeek $118.16 $135.38
2 Yard - 2xWeek $236.33 $261.76
2 Yard - 3xWeek $354.50 $388.15
3 Yard - 1xWeek $143.22 $162.17
3 Yard - 2xWeek $286.40 $315.32
3 Yard - 3xWeek $429.67 $468.54
4 Yard - 1xWeek $177.56 $201.17
4 Yard - 2xWeek $355.07 $391.01
4 Yard - 3xWeek $532.64 $580.93
6 Yard - 1xWeek $233.84 $261.35
6 Yard - 2xWeek $467.73 $511.51
6 Yard - 3xWeek $701.58 $761.62
Extra Pickups
1 Yard Service Day Extra Pickup (service day only) $55.09 $58.79

1.5 Yard Service Day Extra Pickup (service day only) $63.72 $68.02 2 Yard Service Day Extra Pickup (service day only) $71.39 $76.69 3 Yard Service Day Extra Pickup (service day only) $79.10 $84.94 4 Yard Service Day Extra Pickup (service day only) $89.68 $96.94 6 Yard Service Day Extra Pickup (service day only) $107.00 $115.48 Temporary Bins
4 Yard Temp Bin - 3 day rental $181.05 $184.67
Ancillary Services
Additional 64 gallon recycling cart - commercial $45.11 Additional 64 gallon organics cart - commercial $45.11
Account Reactivation Charge - No Cart Delivery $30.47 $31.08 Account Reactivation Charge - With Cart Delivery $79.21 $80.79 Walk in/Pull Out per Bin per Service $17.85 $18.21
Container Overage Charge - per cart, per incident (cart too full for lid to close) $31.82 Container Overage Charge - per bin, per incident (bin too full for lid to close) $194.51 $151.18 Bad Check/EFT Charge $30.00 $30.00
Finance Charge past due greater than 30 days 2.50% 2.50% Finance Charge past due greater than 30 days - minimum charge $5.00 $5.00 Replacement Bin-if due to customer negligence Market Price $874.58 Key charge when container access requires driver to remove lock per month $6.60 $6.73 Contamination in Recycling or Organics carts - per cart, per incident $31.82 Contamination in Recycling or Organics bins - per bin, per incident $70.20 $71.60 *** Trash service includes 1 64 gallon recycling cart and 1 64 gallon organics cart ROLL OFF Rates Eff.
7/1/2025
Rates Eff.
1/1/2026
Container Services
20 Yard Roll Off Container (includes 3 tons disposal)* $634.50 $675.13 30 Yard Roll Off Container (includes 3 tons disposal)* $783.93 $830.60 40 Yard Roll Off Container (includes 3 tons disposal)* $933.39 $986.10 Ancillary Services
Min Haul Charge - 7 day rental charged per day on 8th day $13.24 $49.74 Trip Charge (WM unable to service due to non WM caused circumstance) $198.47 $202.44 Relocation Charge (Move box to new location on customers current site) $198.47 $202.44 Bad Check/EFT Charge $30.00 $30.00
Finance Charge past due greater than 30 days 2.50% 2.50% Finance Charge past due greater than 30 days - minimum charge $5.00 $5.00 *Any tonnage in excess will be charged the landfill rate plus applicable franchise fees. 85 Extra Pickups
1 Yard Service Day Extra Pickup (service day only) $55.09 $58.79

PROPOSITION AUTHORIZES TEMPORARY CHANGES TO CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS IN RESPONSE TO TEXAS’ PARTISAN REDISTRICTING. 50LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY PREPARED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL The text of this measure can be found on page 18 and the Secretary of State’s website at voterguide.sos.ca.gov.
• In response to Texas’ mid-decade partisan
congressional redistricting, this measure
temporarily requires new congressional
district maps, as passed by the Legislature
in August 2025, to be used in California’s
congressional elections through 2030.
• Retains California’s independent Citizens
Redistricting Commission and directs the
Commission to resume enacting congressional
district maps in 2031 after the 2030 census and
every ten years thereafter.
• Establishes state policy supporting use of fair,
independent, and nonpartisan redistricting
commissions nationwide.

SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF NET
STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT:
• One-time costs to counties of up to a few
million dollars statewide. County costs would
be to update election materials to reflect new
congressional district maps.

FINAL VOTES CAST BY THE LEGISLATURE ON ACA 8 (PROPOSITION 50) (RESOLUTION CHAPTER 156, STATUTES OF 2025)
Senate: Ayes 30 Noes 8
Assembly: Ayes 57 Noes 20

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

BACKGROUND
U.S. CONGRESS
U.S. Congress. The U.S. Congress is the part of the
federal government that makes laws. Congress has
two parts: the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of
Representatives (House). Each of the 50 states is
represented by 2 senators, with 100 senators in
total. The House has 435 members. The number
of representatives in the House for each state
depends on how many people live in that state.

Each member in the House represents an area of
the state called a congressional district. California
currently has 52 congressional districts. Voters
who live in each congressional district elect one
member of the House every two years to represent
them. The next election for all 435 representatives
will be in 2026.

U.S. Census Counts States’ Populations Every Ten
Years. The number of people living in an area goes
up and down over time. Every ten years, the U.S.

Census counts the number of people who live in
the U.S. The last census was in 2020, and the next
census is in 2030. This count is used to determine
how many people live in each state and how many
representatives in the House each state gets for the
next ten years.

CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING
Each State Draws Congressional District Maps
Following the U.S. Census. Every ten years, after
the U.S. Census is completed, states draw new
congressional district maps to refect their number
of House representatives and where people live.

This process is called “redistricting.” Each state
decides what process to use to draw its new
district maps. When drawing new maps, each
state must follow federal laws. For example, each
congressional district in the state must represent
about the same number of people.

States Typically Do Not Redistrict Sooner Than
Every Ten Years. States typically only draw
congressional district maps every ten years, unless
a court orders changes to comply with the law.

In August 2025, however, the Texas Legislature
passed a bill to adopt new maps for the 2026
elections without a court order. Several other states
also are considering changes to their maps before
the 2026 elections.
8 | Title and Summary / Analysis
87 PROPOSITION AUTHORIZES TEMPORARY CHANGES TO CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS IN RESPONSE TO TEXAS’ PARTISAN REDISTRICTING.

LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. 50 50

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST
Congressional Redistricting in California. State
legislatures draw congressional district maps in
most states, but some states use commissions to
do this job. Before 2010, the California Legislature
drew the state’s congressional district maps.

In 2010, California voters gave this job to an
independent commission known as the California
Citizens Redistricting Commission (Commission).

The Commission includes 14 members:
5 Democratic members, 5 Republican members,
and 4 members who are not registered with either
of those political parties. When the Commission
draws new congressional district maps, it must
follow federal and state laws. For example, state
law requires, among other things, the Commission
to avoid splitting up neighborhoods or local
communities of interest to the extent possible.

State law also prohibits the Commission from
considering political parties, current ofce holders,
or people running for ofce when it draws the
maps.

Current California Congressional Districts. The
Commission drew the current maps for California’s
52 congressional districts. These maps were based
on the 2020 U.S. Census and have been used since
the 2022 congressional elections.

PROPOSAL
CALIFORNIA’S CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS
Use Legislatively Drawn Congressional District
Maps Until After the Next Census. Proposition 50
replaces California’s current congressional district
maps with new, legislatively drawn maps. (The total
number of districts would not change.) Proposition
50’s maps must follow federal law, but they are not
required to follow the state requirements placed on
the Commission. The state would use Proposition
50’s maps for congressional elections starting in
2026. The state would use these maps until the
Commission draws new district maps, following the
2030 U.S. Census.

NATIONAL CONGRESSIONAL REDISTRICTING
Call for Change in Federal Law. Proposition 50
asks the U.S. Congress to change federal law and
propose an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to

CONTINUED
require redistricting be done by “fair, independent,
and nonpartisan redistricting commissions
nationwide.” Proposition 50 expresses voter
support for this idea, but does not change federal
law or require any particular action of Congress or
the California Legislature.

FISCAL EFFECTS
Minor One-Time Costs to County and State
Elections Ofcials. Counties run elections, and the
state oversees them. Because most congressional
districts in California would change at least some
under the new maps, county and state elections
ofcials would need to update election materials.

This would result in one-time costs to counties of
up to a few million dollars statewide and one-time
costs to the state of roughly $200,000. The state
amount is much less than one-tenth of 1 percent
(0.1 percent) of the state’s roughly $220 billion
General Fund budget. (The General Fund is the
account the state uses to pay for most public
services, including education, health care, and
prisons.)

CURRENT AND PROPOSED

CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS
This section shows maps of the current and
proposed congressional districts (1) statewide,
as shown in Figures 1 and 2; (2) in the northern
part of the state, as shown in Figures 3 and 4; and
(3) in the southern part of the state, as shown in
Figures 5 and 6. A description of the census blocks
represented by each district in the proposed maps
can be found at the following website: https://
leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.
xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB604
Visit sos.ca.gov/campaign-lobbying/cal-accessresources/measure-contributions/2025-ballotmeasure-contribution-totals for a list of committees primarily formed to support or oppose this measure.

Visit fppc.ca.gov/transparency/top-contributors.html
to access the committee’s top 10 contributors.

For the full text of Proposition 50, see page 18. Analysis | 9 88 50

PROPOSITION AUTHORIZES TEMPORARY CHANGES TO CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS IN RESPONSE TO TEXAS’ PARTISAN REDISTRICTING. 50 LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST CONTINUED
10 | Analysis
89 For the full text of Proposition 50, see page 18. Analysis | 11

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST CONTINUED
50 AUTHORIZES TEMPORARY CHANGES TO CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS IN RESPONSE TO TEXAS’ PARTISAN REDISTRICTING.

LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

PROPOSITION
50 90
50 PROPOSITION AUTHORIZES TEMPORARY CHANGES TO CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS IN RESPONSE TO TEXAS’ PARTISAN REDISTRICTING. 50 LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST CONTINUED
12 | Analysis
91 ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST CONTINUED

PROPOSITION AUTHORIZES TEMPORARY CHANGES TO CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS IN RESPONSE TO TEXAS’ PARTISAN REDISTRICTING.

LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. 50 50

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST CONTINUED
For the full text of Proposition 50, see page 18. Analysis | 13 92 50

PROPOSITION AUTHORIZES TEMPORARY CHANGES TO CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS IN RESPONSE TO TEXAS’ PARTISAN REDISTRICTING. 50 LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST CONTINUED
14 | Analysis
93 ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST CONTINUED

PROPOSITION AUTHORIZES TEMPORARY CHANGES TO CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS IN RESPONSE TO TEXAS’ PARTISAN REDISTRICTING.

LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. 50 50

ANALYSIS BY THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST CONTINUED
For the full text of Proposition 50, see page 18. Analysis | 15 94 PROPOSITION AUTHORIZES TEMPORARY CHANGES TO CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS IN RESPONSE TO TEXAS’ PARTISAN REDISTRICTING. 50 LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. 50 ★ ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 50 ★
STOP TRUMP FROM RIGGING THE 2026 ELECTION
Donald Trump and Texas Republicans are making an
unprecedented power grab to steal congressional seats and rig the 2026 election before voting even begins.

Other Republican states are following suit. They want to steal enough seats to control Congress even if voters overwhelmingly reject their agenda.

This isn’t politics as usual. It’s an emergency for our democracy.

ENSURE FAIR REPRESENTATION IN CONGRESS
We have already seen how Trump has recklessly imposed tarifs and hurt California families, denied disaster assistance to fre victims, and ordered mass arrests without warrants. The 2026 election for Congress represents our only chance to provide an essential check and balance on Trump’s dangerous agenda.

If Californians don’t act now, Donald Trump will seize total power for two more years. Proposition 50, the Election Rigging Response Act, will put a stop to their anti-democratic scheme.

Here’s what it does.
• LEVELS THE PLAYING FIELD. Prop. 50 makes sure the 2026 mid-term elections are conducted on a level playing feld without an unfair advantage for Republicans.
• COMMITS TO FAIR REDISTRICTING. Prop. 50 reafrms
California’s commitment to independent redistricting and calls for a nationwide commitment to fair and impartial maps. • GIVES VOTERS THE POWER. Prop. 50 puts the power in the hands of the People of California, not backroom politicians, to approve emergency congressional district maps in response to Trump’s election rigging scheme.
• IS FAIR AND PROPORTIONAL. Prop. 50 provides emergency maps only because Republicans moved forward with their power grab.
• IS TEMPORARY. These maps expire in 2030. Prop. 50
preserves California’s award-winning redistricting reforms and reafrms the California Citizens Redistricting Commission’s authority to draw congressional districts after the next census.

The stakes couldn’t be higher. If Republicans rig the election and steal control of Congress next year, they’ll continue to eliminate healthcare for millions of Americans, slash funding for schools, and cut essential services for veterans to pay for tax breaks for billionaires and big corporations.

PROTECT DEMOCRACY IN ALL 50 STATES
California has a duty to defend democracy. To do that, we can’t unilaterally disarm or fght with both hands tied behind our backs. When Trump tries to rig elections, we must fght back with every tool available.

Prop. 50 draws fair maps that represent California’s diverse communities and ensure our voices aren’t silenced by partisan gerrymandering in other states.

California leads the nation in protecting voting rights and fair elections. When other states try to silence our voices and rig the system, we must respond decisively.

Join President Barack Obama, Governor Gavin Newsom,
Senator Alex Padilla, Senator Adam Schif, Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi, election experts, independent redistricting commissioners, Planned Parenthood, the NAACP, California veterans, teachers, and nurses.

Vote YES on Prop. 50 to stop Trump’s election rigging scheme.

Vote YES for checks and balances.

Vote YES to protect democracy in all 50 states.

Governor Gavin Newsom
U.S. Senator Alex Padilla
U.S. Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi
★ REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF PROPOSITION 50 ★
THE WRONG PATH—NO ON PROP. 50
We know American democracy is on fre, but accelerating
gerrymandering only adds fuel! Politicians are seizing this crisis to justify a power grab.

PROP. 50 DOES NOT DEFEND OUR DEMOCRACY
Prop. 50 is not a magic pill to cure the nation’s ills. It claims to protect democracy, yet diminishes our communities’ voices and is inefective against any overreach of presidential power. Vote NO.

California gerrymandering allowed the Legislature to draw partisan seats without transparency or citizen input, solely to protect incumbents. By 2001, the government was gridlocked, with legislators held hostage to the extremes of their parties.

Voters rose up and handed line-drawing over to citizens, resulting in:
• Competitive Districts: Previously safe seats now must be earned.
• Better Representation: Women in the Legislature doubled, Asian representation tripled, Black representation nearly doubled, and Latino seats grew by 8%.
• Government for the People: With more moderate
representatives, the Legislature passed bipartisan legislation, working for the interests of all Californians.

WE THE PEOPLE
Districts do not belong to either party; they belong to the People.

But, party bosses want to call the shots—again. NO to a “pay-toplay” system.

Prop. 50 says this is “temporary,” yet the Legislature will bypass the independent Citizens Redistricting Commission again in 2028, 2030—and perhaps beyond. Don’t be fooled.

Legislators drew this map behind closed doors for you to rubberstamp. It is not your choice.

Vote NO on partisan gerrymandering. Vote NO on Prop. 50.

Cynthia Dai, Rotating Chair
First Citizens Redistricting Commission
Jeanne Raya, Rotating Chair
First Citizens Redistricting Commission
Jodie Filkins Webber, Rotating Chair
First Citizens Redistricting Commission
16 | Arguments Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any offcial agency. 95 PROPOSITION AUTHORIZES TEMPORARY CHANGES TO CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT MAPS IN RESPONSE TO TEXAS’ PARTISAN REDISTRICTING.

LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. 50
★ ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 50 ★ 50
PROPOSITION 50: A POWER GRAB BY POLITICIANS
Prop. 50 was written by politicians, for politicians. Prop. 50 dismantles constitutional safeguards that keep election maps fair. It removes requirements to keep cities, counties, and local communities together, and eliminates voter protections that ban maps designed to favor incumbents or political parties—putting politicians back in charge of drawing their own districts, or those of their friends.

A “NO” vote protects fair elections and keeps the people of California—not politicians—in charge of redistricting.

NO ON PROP. 50: IT REPEALS LANDMARK VOTER-APPROVED

ELECTION REFORMS
For decades, Sacramento politicians drew their own district boundaries behind closed doors with no public oversight— guaranteeing their reelection, denying voters a real choice, and shutting out many women and people of color from elected ofce.

In 2008, California voters approved historic election reform— creating the independent California Citizens Redistricting Commission. Voters decided district lines should be drawn by a balanced panel of everyday citizens—not by politicians who stood to beneft.

Prop. 50 throws out citizen-drawn congressional maps created through a transparent public process with input from over 35,000 Californians. Instead, politicians secretly drew maps— leaving voters with NO real say.

NO ON PROP. 50: ANOTHER SCHEME TO PERMANENTLY END

INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING
In 2008 and 2010, the Democratic Party and special interests spent millions of dollars to stop citizen redistricting. Later, the California Republican Party even sued to overturn citizen-drawn maps—and lost. Now, Sacramento politicians are scheming to regain control with Prop. 50.

Make no mistake: Prop. 50 is not temporary. For over half a decade, politicians get to impose their gerrymandered maps.

Worse, it sets a dangerous precedent—opening the door for Sacramento to keep drawing election maps beyond 2031—
giving politicians permanent power to shield themselves and their allies from accountability for California’s high cost of living, skyrocketing housing costs, and rising energy bills.

NO ON PROP. 50: DON’T BE MISLED BY POLITICAL SPIN
The same politicians who opposed independent redistricting from the start now claim Prop. 50 will “save democracy.” In truth, Prop. 50 weakens fair representation by shutting the public out and bringing gerrymandering back to California.

Prop. 50 is not democratic; it gives voters a take-it-or-leave-it decision on the most partisan maps in California’s history—a product of politicians’ secretive backroom deals with ZERO meaningful public engagement.

Prop. 50 divides communities to beneft politicians, splitting counties 114 times and cities 141 times—far more than the citizen-drawn maps.
“When politicians gerrymander, they divide our neighborhoods and weaken the voice of communities of color. Whatever happens in Texas, we cannot save democracy by destroying it in California.

Vote NO on Prop. 50.”—Reverend Mac Shorty, Civil Rights Leader NO ON PROP. 50: A MASSIVE WASTE OF TAXPAYER MONEY
The Legislature has called a special election just to pass this politician-protecting constitutional change—costing taxpayers $200,000,000.

With a massive budget defcit, Sacramento politicians are making painful cuts to health care, housing, education, and public safety. Instead of protecting important programs, they’re spending it on a political power grab.

Vote NO on Prop. 50.

VotersFIRSTAct.org
Roberto Moncada, Board Member
United Latinos Action
Faith Bautista Tamashiro, President
National Diversity Coalition
Taylor Shorty, Board Member
Community RePower Movement
★ REBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT AGAINST PROPOSITION 50 ★
WARNING: NO ON 50 IS BACKED BY TRUMP EXTREMISTS
Who’s spending millions against Prop. 50?
An anti-choice mega-millionaire named Charles Munger Jr. who wants to help Donald Trump and Red State Republicans rig the 2026 elections and hand Trump unchecked power for two more years.

Independent redistricting commissioners, election experts, and leading civil rights organizations—from the NAACP to the National Democratic Redistricting Committee—urge you to reject the lies spread by NO on 50’s phony front groups.

Lie #1: “Prop. 50 repeals landmark voter-approved election reforms.” This is plainly false. Prop. 50 calls on all states to end partisan gerrymandering and reafrms the power of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission to draw the lines after the next census.

Lie #3: “Prop. 50 puts politicians back in charge of drawing their own districts.” Untrue. Prop. 50 puts power to approve emergency maps in the hands of voters, not politicians.

Lie #4: “Prop. 50 permanently ends independent redistricting.” Also untrue. Prop. 50 is a temporary and proportional response to Trump’s election-rigging scheme and expires in 2030.

Californians cannot allow Donald Trump and Texas Republicans to rig the 2026 election and silence our voices.

Vote YES on Prop. 50.

Protect democracy, preserve nonpartisan redistricting and ensure a fair election in all 50 states.

Sara Sadhwani, Commissioner
2020 California Citizens Redistricting Commission
Jodi Hicks, President
Planned Parenthood Afliates of California
Lie #2: “Prop. 50 removes requirements to keep cities, counties, Nikki Davis Milevsky, President Sacramento City Teachers Association and local communities together.” Prop. 50 does the opposite, keeping MORE cities and counties combined, and communities together than California’s existing maps.

Arguments printed on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any offcial agency. Arguments | 17 96

Shasta Lake City CouncilOctober 21, 2025

Shasta Lake City Council
October 21, 2025