Agenda packet — Soledad City Council, January 14, 2026 (part 2 of 2)

17.39.150 Effect of proposal for waiver or reduction of development standards.

A proposal for the waiver or reduction of development standards shall neither reduce nor increase the number of incentives or concessions to which the applicant is entitled pursuant to Section 65915(d) of the Government Code.

17.39.160 Density bonus allowance for housing development with affordable housing component.

A. If the requirements of Sections 17.39.035 and 17.39.0840 (property development standards) are met, then the affordable housing developer is entitled to a density bonus pursuant to Section 65915(f) of the Government Code as follows in Table 17.39.100-1.

Table 17.39.100-1
Density Bonus Allowance for Housing Development Projects with Affordable Housing Component

HOUSEHOLD
INCOME

CATEGORY

MINIMUM

PERCENT OF
VERY LOWINCOME
UNITS

MINIMUM

DENSITY
BONUS

ADDITIONAL

DENSITY

BONUS FOR
EACH 1%

INCREASE IN
VERY LOWINCOME
UNITS

MAXIMUM

PERCENT

OF VERY
LOWINCOME
UNITS

MAXIMUM

POSSIBLE

DENSITY
BONUS
Very-LowIncome
Housing
10% of entire
development
15% 1% 30% of
entire
development
365%
(max.
combined)
C. All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number (Government Code Section 65915(g)(2)).

17.39.230 Floor area ratio density bonus.

A. A floor area ratio density bonus may be granted to an eligible housing development, upon request of the developer, in lieu of a density bonus awarded based on dwelling units per acre.

1. In calculating the floor area ratio bonus pursuant to this section, the allowable gross residential area in square feet shall be the product of all the following amounts:
a. The allowable residential base density in dwelling units per acre. b. The site area in square feet, divided by forty-three thousand five hundred sixty. c. Two thousand two hundred fifty.

2. The city council shall not impose any parking requirement on an eligible housing development in excess of 0.1 parking spaces per unit that is affordable to persons and families with a household income equal or less than one hundred twenty percent of the area median income and 0.5 parking spaces per unit that is offered at market rate.

3. An applicant seeking to develop an eligible residential development shall be allowed to calculate impact fees based on square feet, instead of on a per-unit basis. Any affordable housing impact fees generated by the housing development, including inclusionary zoning fees and in-lieu fees, will not be levied on the housing development's affordable units (Government Code Section 65915.1).

4. If an eligible housing development is zoned for mixed-use purposes, any floor area ratio requirement under a zoning ordinance or land use element of the general plan applicable to the nonresidential portion of the eligible residential development, shall 243
Created: 2024-08-30 08:27:38 [EST]
(Supp. No. 9)

Page 13 of 29 ends

continue to apply notwithstanding the award of a floor area ratio bonus in accordance with this section.

5. An applicant for a floor area ratio bonus may also submit to the city a proposal for specific incentives or concessions pursuant to Section 17.39.0180.

17.39.240 Affordable housing incentives.

A. Subsections 65915(d), (j), (k) and (l) of the Government Code govern the following provisions regarding affordable housing incentives.

B. Qualifications for Incentives. Subject to Section 17.39.2600200, all of the following applicable requirements must be satisfied to be granted an incentive(s) pursuant to Section

17.39.026000 and Section 17.39.2500170:

1. The applicant for an incentive must also be an applicant for a density bonus and qualify for a density bonus pursuant to Section 17.39.035040 (Government Code Section 65915(d)(1)).

2. A specific written proposal for an incentive(s) must be submitted with the application for density bonus (Government Code Section 65915(b)(1) and (d)(1)).

3. If an incentive(s) pursuant to Sections 17.39.2600200 and 17.39.2700190 is sought, the applicant must establish that each requested incentive would result in identifiable and actual cost reductions for the qualified housing development (Government Code Section 65915(k)(1) and 65915(k)(3)).

4. If an incentive(s) pursuant to Subsection 17.39.260.0200AB.2 is sought, the applicant must establish that requirements of that section are met (Government Code Section 65915(k)(2)).

5. If an additional incentive for a childcare facility is sought pursuant to Section

17.39.2700120, the applicant must establish that requirements of that section are met (Government Code Section 65915(h)(1)(B)).

6. The granting of an incentive shall not be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment, zoning change, study, or other discretionary approval (Government Code Section 65915(j)). An incentive is applicable only to the project for which it is granted. An applicant for an incentive may request a meeting with the community development director (director) and, if requested, the director will meet with the applicant to discuss the proposal (Government Code Section 65915(d)(1)).

C. Types of Incentives. For the purposes of this chapter, incentive means any of the following:

1. A reduction in site development standards or a modification of development code requirements or design guidelines that exceed the minimum building standards approved by the California Building Standards Commission as provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code, including, but not limited to, a reduction in setback and square footage requirements and in the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that would otherwise be required that results in identifiable and actual cost reductions, to provide for affordable housing 244
costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in Section 17.39.1300250. (Government Code Section 65915(k)(1)).

2. Approval of mixed-use zoning in conjunction with the qualified housing development if commercial, office, industrial or other land uses will reduce the cost of the qualified housing development and if the commercial, office, industrial or other land uses are compatible with the qualified housing development and the existing or planned development in the area where the proposed qualified housing development will be located (Government Code Section 65915(k)(2)).

3. Other regulatory incentives proposed by the affordable housing developer or the city that result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in Section 17.39.1300250. (Government Code Section 65915(k)(3)).

4. Nothing in this section limits or requires the provision of direct financial incentives by the city for the qualified housing development, including the provision of publicly owned land, or the waiver of fees or dedication requirements (Government Code Section 65915(l)).

17.39.250 Number of incentives granted.

A. Subject to Section 17.39.035200, the applicant who meets the requirements of Section

17.39.035200 shall receive the following incentives and as shown in Table 17.39.0190250-

1. 1. One incentive or concession for qualified housing development projects that include at least five percent for very low-income households, at least ten percent of the total units for low-income households, or at least ten percent for persons and families of moderate-income households in a development in which units are for sale (Government Code Section 65915(d)(2)(A)).

2. Two incentives or concessions for qualified housing development projects that include at least ten percent for very low-income households, at least seventeen percent of the total units for low-income households, or at least twenty percent for persons and families of moderate-income households in a development in which the units are for sale (Government Code Section 65915(d)(2)(B)).

3. Three incentives or concessions for qualified housing development projects that include at least fifteen percent for very low-income households, at least twenty-four percent of the total units for low-income households, or at least thirty percent for persons and families of moderate-income households in a development in which the units are for sale (Government Code Section 65915(d)(2)(C)).

4. Four Five incentives or concessions for qualified housing development projects pursuant to Section 17.39.170011. If the project is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, the applicant shall also receive a height increase of up to three additional stories, or thirty-three feet (Government Code Section 65915(d)(2)(D)). 245
a. Where one hundred percent of all units in the development, including total units and density bonus units, but exclusive of manager’s unit or units, are for lower income households, the project is eligible for five incentives or concessions, with the exception that up to twenty percent of the units in the development may be for moderate income (Government Code Section 65915 (b)(1)(G) and (d)(2)(D)).

5. One incentive or concession for projects that include at least twenty percent of the total units for lower income students in a student housing development (Government Code Section 65915(d)(2)(E)).

6. Four incentives or concessions for projects that include at least sixteen percent of the units for very low income households or at least forty-five percent for persons and families of moderate income in a development in which the units are for sale (Government Code Section 65915(d)(2)(F)).

B. A qualified housing development proposal that includes a childcare facility shall be granted an additional incentive that contributes significantly to the economic feasibility of the construction of the childcare facility (Government Code Section 65915(h)(1)(B)).

Table 17.39.250-1
Incentive Allowances for Qualified Housing Developments INCOME CATEGORY MINIMUM % OF AFFORDABLE UNITS
Very Low Income 5% 10% 15% 16% 80%-
100%
Low Income 10% 17% 24% 80-100%
Moderate Income: ForSale Units 10% 20% 30% 45% 45%
Moderate Income: ForRent Units n/a n/a n/a n/a Up to
20%
Up to 20%
45%
Lower-Income Student
Housing
20% 23% n/a n/a n/a n/a
Incentives/Concessions
Allowed
1 2 3 44 5

17.39.260 Criteria for denial of application for incentives.

A. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter or by state law, if the requirements of Section

17.39.240 are met, the city shall grant the incentive(s) that are authorized by Section

17.39.250 unless a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, is made with respect to any of the following, in which case the city may refuse to grant the incentive(s):

1. The incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, consistent with Section 17.39.240190N to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in Section 17.39.035230 (Government Code Section 65915(d)(1)(A)). 246

2. The incentive would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(2), upon the public health and safety on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households (Government Code Section 65915(d)(1)(B); Government Code Section 65915 (d)(3)).

3. The incentive would be contrary to state or federal law (Government Code Section 65915(d)(1)(C)).

4. The community has adequate childcare facilities as demonstrated by substantial evidence, in which case the additional incentive for a childcare facility pursuant to Section 17.39.1800200 may be denied (Government Code Section 65915(h)(3)).

17.39.270 Waiver or modification of development standards.

A. Requirements for Waiver or Modification of Development Standards.

1. Application. To qualify for a waiver or reduction of one or more development standards, the applicant must submit a written application (together with an application for a qualified housing development) that states the specific development standard(s) sought to be modified or waived and the basis of the request(Government Code Section 65915(e)(1)). An applicant for a waiver or modification of development standard(s) pursuant to this section may request a meeting with the director to review the proposal.

If requested, the director shall meet with the applicant (Government Code Section 65915(e)(1)). An application for the waiver or reduction of development standard(s) pursuant to this section shall neither reduce nor increase the number of incentives to which the applicant is entitled pursuant to Section 17.39.026500 (Government Code Section 65915(e)(2)).

2. Findings. All the following findings must be made for each waiver or reduction requested:
a. The development standard for which a waiver or reduction is requested will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of the proposed qualified housing development at the densities or with the incentives permitted under this chapter (Government Code Section 65915(e)(1)).
b. The requested waiver or reduction of a development standard will not have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(2), upon the health or safety or, if such a specific, adverse impact exists, there is a feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact (Government Code Section 65915(e)(1)).
c. The requested waiver or reduction of a development standard will not have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources (Government Code Section 65915(e)(1)). d. The requested waiver or reduction of a development standard is not contrary to state or federal law (Government Code Section 65915(e)(1)). 247

3. Additional Waivers or Modifications of Development Standards. A housing development that receives a waiver from maximum controls on density pursuant to Section 17.39.2301790 is only eligible for a waiver or reduction in development standards as provided in Section 17.39.2301790.A, unless the city agrees to additional waivers or reductions of development standards.

4. Granting Application for Waiver or Modification of Development Standards. If the requirements of Section 17.39.2900210 are satisfied, the application for waiver or modification of development standard(s) shall be granted, and the city shall not apply a development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a qualified housing development at the densities or with the incentives permitted by this chapter (Government Code Section 65915(e)(1)).

17.39.280 Parking standard modifications for qualified housing developments.

A. Requirements for Parking Standard Modifications. Parking standard modifications pursuant to Section 17.39.2700240 are available only for qualified housing developments. An application for parking standard modifications stating the specific modification requested pursuant to Section 17.39.2700240 must be submitted with the qualified housing development application (Government Code Section 65915(p)(6)).

B. Parking Standard Modifications. If the requirements of Section 17.39.2700240 are met, the vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of parking for persons with a disability and guests, shall not exceed the following ratios (Government Code Section 65915(p)(1)), except where noted under Section 17.39.280240.C (exceptions):

1. Zero to one bedroom: one on-site parking space.

2. Two to three bedrooms: one and one-half on-site parking spaces.

3. Four and more bedrooms: two and one-half on-site parking spaces.

4. One bedspace in a student housing development: zero parking spaces.

C. Exceptions. Upon request of the applicant, the following maximum parking standards shall apply, inclusive of parking for persons with a disability and guests, to the entire housing development subject to this chapter, as required by Government Code Section 65915(p)(2):

1. A maximum of one-half parking spaces per bedroom shall apply when all the following conditions apply:
a. The development includes either:
i. At least eleven percent very low-income units for housing developments meeting the criteria in Section 17.39.016000; or
ii. At least twenty percent low-income units for housing developments meeting the criteria in Section 17.39.016000; or
iii. At least forty percent moderate-income units for housing developments meeting the criteria in Section 17.39.016000.
b. The development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code. 248
c. There is unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development. A development shall have unobstructed access to a major transit stop if a resident is able to access the major transit stop without encountering natural or constructed impediments which may include, but are not limited to, freeways, rivers, mountains, and bodies of water, but does not include residential structures, shopping centers, parking lots, or rails used for transit.

2. No vehicular parking standards shall apply when all any of the following conditions apply:
a. The development consists solely of rental units, exclusive of a manager's unit or units, with an affordable housing cost to lower-income families, as provided in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
b. The development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code and there is unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development. c. There is unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development. A development shall have unobstructed access to a major transit stop if a resident is able to access the major transit stop without encountering natural or constructed impediments which may include, but are not limited to, freeways, rivers, mountains, and bodies of water, but does not include residential structures, shopping centers, parking lots, or rails used for transit.

3. No vehicular parking standards shall apply when all the following conditions apply:
a. The development consists solely of rental units, exclusive of a manager's unit or units, with an affordable housing cost to lower-income families, as provided in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
c. b. The development is for individuals who are sixty-two years of age or older and which complies with Sections 51.2 and 51.3 of the Civil Code. d. c. The development shall have either paratransit service or unobstructed access, within one-half mile, to fixed bus route service that operates at least eight times per day.

4. No minimum vehicular parking standards shall apply when all the following conditions apply:
a.The development consists solely of rental units, exclusive of a manager's unit or units, with an affordable housing cost to lower-income families, as provided in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
e. d. The development is either:
i. A special needs housing development, as defined in Section 51312 of the Health and Safety Code, or
ii. A supportive housing development, as defined in Section 50675.14 of the Health and Safety Code.
249
c. If the development is a special needs housing development shall have either paratransit service or unobstructed access, within one-half mile, to fixed bus route service that operates at least eight times per day.

D. If the total number of parking spaces required for the qualified housing development is other than a whole number, the number shall be rounded up to the next whole number. For purposes of this section, "on-site parking" may be provided through tandem parking or uncovered parking, but not through on-street parking (Government Code Section 65915(p)(45)).

E. Except as otherwise provided in this section, all other provisions of Chapter 19.82 (offstreet parking and loading) applicable to residential development apply.

F. An applicant may request additional parking incentives beyond those provided in this section if applied for pursuant to Section 17.39.2700160 (Government Code Section 65915(p)(56)).

G. Notwithstanding allowances in Section 17.39.2700240, if the city or an independent consultant has conducted an area-wide or jurisdiction-wide parking study in the last seven years, then the city may impose a higher vehicular parking ratio not to exceed the ratio described in Section 17.39.2700240, based on substantial evidence found in the parking study that includes, but is not limited to, an analysis of parking availability, differing levels of transit access, walkability access to transit services, the potential for shared parking, the effect of parking requirements on the cost of market-rate and subsidized developments, and the lower rates of car ownership for low- and very low- income individuals, including seniors and special-needs individuals. The city shall pay the costs of any new study. The city shall make findings, based on a parking study completed in conformity with this paragraph, supporting the need for the higher parking ratio (Government Code Section 65915(p)(7)).

17.39.290 Density bonus and affordable housing incentive program.

A. Project Design and Phasing. Projects seeking an affordable housing benefit pursuant to this chapter must comply with the following requirements, unless otherwise specified in writing by the Director:

1. Location/Dispersal of Units. Affordable units shall be reasonably dispersed throughout the development where feasible and shall contain on average the same (or greater) number of bedrooms as the market-rate units.

2. Phasing. If a project is to be developed in phases, each phase must contain the same or substantially similar proportion of affordable units and market-rate units.

3. Exterior Appearance. The exterior appearance and quality of the affordable units must be similar to the market-rate units. The exterior materials and improvements of the affordable units must be similar to, and architecturally compatible with, the market-rate units.

B. Application Requirements. An application for one or more affordable housing benefits must be submitted as follows:
250

1. Each affordable housing benefit requested must be specifically stated in writing on the application form provided by the city.

2. The application must include the information and documents necessary to establish that the requirements of this chapter are satisfied for each affordable housing benefit requested, including:
a. For density bonus requests, that the requirements of Section 17.39.0540 are met; b. For incentive requests, that the requirements of Section 17.39.160 are met; c. For development standard waiver or modification requests, that the requirements of Section 17.39.2700 are met; and/or
d. For parking standard modification requests, that the requirements of Section

17.39.2800 are met.

3. The application must be submitted concurrently with a complete application for a qualified housing development. When notifying the applicant for a density bonus whether the application is complete, the city shall also notify the applicant of:
a. The amount of density bonus for which the applicant is eligible: and b. If a parking ratio is requested by the applicant, the parking ratio for which the applicant is eligible; and
c. If the applicant requests incentives or concessions, or waivers or reductions of development standards, the city/county will notify the applicant whether the applicant has provided adequate information for the city/county to make a determination as to those incentives, concessions, or waivers or reductions of development standards.

4. The application must include a site plan that complies with and includes the following:
a. For senior citizen housing development projects, the number and location of proposed total units and density bonus units.
b. For all qualified housing development projects other than senior citizen housing development projects, the number and location of proposed total units, affordable units, and density bonus units. The density bonus units shall be permitted in geographic areas of the qualified housing development other than the areas where the affordable units are located (Government Code Section 65915(i)). c. The location, design, and phasing criteria required by Section 17.39.2250, including any proposed development standard(s) modifications or waivers pursuant to Section 17.39.2710.

5. The application for a qualified housing development must state the level of affordability of the affordable units and include a proposal for compliance with Section

17.39.310270 for ensuring affordability.

6. If a density bonus is requested for a qualified land donation pursuant to Section

17.39.220160, the application must show the location of the qualified land in addition to including sufficient information to establish that each requirement in Section

17.39.220160 has been met.
251

7. If an additional density bonus or incentive is requested for a childcare facility pursuant to Section 17.39.18020 and/or Section 17.39.210, the application shall show the location and square footage of the childcare facility in addition to including sufficient information to establish that each requirement in Section 17.39.1820 and/or Section

17.39.28020.B. has been met.

C. An application for an affordable housing benefit under this chapter will not be processed until all of the provisions of this section are complied with as determined by the director and shall be processed concurrently with the application for the qualified housing development project for which the affordable housing benefit is sought. Prior to the submittal of an application for a qualified housing development, an applicant may submit to the director a preliminary proposal for affordable housing benefits. The director shall, within 90 days of receipt of a written proposal, notify the applicant of the director's preliminary response and schedule a meeting with the applicant to discuss the proposal and the director's preliminary response.

D. The city shall adjust the amount of density bonus and parking ratios awarded based on any changes to the project during development.

17.39.300 Determination on density bonus and affordable housing incentive program requirements.

A. The decision-making body for the underlying qualified housing development application is authorized to approve or deny an application for an affordable housing benefit in accordance with this chapter.

1. Affordable Housing Benefit Determinations. An application for an affordable housing benefit shall be granted if the requirements of this chapter are satisfied unless:
a. The application is for an incentive for which a finding is made in accordance with Section 17.39.2030; or
b. The underlying application for the qualified housing development is not approved independent of and without consideration of the application for the affordable housing benefit.

2. Affordable Housing Benefit Compliance Provisions. To ensure compliance with this chapter and state law, approval of an application for an affordable housing benefit may be subject to, without limitation:
a. The imposition of conditions of approval to the qualified housing development, including imposition of fees necessary to monitor and enforce the provisions of this chapter;
b. An affordable housing agreement and, if applicable, an equity-sharing agreement pursuant to Section 17.39.310270; and
c. Recorded deed restriction implementing conditions of approval and/or contractual or legally mandated provisions.

3. A decision regarding an affordable housing benefit application is subject to the appeal provisions of Section 19.46 (appeals).
252

17.39.310 Affordable housing agreement and equity-sharing agreement.

A. General Requirements. No density bonus pursuant to Section 17.39.0540 shall be granted unless and until the affordable housing developer, or its designee approved in writing by the director, enters into an affordable housing agreement and, if applicable, an equity-sharing agreement, with the city or its designee pursuant to and in compliance with this section (Government Code Section 65915(c)). The agreements shall be in the form provided by the city, which shall contain terms and conditions mandated by, or necessary to implement, state law and this article. The director may designate a qualified administrator or entity to administer the provisions of this section on behalf of the city. The affordable housing agreement shall be recorded prior to, or concurrently with, final map recordation or, where the qualified housing development does not include a map, prior to issuance of a building permit for any structure on the site. The director is hereby authorized to enter into the agreements authorized by this section on behalf of the city upon approval of the agreements by city attorney/county counsel for legal form and sufficiency.

B. Affordable Housing Agreement.

1. The affordable housing developer of a qualified housing development based upon the inclusion of low-income and/or very low-income affordable rental units must enter into an agreement with the city to maintain the continued affordability of the affordable units for fifty-five years (for rental units) or forty-five years (for for-sale units), or a longer period if required by the construction or mortgage financing assistance program, mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program, as follows (Government Code Section 65915(c)(1)(A)).

2. Agreement Conditions. The agreement shall establish specific compliance standards and specific remedies available to the city if such compliance standards are not met.

The agreement shall, among other things, specify the number of lower-income affordable units by number of bedrooms; standards for qualifying household incomes or other qualifying criteria, such as age; standards for maximum rents or sales prices; the person responsible for certifying tenant or owner incomes; procedures by which vacancies will be filled and units sold; required annual report and monitoring fees; restrictions imposed on lower-income affordable units on sale or transfer; and methods of enforcing such restrictions.

3. Determining Rent. Rents for the lower-income affordable units that qualified the housing development for the density bonus pursuant to Section 17.39.0540 shall be set and maintained at an affordable rent (Government Code Section 65915(c)(1)). The agreement shall set rents for the lower-income density bonus units at an affordable rent, as defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 50053. a. Exceptions—Rental Units. In a rental housing development with one hundred percent of units affordable to lower-income households per Section 17.39.1710, rents would be governed as follows. At least twenty percent of the units in the development would be rented at affordable rents and the rent for the rest of the units would be set at an amount consistent with the maximum rent levels for a housing development that receives an allocation of state or federal low-income housing tax credits from the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee. 253

4. Senior Units. At least thirty-five senior citizen housing development units are maintained and available for rent or sale to senior citizens, as defined in Civil Code Section 51.3.

C. Equity Sharing Agreement.

1. The affordable housing developer of a qualified housing development based upon the inclusion of very low, low, or moderate-income affordable units in a development in which units are for sale must ensure that a for-sale unit that qualified the applicant for the award of the density bonus meets either of the following conditions:
a. The unit is initially occupied by a person or family of a very low, low, or moderate-income household. The unit is offered at an affordable housing cost as defined in the Health and Safety Code Section 50052.5 (Government Code Section 65915(c)(2)) and is subject to an equity sharing agreement. b. The unit is purchased by a qualified nonprofit housing corporation pursuant to a recorded contract that satisfies all of the requirements specified in paragraph (10) of subdivision (a) of Section 402.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and that includes all of the following:
i. A repurchase option that requires a subsequent purchaser of the property that desires to resell or convey the property to offer the qualified nonprofit corporation the right to repurchase the property prior to selling or conveying that property to any other purchaser.
ii. An equity sharing agreement.
iii. Affordability restrictions on the sale and conveyance of the property that ensure that the property will be preserved for lower income housing for at least forty-five years for owner-occupied housing units and will be sold or resold only to persons or families of very low, low, or moderate income, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code.

2. The city shall enforce the equity-sharing agreement unless it is in conflict with the requirements of another public funding source or law (Government Code Section 65915(c)(2)). The equity-sharing agreement shall be between the city and the buyer or the developer and the buyer if the developer is the seller of the unit. The following provisions will be included in the equity-sharing agreement:
a. Upon resale, the seller of the unit shall retain the value of improvements, the down payment, and the seller's proportionate share of appreciation. The city shall recapture any initial subsidy, as defined in subparagraph (ii), and its proportionate share of appreciation, as defined in subparagraph (iii), which amount shall be used within five years for any of the purposes described in Health and Safety Code Section 33334.2(e) that promote homeownership (Government Code Section 65915(c)(2)(C)).
b. The city's initial subsidy shall be equal to the fair market value of the unit at the time of initial sale minus the initial sale price to the moderate-income household, plus the amount of any down payment assistance or mortgage assistance. If upon resale the market value is lower than the initial market value, then the value at the 254
time of the resale shall be used as the initial market value (Government Code Section 65915(c)(2)(C)).
c. The city's proportionate share of appreciation shall be equal to the ratio of the city's initial subsidy to the fair market value of the unit at the time of initial sale (Government Code Section 65915(c)(2)(C)).
d. If the unit is purchased by a qualified nonprofit housing corporation pursuant to Section 17.39.310250.C, the city may enter into a contract with the qualified nonprofit housing corporation under which the qualified nonprofit housing corporation would recapture any initial subsidy and its proportionate share of appreciation if the qualified nonprofit housing corporation is required to use one hundred percent of the proceeds to promote homeownership for lower-income households as defined by Health and Safety Code Section 50079.5 within the city's jurisdiction (Government Code Section 65915(c)(2)(C)).

4. Criteria for Denial of Application for a Density Bonus and Incentive. An applicant is ineligible for a density bonus or any other incentives under this chapter if the housing development is proposed on any property that includes a parcel or parcels where rental dwelling units are; or, if the dwelling units have been vacated or demolished in the five-year period preceding the application, have been subject to:
a. A recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of lower or very low income; or
b. Any other form of rent or price control through a public entity's valid exercise of its police power; or occupied by lower-income households, unless the proposed housing development replaces those units, and either of the following applies:
i. The proposed housing development, inclusive of the units replaced pursuant to this paragraph, contains affordable units at the percentages set forth in subdivision (2) below.
ii. Each unit in the development, exclusive of a manager's unit or units, is affordable to, and occupied by, a lower-income household.

This does not apply to an applicant seeking a density bonus for a proposed housing development if the applicant's application was submitted to, or processed by the city before January 1, 2015.
c. Replacement. The term "replace" in Section 17.39.310 means either of the following:
i. If any dwelling units described in paragraph (4) above are occupied on the date of application, the proposed housing development must provide at least the same number of units of equivalent size to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as those households in occupancy. If the income category of the household in occupancy is not known, it will be rebuttably presumed that lower income renter households occupied these units in the same proportion of lower income renter households to all renter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by 255
the most recently available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database. For unoccupied dwelling units described in subparagraph (4) above in a development with occupied units, the proposed housing development will provide units of equivalent size to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as the last household in occupancy. If the income category of the last household in occupancy is not known, it will be rebuttably presumed that lower income renter households occupied these units in the same proportion of lower income renter households to all renter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by the most recently available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database.
ii. If all dwelling units described in paragraph (4) have been vacated or demolished within the five-year period preceding the application, the proposed housing development must provide at least the same number of units of equivalent size as existed at the highpoint of those units in the fiveyear period preceding the application to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as those persons and families in occupancy at that time, if known. If the incomes of the persons and families in occupancy at the highpoint is not known, it must be rebuttably presumed that lowincome and very low-income renter households occupied these units in the same proportion of low-income and very low income renter households to all renter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by the most recently available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy database.

If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units are subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least fifty-five years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced are subject to an equity-sharing agreement pursuant to paragraph (3) above.
d. For any dwelling unit described in paragraph (4) that is or was, within the fiveyear period preceding the application, subject to a form of rent or price control through a local government's valid exercise of its police power and that is or was occupied by persons or families above lower income, the city may either:
i. Require that the replacement units be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, low-income persons or families.

If the replacement units will be rental dwelling units, these units are subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least fifty-five years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced are subject to paragraph (3).
ii. Minimum Affordable Housing Component and Childcare Facility. If an additional density bonus or incentive is granted because a childcare facility is 256
included in the qualified housing development, the affordable housing agreement shall also include the affordable housing developer's obligations pursuant to Section 17.39.1820 for maintaining a childcare facility, if not otherwise addressed through conditions of approval.

17.39.320 Density bonus or incentives for condominium conversion projects.

A. Requirements for Density Bonus or Incentive for Condominium Conversion Projects.

1. Applicant to convert apartments to a condominium project agrees to provide at least:
a. Thirty-three percent of the total units of the proposed condominium project to persons and families of moderate-income households, or
b. Fifteen percent of the total units of the proposed condominium project to persons and families of low-income households.

2. If applicant agrees to pay for the reasonably necessary administrative costs incurred by the city pursuant to this section, the city shall either:
a. Grant a density bonus, or
b. Provide other incentives of equivalent financial value (Government Code Section 65915.5(a)).

B. Definition of Density Bonus for Condominium Conversion Projects. If the requirements of Section 17.39.3300260.A are met, then the condominium conversion project will be entitled to an increase in units of twenty-five percent over the number of apartments, to be provided within the existing structure or structures proposed for conversion from apartments to condominiums (Government Code Section 65915.5(b)).

C. Presubmittal Preliminary Proposals for Density Bonus or Incentive for Condominium Conversion Projects. Prior to the submittal of a formal request for subdivision map approval or other application for necessary discretionary approvals, an applicant to convert apartments to a condominium project may submit to the director a preliminary proposal for density bonus or other incentives of equivalent financial value. The director shall, within ninety days of receipt of a written proposal, notify the applicant of the director's preliminary response and schedule a meeting with the applicant to discuss the proposal and the director's preliminary response (Government Code Section 65915.5(d)).

D. Application for Density Bonus or Incentives for Condominium Conversion Projects. An applicant must submit a completed application provided by the city for a density bonus or for other incentives of equivalent financial value. The application must be submitted concurrently with the application for the condominium conversion project. The application must include the following:

1. All information and documentation necessary to establish that the requirements of Section 17.39.320260 are met.

2. The proposal for a density bonus or the proposal for other incentives of equivalent financial value.
257

3. Site plans demonstrating the location of the units to be converted, the affordable units, the market-rate units, and the density bonus units in the condominium conversion project.

4. Any other information and documentation requested by the city to determine if the requirements of Section 17.39.320260 are met.

E. Both the application for a density bonus or other incentives of equivalent financial value and the application for the condominium conversion must be complete before the application for a density bonus or other incentives of equivalent financial value will be considered.

F. Granting Density Bonus or Incentive for Condominium Conversion Projects.

1. Approval.
a. If the requirements of Section 17.39.320260 are met, the decision-making body for the condominium conversion project application is authorized to grant an application for a density bonus or other incentives of equivalent financial value, subject to Section 17.39.320260.
b. Reasonable conditions may be placed on the granting of a density bonus or other incentives of equivalent financial value that are found appropriate, including, but not limited to, entering into an affordable housing agreement pursuant to Section

17.39.310250, which ensures continued affordability of units to subsequent purchasers who are persons and families of moderate-income households or lowincome households (Government Code Section 65915.5(a)).

2. Ineligibility. An applicant shall be ineligible for a density bonus or other incentives of equivalent financial value if the apartments proposed for conversion constitute a qualified housing development for which a density bonus as defined in Section

17.39.0540 or other incentives were provided (Government Code Section 65915.5(f)).

3. Decision on Condominium Conversion Project. Nothing in this section shall be construed to require the city to approve a proposal to convert apartments to condominiums (Government Code Section 65915.5(e)).

17.39.325 Request for Density Bonus in Commercial Development.

A. Requirements for Density Bonus or Incentive for Condominium Conversion Projects.

1. An applicant to convert apartments to a condominium project agrees to provide at least:
a. Thirty-three percent of the total units of the proposed condominium project for moderate-income households, or
b. Fifteen percent of the total units of the proposed condominium project for lowincome households.

2. If applicant agrees to pay for the reasonably necessary administrative costs incurred by the city pursuant to this section, the city shall either:
a. Grant a density bonus, or
258
b. Provide other incentives of equivalent financial value (Government Code Section 65915.5(a)).

B. Definition of Density Bonus for Condominium Conversion Projects. If the requirements of Section 17.39.320.A are met, then the condominium conversion project will be entitled to an increase in units of twenty-five percent over the number of apartments, to be provided within the existing structure or structures proposed for conversion from apartments to condominiums

17.39.330 Enforcement provisions.

A. Occupancy. Prior to occupancy of an affordable unit, the household's eligibility for occupancy of the affordable unit must be demonstrated to the city. This provision applies throughout the restricted time periods pursuant to Section 17.39.310250 and applies to any change in ownership or tenancy, including subletting, of the affordable unit.

B. Ongoing Compliance. Upon request, the affordable housing developer must show that the affordable units are continually in compliance with this chapter and the terms of the affordable housing agreement. Upon thirty-day notice, the city may perform an audit to determine compliance with this chapter and the terms of any agreement or restriction.

C. Enforcement. The city has the authority to enforce the provisions of this chapter, the terms of affordable housing agreements and equity sharing agreements, deed restrictions, covenants, resale restrictions, promissory notes, deed of trust, conditions of approval, permit conditions, and any other requirements placed on the affordable units or the approval of the qualified housing development. In addition to the enforcement powers granted in this chapter, the city may, at its discretion, take any other enforcement action permitted by law, including those authorized by city ordinances. Such enforcement actions may include, but are not limited to, a civil action for specific performance of the restrictions and agreement(s), damages for breach of contract, restitution, and injunctive relief. The remedies provided for herein shall be cumulative and not exclusive and shall not preclude the city from seeking any other remedy or relief to which it otherwise would be entitled under law or equity.

Section 3. CEQA. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the zoning text amendments to Chapter 17.39- Density Bonus of Title 17 of the Soledad Municipal Code, are consistent with the environmental analysis conducted for the City of Soledad 6th Cycle Housing Element, which was evaluated under an Addendum to the certified General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The amendments do not result in significant new environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts.

Therefore, no additional environmental review is required under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164. These amendments do not propose or commit the City to construction, and any subsequent project proposing a residential project in these zones would undergo environmental review at the time of proposal.
259
Section 4. Severability. The City Council hereby declares every section, paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase in this ordinance is severable. If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason found to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining sections, paragraphs, sentence, clause or phrases.

Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force 30 days after its adoption, and a summary of this ordinance shall be published once with the names of the members of the council voting for and against the ordinance in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Soledad.

This ordinance was introduced and read on the 17th day of December 2025 and was finally adopted on the 14th day of January 2026 by the following vote.

AYES, and in favor thereof, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:
_____________________________
ANNA M VELAZQUEZ, Mayor
Attest:
______________________________________
MEGAN HUNTER, City Manager/Clerk
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
Dec 17, 2025
City of Soledad
248 Main St
Soledad, CA 93960
By email: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
CC: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Re: Proposed Amendments to the City’s ADU Regulations
Dear Soledad City Council,
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits this letter as a public comment regarding item VIII.2 for the Council meeting of December 17 2025, an update to the City’s zoning text. Specifically, CalHDF writes to comment on the City’s proposed regulations for the construction of accessory dwelling units (“ADUs”) and junior accessory dwelling units (“JADUs”).

There are specific portions of the City's ADU code that violate state law, and the City should correct these issues before passing the ordinance.

Background
The law gives local governments authority to enact zoning ordinances that implement a variety of development standards on ADUs. (Gov. Code, § 66314.) The standards in these local ordinances are limited by state law so as not to overly restrict ADU development. (See id.) Separately from local ADU ordinances, Government Code section 66323 establishes a narrower set of ADU types that local governments have a ministerial duty to approve. “Notwithstanding Sections 66314 to 66322 ... a local agency shall ministerially approve” these types of ADUs. (Id. at subd. (a).) This means that ADUs that satisfy the minimal requirements of section 66323 must be approved regardless of any contrary provisions of the local ADU ordinance. (Ibid.) Local governments may not impose their own standards on such ADUs. (Gov. Code, § 66323, subd. (b) [“A local agency shall not impose any objective development or 2201 Broadway, PH1, Oakland, CA 94612
www.calhdf.org
267
design standard that is not authorized by this section upon any accessory dwelling unit that meets the requirements of any of paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive, of subdivision (a).”].) In addition, ADUs that qualify for the protections of Government Code section 66323, like other ADUs, must be processed by local governments within 60 days of a complete permit application submittal. (Gov. Code, § 66317, subd. (a).) State law also prohibits creating regulations on ADU development not explicitly allowed by state law. Government Code Section 66315 states, “No additional standards, other than those provided in Section 66314, shall be used or imposed, including an owner-occupant requirement, except that a local agency may require that the property may be used for rentals of terms 30 days or longer.”
Impermissible Owner Occupancy Restriction on JADUs
City code section 17.38.260(C)(1) requires owner occupancy for properties that contain a JADU.

However, the City should also be aware that AB 1154 will be effective on January 1, 2026. In addition to other provisions, AB 1154 forbids the application of owner occupancy requirements to properties with a JADU when the JADU has its own bathroom.

Given how close we are to the effective date of AB 1154, the City should update its code accordingly.

Impermissible Application of Underlying Standards
City code section 17.38.260(D)(1)(e) applies all underlying zoning standards to all attached ADUs, with an exception if application of such standards would preclude construction of an 800 square foot ADU.

City code section 17.38.260(D)(2)(e) applies all underlying zoning standards to all detached ADUs, with an exception if application of such standards would preclude construction of an 800 square foot ADU.

However, as discussed supra, the City may not apply any underlying standards to ADUs developed pursuant to Government Code section 66323, subdivision (a). The savings clause regarding 800 square foot ADUs is insufficient because ADUs developed pursuant to section 66323, subdivision (a) are not subject to any underlying zoning standards, as Government Code section 66323, subdivision (b) forbids the application of any local standards.

Of particular note, City code section 17.38.260(D)(2)(e) applies underlying front setback requirements to all detached ADUs. However, Government Code section 66323, subdivision 2 of 4
268
(a) does not permit any imposition of front setback requirements if the ADUs qualify for the protections of that section of law. This is because Government Code section 66323, subdivision (b) forbids application of any local standards not specifically listed in section 66323. New construction, detached ADUs developed pursuant to section 66323 are only required to adhere to four foot side and rear setbacks. This means that the City may not impose any front setbacks on such ADUs.

Additionally, the savings clause relating to 800 square foot ADUs is insufficient. First, even if an ADU is developable elsewhere on the parcel, Government Code section 66323, subdivision (b) forbids the City from imposing a front setback requirement in order to regulate the ADU’s location. Second, detached ADUs developed on parcels with multifamily buildings pursuant to Government Code section 66323, subdivision (a)(4) are not subject to any size limits. This is because Government Code section 66323 does not include any size limits on ADUs on multifamily parcels, and Government Code section 66323, subdivision (b) forbids the application of any development standards to section 66323 ADUs if such standards are not included in section 66323. This means that an exception for 800 square foot ADUs is inadequate for detached ADUs developed on parcels with multifamily buildings.

HCD has issued guidance under its authority in Government Code section 66327 (that guidance is located in the January 2025 HCD ADU Handbook, page 18) affirming the duty of local agencies to allow ADUs protected by Government Code section 66323 in the front setback under all circumstances: “66323 Units do not have to comply with lot coverage, front setbacks, and design standards.” This applies whether the property is a single family home or a multifamily building.

The City must amend its code to exempt section 66323 ADUs from all underlying zoning standards, including front setback requirements.

Impermissible Parking Requirements
City code section 17.38.260(D)(2)(d) imposes parking requirements on all ADUs, less certain specified exceptions.

However, as discussed supra, the City cannot impose local development standards on ADUs that conform to the requirements of Government Code section 66323, subdivision (a), as section 66323, subdivision (b) specifically exempts such ADUs from all local requirements.

This means that the City cannot impose parking requirements on section 66323 ADUs.

From page 20 of the January 2025 HCD ADU Handbook (emphasis added):

A local agency may not impose development or design standards, including both local standards and standards found in State ADU Law, on 66323 Units that are not 3 of 4
269
specifically listed in Government Code section 66323. (Gov. Code, § 66323, subds. (a), (b).) This includes, but is not limited to, parking, height, setbacks, or other zoning provisions (e.g., lot size, open space, floor area ratio, etc.).

The City must amend its ADU ordinance to exempt section 66323 ADUs from parking requirements, as is required by state law.
⧫ ⧫ ⧫
It is laudable that the City is updating its ADU regulations as state law changes. However, the City should make sure that its zoning regulations comply with state law.

CalHDF is a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation whose mission includes advocating for increased access to housing for Californians at all income levels, including low-income households. You may learn more about CalHDF at www.calhdf.org.

Sincerely,
Dylan Casey
CalHDF Executive Director
James M. Lloyd
CalHDF Director of Planning and Investigations
4 of 4
270
SUBJECT: Waiver of Reading, Adoption and Read by Title Only of Ordinance No. 774, Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Soledad Amending the Downtown Specific Plan Section 2.0- Zones of Chapter 5.0- Development Code and Chapter 10.0- Definitions, to Establish Separate Veterinary Services and Animal Boarding Uses and to Conditionally Allow SmallScale Veterinary Services in the Downtown Core District TO: Honorable Mayor Anna Velazquez and City Council
FROM: Beatriz Trujillo, Community and Economic Development Director and Ariana Mora, Senior Planner
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2026

CITY OF SOLEDAD

STAFF REPORT
THROUGH: Megan Hunter, City Manager
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1.

Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council of the City of Soledad consider waiver of reading, adoption and reading by title only of Ordinance No. 774, an Ordinance of City Council of the City of Soledad Amending the Downtown Specific Plan Section 2.0- Zones of Chapter 5.0- Development Code and Chapter 10.0- Definitions, to Establish Separate Veterinary Services and Animal Boarding Uses and to Conditionally Allow Small Scale Veterinary Services in the Downtown Core District.

Executive Summary
The City of Soledad is advancing targeted amendments to the Downtown Soledad Specific Plan to clarify land use regulations and support a more vibrant and economically resilient downtown. These updates respond directly to City Council direction to reevaluate how veterinary services are regulated in Soledad and to ensure the Specific Plan supports appropriate small-scale service uses. The proposed revisions modify Section 2.0 – Zones of Chapter 5.0 – Development Code and Chapter 10.0 – Definitions to establish distinct land use categories for Veterinary Services and Animal Boarding and to allow Small-Scale Veterinary Services as a minor use within the Downtown Core District.

These refinements are intended to resolve existing ambiguities in the Plan, ensure consistent application of land use standards, and provide clear pathways for small service-oriented businesses to operate within the downtown area. The proposed amendments were initially reviewed by the Soledad Planning Commission on November 20, 2025, and recommended for adoption by the City Council. The proposed ordinance was presented to the City Council for introduction and first reading on December 17, 2025, and is now being presented for review and consideration of approval. 271
Background
The Downtown Soledad Specific Plan (DSP) establishes five distinct zoning districts, each with tailored development standards and land use regulations designed to reinforce the intended character and function of the downtown area. Within these districts, land uses are classified as Permitted (P), Minor Use Permit (MUP), Conditional Use Permit (CUP), or Prohibited (-). Permitted uses are typically reviewed administratively, while MUPs and CUPs require ministerial or discretionary processes that include public noticing. This framework enables the City to manage growth, ensure land use compatibility, and maintain a balanced mix of commercial, residential, and light industrial uses in the Downtown.

In response to the City Council’s interest in expanding access to animal services, staff initiated a review of how veterinary uses are regulated within the DSP. Because the proposed revisions represented a meaningful policy shift, staff presented the concept to the City Council on October 15, 2025. Following this discussion, the City Council directed staff to prepare amendments to the DSP that would create clearer land use distinctions for veterinary-related services and expand opportunities for small-scale, appointment-based veterinary care in the Downtown Soledad.

Consistent with this direction, staff is proposing Ordinance No. 774, which introduces amendments to the DSP to establish separate veterinary service and animal boarding use categories and to allow smallscale veterinary services in the Downtown Core District with appropriate limitations. Because the proposed ordinances include policy updates to the Downtown Specific Plan and the Soledad Municipal Code, the amendments are required to be reviewed by the Soledad Planning Commission prior to consideration by the City Council. On November 20, 2025, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed ordinances and recommended adoption.

The introduction and first reading by title only occurred on December 17, 2025, during which the City Council had the opportunity to review the proposed changes and ask questions to Staff. At this time, the proposed ordinance is being presented to the Council as a recommendation for adoption. The proposed amendments are to be reviewed by the Council to consider whether they accurately reflect and implement the Council’s direction, as previously noted.

Review & Analysis
The DSP establishes five zoning districts, as seen in Map 1 attached to this report, each with land use regulations tailored to support its intended character and geographic context. This structure provides development flexibility while preserving the City’s long-term vision for a vibrant and balanced Downtown Soledad. As community needs evolve, periodic updates to the DSP are necessary to ensure it continues to support essential services and contributes to residents’ quality of life.

One identified gap in allowed uses relates to veterinary services. Although veterinary clinics are conditionally permitted in several DSP districts, they remain explicitly prohibited in the Downtown Core (DC) District. This restriction has become increasingly challenging for the community, particularly following the closure of Soledad’s only veterinary clinic. With a growing population and increased pet ownership, residents now have limited access to basic veterinary care and must frequently travel outside the city for vaccinations, wellness checks, and spay/neuter services. Expanding access to limited-service veterinary care within the DC District would help address this need while maintaining compatibility with surrounding uses. Small-scale, appointment-based outpatient clinics, without overnight boarding or outdoor kennels, are low-intensity operations that align with the DSP’s land use goals and support public health and animal welfare throughout South Monterey County. 272
Existing Veterinary Use Allowances in the DSP
Downtown Core District – Prohibited
Downtown Edge -Conditionally Allowed (MUP)
Monterey Street District – Conditionally allowed (CUP)
Railroad Corridor District – Conditionally allowed (MUP) Gateway District – Conditionally allowed (MUP)
Proposed Amendments to the Downtown Specific Plan (Ordinance No. 774) To enable small-scale veterinary services in the DC District while maintaining clear distinctions between compatible and higher impact uses, staff recommends the following text amendments:

Amend Chapter 5.0 – Development Code, Section 2.0 – Zones, to: Establish separate use categories for Veterinary Services and Animal Boarding/Daycare.

Allow Veterinary Services as a Minor Use Permit (MUP) use within the Downtown Core District, all other districts will reflect the proposed use category changes but keep the existing permit requirements.

Maintain Animal Boarding/Daycare as a prohibited use in the Downtown Core District Amend Chapter 10.0 – Definitions, to:

Update the definition of “Veterinary Services” to clarify that permitted activities include spay/neuter procedures, vaccinations, and wellness care conducted on an outpatient, appointment-only basis. Clarify that overnight animal boarding is not included within the definition of Veterinary Services. Establish a distinct definition for “Animal Boarding/Daycare” as a separate use involving overnight stays or extended care and prohibit this use in the DC District.

General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan Compliance
The proposed amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan is consistent with the 2005 General Plan by supporting a balanced mix of land uses in Soledad. Allowing small-scale veterinary services in the Downtown Core while distinguishing them from higher-intensity animal boarding uses helps maintain a balance between employment-generating commercial activities and community-serving uses, aligning with Policy L10. By expanding opportunities for essential neighborhood-serving services within an existing commercial district, the amendments also support Policy L22, which calls for ensuring adequate commercial land to meet the present and future needs of residents. Additionally, enabling limited-service veterinary clinics responds to an identified service gap in Soledad and supports Policy E3 by encouraging the attraction and retention of commercial tenants in undersupplied sectors. Together, these updates strengthen the economic vitality of Downtown, promote a complete and more functional commercial environment, and reinforce Soledad’s broader land use and economic development goals.

Planning Commission Discussion
The Planning Commission conducted its initial review of the proposed ordinance amending the Downtown Specific Plan to accommodate veterinary services within the Downtown Core District on November 20, 2025. The Commission’s discussion focused primarily on the types of animals that would be permitted in this district. After clarifying several applicable zoning standards, the Planning Commission recommended modifying the proposed definition of “veterinary services” to clearly limit 273
treatment to household animals and to specify that services be restricted to wellness exams, vaccinations, preventative care, and routine surgical procedures such as spay and neuter services. Staff is forwarding this recommended modification to the City Council for consideration as part of the proposed ordinance.

City Council Discussion
Ordinance No. 774 was first introduced to the City Council on December 17, 2025, at which time the Council approved its introduction and directed it to proceed to a public hearing. During the discussion, the Council requested clarification regarding the proposed amendments to the definitions of Animal Boarding and Day Care and household pets for small veterinary services.

Regarding the definition of household pets in the Veterinary Services, Limited Treatment category, the Planning Commission provided a recommendation to limit services to only household pets. However, during the introduction of the ordinance, the Council directed staff to refine the definition further. It is important to note that the Soledad Municipal Code Chapter 17.38- Special Standards, already defines small-animal veterinary hospitals or clinics. This code limits treatment to small animals, such as dogs, cats, and other similar household pets, while explicitly prohibiting medical treatment for livestock or animals of the cattle family, including cows and bulls, which are typically raised for meat, milk, or labor. To maintain consistency with existing code language, staff recommends updating the definition as noted in red:

Veterinary Services, Limited Treatment (land use type):

A small-scale medical establishment for typical household pets, including dogs, cats, rabbits, birds, and other domesticated animals commonly kept as pets, with staff and facilities that provide outpatient animal care, including wellness exams, vaccinations, preventative treatments, and routine surgical procedures such as spay and neuter services. This use does not include livestock, farm animals, or bovine animals (e.g., cows, bulls, bison, or other animals raised primarily for meat, milk, labor, or other agricultural purposes). No overnight boarding, outdoor kennels, surgical suites, or animal hospitalization facilities are permitted.

For the Animal Boarding and Day Care definition, the Council requested clarification on how “shortterm” and “long-term” stays are distinguished. Typically, animal day care is a short-term use, with animals dropped off and picked up within the same day and not requiring extended on-site housing. In contrast, animal boarding generally involves longer-term stays, where animals remain on-site for consecutive days. The Downtown Specific Plan does not currently define boarding durations, which may create ambiguity in land use applications. To provide clarity, staff recommends refining the definition to specify that short-term stays include animal day care and boarding services lasting from a single day up to one week, commonly associated with temporary care needs such as travel, weekend absences, or emergencies. Long-term boarding refers to stays extending beyond one week, which more closely resemble extended housing of animals. To provide clarity, staff recommends updating the definition as noted in red:

Animal Boarding and Day Care (land use type):

A facility where animals are housed or cared for short- or long-term stays. Facilities may include kennels, designated outdoor areas, grooming services, and training activities. Short-term stays include animal day care and boarding services lasting from a single day up to one week, typically associated with temporary care needs such as travel, weekend absences, or emergencies. Long-term boarding refers to stays extending beyond one week, where animals are housed on-site for consecutive days. 274
Exhibit A -Ordinance No. 774
Attachment 1 - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2025-11 Map 1- Downtown Specific Plan Boundary
Presentation 1- Ord No. 774
The proposed timeframes reflect common industry practices, establish a clear distinction between day care and boarding operations, and provide an objective standard to support consistent land use determinations while minimizing potential land use conflicts.

Conclusion
The proposed amendments to the Downtown Soledad Specific Plan implement City Council direction to provide greater flexibility for essential veterinary and wellness services and address community needs for spay/neuter and outpatient care while maintaining consistency with the DSP’s long-term vision for a vibrant and balanced Downtown. The review of the amendments remains a vital step in this process, providing thoughtful evaluation and recommendations on the proposed ordinance language.

The Council's action is to review and consider the Ordinance No. 774 for adoption.

Financial Considerations
At this time, all costs associated with processing this item are administrative in nature and have been absorbed within the Community and Economic Development Department’s existing departmental budget. No additional expenditures are anticipated.

Alternatives
Adopt and read by title only, Ordinance No. 774 as presented; or Adopt and read by title only, Ordinance No. 774 with specific, directed modifications, such as adjustments to the proposed language, clarifications, or corrections; or Deny the proposed Ordinance No. 774 and provide direction to staff. This action is not recommended as the proposed ordinance is a policy change directed by the City Council from the October 15, 2025 City Council meeting.

Planning/CEQA
The proposed amendments to the Downtown Soledad Specific Plan, including revisions to Section 2.0 – Zones of Chapter 5.0 – Development Code and Chapter 10.0 – Definitions to establish separate veterinary services and animal boarding uses and to conditionally allow small scale veterinary services in the downtown core district, qualify for a categorical exemption under CEQA Guidelines §15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) and §15061(b)(3) (No Significant Effect on the Environment). The amendments are limited to text changes that regulate allowable land uses and definitions within existing zones, do not authorize physical construction, and will not result in any significant environmental impacts. Any future development under these provisions will be subject to separate review under CEQA.

Public Notice Requirements
The public hearing was published in the Salinas Californian on December 24, 2025.

Attachment(s):
275
ORDINANCE NO. 774

AN ORDINANCE OF CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOLEDAD AMENDING THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN SECTION 2.0- ZONES OF CHAPTER 5.0- DEVELOPMENT CODE AND CHAPTER 10.0- DEFINITIONS, TO ESTABLISH

SEPARATE VETERINARY SERVICES AND ANIMAL BOARDING USES AND TO

CONDITIONALLY ALLOW SMALL-SCALE VETERINARY SERVICES IN THE

DOWNTOWN CORE DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Downtown Soledad Specific Plan (“DSP”) was adopted by the City in 2012 to guide land use, development standards, and design within the Downtown area; and WHEREAS, the DSP establishes five zoning districts and provides flexibility to accommodate a variety of compatible land uses while preserving the long-term vision for a vibrant, balanced, and economically healthy Downtown; and
WHEREAS, the type and extent of permitted uses in each zone are guided by their intended purpose and geographic context of the district, ensuring orderly development while maintaining the character and quality of life in Downtown Soledad; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to periodically review and update the DSP to ensure it continues to support essential services, meets emerging community needs, and enhances the overall vitality and livability of the Downtown area; and WHEREAS, veterinary services are currently prohibited in the Downtown Core (DC) District, while similar services are conditionally permitted in other DSP zones; and WHEREAS, population growth and increased pet ownership have created a need for access to veterinary and wellness services within the Downtown area, while maintaining compatibility with surrounding uses; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments to the Downtown Soledad Specific Plan, including revisions to Section 2.0 – Zones of Chapter 5.0 – Development Code and Chapter 10.0 – Definitions, are intended to establish separate veterinary services and animal boarding uses and to conditionally allow small-scale veterinary services in the Downtown Core District; and WHEREAS, allowing small-scale, outpatient veterinary services, including wellness checks and spay/neuter procedures, with limitations on higher-impact operations such as overnight boarding, will help address local service gaps, promote public health and safety, and maintain the character and goals of the Downtown Core District; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments will provide a framework to conditionally allow these uses through discretionary review, ensuring that new uses are compatible with existing Downtown land uses and continue to support the City’s vision for a vibrant and balanced Downtown; and
276
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments to the Downtown Soledad Specific Plan are consistent with 2005 the City of Soledad General Plan, including Policy L10, which directs the City to maintain a reasonable balance between employment-generating uses and communityserving land uses; Policy L22, which calls for ensuring adequate commercial land to meet the present and future needs of residents and to sustain economic vitality; and Policy E3, which encourages efforts to attract and retain commercial and office tenants in sectors that are currently undersupplied and for which local demand exists; and
WHEREAS, allowing small-scale veterinary services within the Downtown Core supports these policies by expanding access to essential neighborhood-serving commercial services, addressing an identified community need, enhancing opportunities for economic activity, and strengthening the overall vitality and functionality of the Downtown commercial district; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendments to the Downtown Soledad Specific Plan qualify for a categorical exemption under CEQA Guidelines §15303 and the common-sense exemption under §15061(b)(3), as they consist solely of text changes regulating allowable land uses and definitions, do not authorize any physical construction, and will not result in a significant environmental impact and any future development under these provisions will be subject to separate CEQA review.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED by the Soledad City Council as follows:

Section 1. All of the recitals set forth above are true and correct to the best of its knowledge, and by this reference are incorporated herein.

Section 2. Table 5.2A.1 Allowed Land Uses and Required Parking: Downtown Core of Section

2.30.10- Downtown Core of Chapter 5.0- Development Code in the Downtown Specific Plan is hereby amended as follows:

Category Use Permit Parking
Animal Boarding and
Day Care
- -
Services Veterinary Clinic /
Animal Boarding &
Day Care
- -
Veterinary Services
(Limited Treatment)
MUP 1/400
277
Section 3. Table 5.2B.1 Allowed Land Uses and Required Parking: Downtown Edge of Section

2.30.20- Downtown Edge of Chapter 5.0- Development Code in the Downtown Specific Plan is hereby amended as follows:

Category Use Permit Parking
Animal Boarding and
Day Care
MUP 1/400
Services Veterinary Clinic /
Animal Boarding &
Day Care
MUP 1/400
Veterinary Services
(Limited Treatment)
MUP 1/400
Section 4. Table 5.2C.1 Allowed Land Uses and Required Parking: Monterey Street of Section

2.30.30- Monterey Street of Chapter 5.0- Development Code in the Downtown Specific Plan is hereby amended as follows:

Category Use Permit Parking
Animal Boarding and
Day Care
CUP 1/400
Services Veterinary Clinic /
Animal Boarding &
Day Care
CUP 1/400
Veterinary Services
(Limited Treatment)
CUP 1/400
Section 5. Table 5.2D.1 Allowed Land Uses and Required Parking: Railroad Corridor of Section

2.30.40- Railroad Corridor of Chapter 5.0- Development Code in the Downtown Specific Plan is hereby amended as follows:

Category Use Permit Parking
Animal Boarding and
Day Care
P 1/400
Services Veterinary Clinic /
Animal Boarding &
Day Care
P 1/400
Veterinary Services
(Limited Treatment)
P 1/400
278
Section 6. Table 5.2E.1 Allowed Land Uses and Required Parking: Gateway of Section 2.30.50- Gateway of Chapter 5.0- Development Code in the Downtown Specific Plan is hereby amended as follows:

Category Use Permit Parking
Animal Boarding and
Day Care
P 1/400
Services Veterinary Clinic /
Animal Boarding &
Day Care
P 1/400
Veterinary Services
(Limited Treatment)
P 1/400
Section 7. Chapter 10.0- Definitions in the Downtown Specific Plan is hereby amended as follows:

Animal Boarding and Day Care (land use type): A facility where animals are housed or cared for short- or long-term stays. Facilities may include kennels, designated outdoor areas, grooming services, and training activities. Short-term stays include animal day care and boarding services lasting from a single day up to one week, typically associated with temporary care needs such as travel, weekend absences, or emergencies. Long-term boarding refers to stays extending beyond one week, where animals are housed on-site for consecutive days.

Veterinary Clinic / Animal Boarding and Day Care (land use type): A medical establishment for animals with on-site staff and facilities that serves animal patients with a variety of medical services ranging from diagnoses to surgery and includes boarding overnight observation or boarding incidental to medical care.

Veterinary Services, Limited Treatment (land use type): A small-scale medical establishment for typical household pets, including dogs, cats, rabbits, birds, and other domesticated animals commonly kept as pets, with staff and facilities that provide outpatient animal care, including wellness exams, vaccinations, preventative treatments, and routine surgical procedures such as spay and neuter services. This use does not include livestock, farm animals, or bovine animals (e.g., cows, bulls, bison, or other animals raised primarily for meat, milk, labor, or other agricultural purposes). No overnight boarding, outdoor kennels, surgical suites, or animal hospitalization facilities are permitted.

Section 8. CEQA. The proposed amendments to the Downtown Soledad Specific Plan, including revisions to Section 2.0 – Zones of Chapter 5.0 – Development Code and Chapter 10.0 – Definitions to establish separate veterinary services and animal boarding uses and to conditionally allow small scale veterinary services in the downtown core district, qualify for a categorical exemption under CEQA Guidelines §15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) and §15061(b)(3) (No Significant Effect on the Environment). The amendments are limited to text changes that regulate allowable land uses and definitions within existing zones, do not authorize physical construction, and will not result in any significant environmental impacts.

Any future development under these provisions will be subject to separate review under CEQA. 279
Section 9. Severability. The City Council hereby declares every section, paragraph, sentence, clause and phrase in this ordinance is severable. If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason found to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining sections, paragraphs, sentence, clause or phrases.

Section 10. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force 30 days after its adoption, and a summary of this ordinance shall be published once with the names of the members of the council voting for and against the ordinance in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Soledad.

This ordinance was introduced and read on the 17th day of December 2025 and was finally adopted on the 14th day of January, 2026 by the following vote.

AYES, and in favor thereof, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:
_____________________________
ANNA M VELAZQUEZ, Mayor
Attest:
______________________________________
MEGAN HUNTER, City Manager/Clerk
280
281
282
&LW\RI6ROHGDG'RZQWRZQ6SHFLÀF3ODQ_)LQDO_ &+$37(5'(9(/230(17&2'(
SECTION 2.0 ZONES
2C
3C
4C
5C
3D
4D
5D
6C 6D
8C
9C
8D
9D
11C
12C
13C
10C 10D
11D
10E
7C
7D
1C
1B
2B
3B
4B
5B
6B 6E
7E
6F
7F
8E
9E
7B
8B
9B
10B
11B
1A
2A
3A
4A
5A
6A
7A
8A
9A
10A
11A
12A
13B
13A
14B
Front Street
Monterey Street
Market Street
West Street
Benito Street
Encinal Street
Main Street
Soledad Street
Kidder Street
Dixie Street
Oak Street
Alder Street
Park Street
Pine Street
First Street
Palm Avenue
Monterey Street Monterey Street
Front Street Front Street
East Street
Key to Figure 5.2.1 Figure 5.2.1 Regulating Plan
'RZQWRZQ&RUH=RQH
5DLOURDG&RUULGRU=RQH
'RZQWRZQ(GJH=RQH
*DWHZD\=RQH
0RQWHUH\6WUHHW=RQH
3XEOLF)DFLOLW\=RQH(See
3)=RQH60&7LWOHIRU

UHTXLUHPHQWV

2OG7RZQ1HLJKERUKRRG
Area
6HH6SHFLÀF3ODQIRUSROLF\
GLUHFWLRQDQG5]RQH,Q7LWOH
RIWKH6ROHGDG0XQLFLSDO&RGH

12 5HIHUHQFHWR%ORFN
6HH7DEOH
IRUVWDQGDUGV
,QWHQGHG6WUHHW

VHH)LJIRUUHTXLUHPHQWV

283

DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC
PLAN

VETERINARY SERVICES

AND ANIMAL BOARDING
USES
City of Soledad
December 17, 2025
1 284
Policy change direction by City
Council on October 15, 2025
Clearer land use distinctions for
veterinary-related services and
expand opportunities for smallscale, appointment-based veterinary care in the Downtown Soledad
Identified gap in allowed uses
relates to veterinary services

OVERVIEW
1 2
3 2
285
Staff is reccomending Approval of
Ord. No 774:
• As presented
• With adjustments to the
proposed language or
clarifications
The proposed ordinance is a policy
change directed by the City Council

CITY COUNCIL
ACTION
3 286
ORD. NO. 774 – Vet Services in DSP
Identified Service Gap
4 Current Challenges Purpose and Community
Benefits
1 2 3
Gateway District – Allowed
with MUP
Railroad Corridor District –
Allowed with MUP
Monterey Street District –
Allowed with CUP
Downtown Core District –
Prohibited
Improve access to basic pet
healthcare
Reduce the need for residents
to travel outside the city
Support public health and
animal welfare
As community needs change,
ensure the DSP continues to
support essential services.

Veterinary clinics are
prohibited in the Downtown
Core (DC).

The only veterinary clinic in
Soledad closed
287
L-10 accommodate needed housing while
maintaining an appropriate balance between
residential and employment-generating uses
L22 ensures adequate commercial land to meet the
present and future needs of residents.

E3 encourages the attraction and retention of
commercial tenants in undersupplied sectors.

City Council Direction

GENERAL PLAN

COMPLIANCE
1 2
3 4
5 288
The Downtown Soledad Specific Plan (DSP) establishes five zoning districts, each with development standards tailored to support the desired downtown character.

OVERVIEW OF THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC
6 PLAN
FRONT ST.

MONTEREY ST.

MARKET ST.
289

OVERVIEW OF THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC
7 PLAN
 Land Uses within each district are classified as:
 P – Permitted
 MUP – Minor Use Permit
 CUP – Conditional Use Permit
 - Prohibited
 Permitted uses are generally processed administratively; MUPs and CUPs require additional review and public noticing.
290
8 ORD. NO. 774- VET SERVICES IN DSP
 Implements Council direction by updating land use regulations within the DSP
 Creates
 Separate categories for Veterinary Clinics and Veterinary Services, and Animal Boarding/Daycare where the DSP proposed it as all one use Category Use Downtown
Core
Downtown
Edge
Monterey Street Railroad Corridor Gateway
Services
Animal Boarding
and Day Care
- MUP CUP P P
Veterinary Clinic
/ Animal
Boarding & Day
Care
- MUP CUP P P
Veterinary
Services
(Limited
Treatment)

MUP MUP CUP P P
291
9 ORD. NO. 774- VET SERVICES IN DSP
Original Definition:

New Definitions:
 Amend Chapter 10.0 – Definitions of the DSP
Animal Boarding and Day Care
(land use type): A facility where
animals are housed or cared for
short- or long-term stays.

Facilities may include kennels,
designated outdoor areas,
grooming services, and training
activities.

Veterinary Services, Limited Treatment (land use type): A small-scale medical establishment for animals with staff and facilities that provides outpatient animal care,
including wellness exams, vaccinations, preventative
treatments and routine surgical procedures such as
spay and neuter services. No overnight boarding,
outdoor kennels, surgical suites, or animal
hospitalization facilities are permitted.
292
Reccomended to Approve Ord. No. 774 :

With modification of the Veterinary Services
definition to say:

Veterinary Services, Limited Treatment (land use type): A small-scale medical establishment for household animals, with staff and facilities that provides outpatient animal care, including wellness exams, vaccinations, preventative
treatments and routine surgical procedures such as spay and neuter services. No overnight boarding, outdoor kennels, surgical suites, or animal hospitalization facilities are permitted.

PLANNING

COMMISSION

RECCOMENDATION
10 293
Modify of the Veterinary Services definition:

Veterinary Services, Limited Treatment (land use type): A small-scale medical establishment for typical household pets including dogs, cats, rabbits, birds, and other
domesticated animals commonly kept as pets, with staff
and facilities that provides outpatient animal care,
including wellness exams, vaccinations, preventative
treatments and routine surgical procedures such as
spay and neuter services. This use does not include
livestock, farm animals, or bovine animals (e.g., cows, bulls, bison, or other animals raised primarily for meat, milk, labor, or other agricultural purposes). No overnight boarding, outdoor kennels, surgical suites, or animal
hospitalization facilities are permitted.

STAFF

RECCOMENDATION
COUNCIL DIRECTION 11
294
Modify the Animal Boarding and Day Care
definition:

Animal Boarding and Day Care (land use type): A facility where animals are housed or cared for short- or long-term stays.

Facilities may include kennels, designated outdoor areas, grooming services, and training activities. Short-term stays include animal day care and boarding services lasting from a single day up to one week, typically associated with temporary care needs such as travel, weekend absences, or
emergencies. Long-term boarding refers to stays extending beyond one week, where animals are housed on-site for
consecutive days.

STAFF

RECCOMENDATION
COUNCIL DIRECTION 12
295
Consider Approval of Ord. No. 774:
 As presented
 With adjustments to the proposed language
or clarifications
CEQA: he proposed zoning text amendments through
Ordinance No. 774 qualifies for a categorical
exemption under CEQA Guidelines §15303 and the
common-sense exemption under §15061(b)(3), as they
consist solely of text changes regulating allowable land uses and definitions
Upon Approval:
 Formal adoption for January 14, 2025

CITY COUNCIL
ACTION
13 296

DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC
PLAN

VETERINARY SERVICES

AND ANIMAL BOARDING
USES
Thank You!
14 297
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 6320, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Soledad Approving the Toledo Basin Park Preferred Concept Plan TO: Honorable Mayor Anna Velazquez and City Council
FROM: Jessica Potts, Parks and Recreation Director
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2026

CITY OF SOLEDAD

STAFF REPORT
THROUGH: Megan Hunter, City Manager
AGENDA ITEM NO. 1.

Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council consider and adopt Resolution No.6320, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Soledad "Approving the Toledo Basin Park Preferred Concept Plan" and receive a presentation from BFS Landscape Architects.

Executive Summary
The City of Soledad Parks and Recreation Department, in partnership with BFS Landscape Architects, has completed the Preferred Concept Design for the proposed Toledo Basin Park. This work represents approximately one year of community outreach and public engagement, resulting in a design refined through community feedback. Adoption of the Preferred Concept Plan will formally establish the vision and framework for the Toledo Basin Park and allow the City to move forward with funding efforts, partnerships, and future implementation activities. The Preferred Concept Plan serves as the blueprint for the project and reflects both community priorities and City-adopted planning goals.

Background
Toledo Basin Park has been identified as a future community park site intended to expand access to recreational amenities and green space for surrounding neighborhoods. The project was initiated in alignment with the City’s adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan, which prioritizes the development of new parks in underserved areas and emphasizes inclusive, multi-generational recreational opportunities.

Over the past year, the City conducted a comprehensive public engagement process that included a community survey, on-site outreach, and public workshops, attended by community members of all ages and demographics. Feedback from these sessions informed the development of the draft concept design, which was subsequently presented back to the community for additional input. This step-bystep process ensured transparency, responsiveness, and meaningful community participation in shaping the proposed park.
298
Review & Analysis
The Toledo Basin Park Preferred Concept Design reflects both the community input and City-adopted planning priorities. The proposed concept includes a mix of recreational, gathering, and wellnessoriented amenities intended to serve youth, families, seniors, and residents of all abilities. Intentional outreach and conversations with Soledad youth and families were conducted to help identify community needs and guide the overall layout, amenities, and character of the park space.

This project directly implements goals identified in the City’s adopted Parks and Recreation Master Plan, which calls for the development of Toledo Basin Park through a phased approach beginning with concept planning and community engagement, followed by the pursuit of external funding prior to construction.

The Preferred Concept Plan also aligns with the City’s newly adopted Strategic Plan, particularly goals related to Community Places, Health, Youth, Environmental Justice and Equity, and Mobility. The concept emphasizes physical activity, mental well-being, social connection, equitable access to public spaces, and improved neighborhood connectivity through walkable and bikeable features. Amenities within the concept are designed to provide safe and accessible spaces for youth and teens, gathering and recreational areas for residents of all ages, and opportunities to strengthen community connection through outdoor spaces.

Retention Basin Considerations
During the planning process, questions were raised regarding the potential to fill in the existing retention basin, as other parks in the community include large, excavated areas. This option was evaluated and determined to be cost-prohibitive. Filling the basin would require significant dirt import, grading, engineering, and drainage modifications, adding millions of dollars to the overall project cost.

Rather than substantially increasing costs, the Preferred Concept Plan intentionally leverages the existing basin’s characteristics to maximize value. The basin’s form provides natural wind protection, allowing for a broader range of amenities and activities that would otherwise be limited by wind exposure. In addition, the basin creates natural sound breaks and visual separation, offering areas of quiet, solitude, and respite within the park. These features enhance the park’s functionality, comfort, and diversity of use without additional major construction costs.

Adoption of the Preferred Concept Plan confirms the City’s commitment to a fiscally responsible and context-sensitive design that balances community desires, environmental conditions, and long-term feasibility. The plan establishes a clear and consistent framework that can be used to pursue funding and guide future project phases as resources become available.

Financial Considerations
City Council previously authorized a professional services agreement with BFS Landscape Architects for community outreach, conceptual design services, and optional 30 percent design documents for the Toledo Basin Park project. The total contract amount is $88,700, which includes:
$33,200 for community outreach and conceptual design services, including reimbursable expenses;
$45,000 for optional 30 percent design documents; and
$10,500 for topographical survey services.
299
Resolution No. 6320
Toledo Basin Park-01-Preferred Concept Plan
Toledo Basin Park City Council PowerPoint Presentation
Costs associated with the Concept Design and outreach phase are funded through the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and supported by Park Impact Fees. Adoption of the Preferred Concept Plan does not create a new fiscal obligation and does not authorize additional design or construction expenditures at this time.

Future project costs, including any additional design phases or construction, will be contingent upon the identification and securing of external funding sources.

Alternatives
Adopt the Preferred Concept Plan as recommended.

Provide direction to modify the Preferred Concept Design prior to adoption.

Decline to adopt the Preferred Concept Design and provide an alternative direction to staff.

Planning/CEQA
The City of Soledad has determined that adoption of the Toledo Basin Park Preferred Concept Plan constitutes planning-level actions and are not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378. The proposed action does not have the potential to result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable physical change in the environment.

Approval of the Preferred Concept Plan is intended solely to support grant and funding applications and do not commit the City to construction, implementation, or any specific design alternative.

Environmental review will be conducted in compliance with CEQA as the project advances to future design and construction phases, at which time project-level impacts will be evaluated.

Public Notice Requirements
Not Applicable.

Attachment(s):
300
RESOLUTION NO. 6320

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOLEDAD

ADOPTING THE TOLEDO BASIN PARK PREFERRED CONCEPT PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Soledad (the “City”) adopted the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, which identifies Toledo Basin Park as a priority future community park intended to expand access to recreational amenities and green space; and
WHEREAS, the City of Soledad Parks and Recreation Department, in partnership with BFS Landscape Architects, has completed the Preferred Concept Plan following approximately one year of community outreach and public engagement; and WHEREAS, the Preferred Concept Plan reflects community input and aligns with the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan and Strategic Plan goals related to community places, health, youth, equity, and mobility; and
WHEREAS, adoption of the Preferred Concept Plan establishes the long-term vision and framework for Toledo Basin Park and provides a clear blueprint to support future funding efforts and project advancement; and
WHEREAS, adoption of the Preferred Concept Plan does not approve construction of the project and does not commit the City to future expenditures; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that adoption of the Toledo Basin Park Preferred Concept Plan is a planning-level action and is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, as it does not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable physical change in the environment, and environmental review will be conducted before any future construction approvals.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Soledad as follows:

1. All of the recitals set forth above are true and correct to the best of the Council's knowledge and by this reference are adopted herein as findings.

2. The Council hereby adopts the Toledo Basin Park Preferred Concept Plan: and

3. The City Council authorizes City staff to utilize the adopted Preferred Concept Plan to pursue grant funding and other funding opportunities for the Toledo Basin Park Project.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the CityCouncil of the City of Soledad, at a regular meeting duly held on the 14th day of January 2026, by the following vote:

AYES, and in favor thereof Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

Attachment 1
301
ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:

ANNA M. VELAZQUEZ, Mayor
ATTEST:

MEGAN HUNTER, City Clerk
302
Entry Plaza with Tree Shading & Seating
Nature-Themed Inclusive Toddler, 2-5, & 5-12 Year-Old Play Areas with Rock Climbing Wall, Embankment Play, Fencing & Gates, & Shade Structures
Terracing with Ramps, Seating, & Plantings
Walking & Biking Loop with Shaded Fitness Nodes
& Interpretive Signage along Existing Basin Rim
Games Plaza with Multi-Sport Court
(Pickup Basketball Half Courts, Volleyball, Wall
Ball, and Tennis Practice Wall)
Small Community Center with Public Restrooms Youth Plaza with Study Spaces, WiFi, & Seating Central Plaza with Site Furnishings, Seating, &
Shade Structures
Native Botanical Garden with Pedestrian
Bridges over Stormwater Detention Area
Amphitheater with Small Bandshell Structure
1 1
3 3
7 7
9 9
10 10
5 5
2 2
2 2
4 4
8 8
6 6
Existing & Future Neighborhood Connections
Accessible Parking (2 Spaces)
Vegetative Screening for Neighbor Privacy
Low-Impact Development Areas
(Stormwater Management)
11 11
12 12
12 12
13 14
14 14
13 13
13 13

GABILAN DR

TOLEDO ST
JANUARY 2026
303

TOLEDO BASIN PARK

PREFERRED CONCEPT PLAN

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 14, 2026
304

TOLEDO ST

GRANADA ST

PROJECT LOCATION JACK FRANSCIONI

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
305
• 3.8 acres total
• Former stormwater detention basin –
elevated “rim” along edges of site with
a lower center and south perimeter
• Approx. 25’ elevation difference from
highest to lowest points across site
Site character
• Existing street parking and sidewalk along
Gabilan Dr – sidewalk experiences 12’ of
elevation change across the site
• Existing neighborhood connections include:
• Curb ramp and crosswalk at Toledo St
• Sidewalk extension in greenspace to south
306
• 2008 – Gabilan Park Plan by RHAA
• Outreach concluded the community wanted the
following amenities: play areas, sprayground, shade
structures, picnic areas, BBQs, drinking fountains,
restroom, seating, paths, plantings with seasonal
interest, highlighting the mountain view, signage,
fencing, and lighting.
• 2025 – City Parks & Recreation Master Plan
• Outreach concluded the community wanted the
following amenities: Walking track, outdoor gym, disc
golf, pump track (bicycle track), playground, picnic
tables, amphitheater, and dog park.
• Recommendations included continuing to engage the
community to refine priorities, utilizing the existing
topography to protect from wind, and a childcare facility. 2008 Plan by RHAA
Parks & Rec Master Plan Outreach Responses

PROJECT BACKGROUND
307
Community
Input
(Rounds #1-2)
City Resources
Concept Design
Options

PROJECT SCHEDULE
Nov 2024 -
Feb 2025
Jan-Apr
2025
Apr-Jun
2025
Jul-Sep
2025
Oct-Nov
2025
Nov-Dec
2025
Jan 2026
Jan-Mar
2026

FUTURE,
NOT IN

CONTRACT
Community Outreach
Round #1
Site Mapping & Analysis +
Costing Exercise to Fill Basin
Community Outreach
Round #2
Processing Outreach, Site
Analysis, & Concept Design
Options Development
Community Outreach
Round #3
Refine Design Options into
Preferred Concept Plan
Present Plan to City Council
for Adoption
Develop Plans for City to
Obtain Project Funding
Construction Drawings &
Implementation
Programming &
Amenities
+
Site Analysis City Planning
Initiatives
Community
Input
(Round #3)

PREFERRED

CONCEPT PLAN

PROJECT APPROACH
308
• In-Person Opportunities: Pop-Ups at senior luncheons and at the project site, Canvassing Orchard Lane Park, Workshops with general community and youth focus groups
• Display boards for sticker dot voting and sticky note commenting • Conversational engagement and comment card option
• Plan worksheet for programming sticker input and annotating • Design Option printouts and sticky notes for annotating in small groups • Virtual Opportunities: Public online survey, Mentimeter survey component to youth workshop
• Spanish translation in-text and live by City Staff

COMMUNITY OUTREACH
309
• 80+ attendees total at in-person events
• 103 online survey responses
• Responses confirmed and refined prior outreach efforts, but the youth focus group revealed different priorities for the youth plaza
• Community priorities:
• Shade, lighting, sightlines, and windbreaks
• Maximizing amenities, especially those not elsewhere in Soledad and to facilitate community gatherings
• Balancing both passive and active recreation
• Universal playground & accessibility
• Conceptual Design Options were received favorably, but there was a slight preference for Design Option #2 – with revisions, including to incorporate elements from Design Option #1

OUTREACH HIGHLIGHTS
310
Feasibility exercise looking at filling existing basin to create a sports field concluded not feasible:

High cost for a single use type and 25’ elevation change in topography incompatible with required flatness.

DESIGN OPTION 1: DESIGN OPTION 2:

CONCEPT DESIGN OPTIONS DEVELOPMENT
• Passive recreation focus
• Focuses on ‘natural,’
‘garden,’ ‘relaxing’
community input
• Builds on spirit of past
park design
• Shade more from trees
than structures
• Fewer amenities, more
flexible space by grading
existing slopes
• Unique to plan:

Amphitheater &
Splashpad
• Decentralized in design:

Play Areas, Native
Botanical Garden, &
L.I.D. Features
• Active recreation focus
• Focuses on‘adventure,’
‘colorful,’ & ‘unique’
community input
• Builds on community
input to highlight
mountains & their forms
• More shade structures
• More amenities
• Retains more existing
topography
• Unique to Plan: Fitness
Circuit, Terracing, Games
Plaza with Multi-Sport
Court, tiering to separate
amenity-dense design
• More centralized in
design: Play Areas,
Native Botanical Garden,
& L.I.D. Features 311

PREFERRED CONCEPT PLAN
1 3
4 2
5 6
7 8 14
9 10
312

THANK YOU
313

PREFERRED CONCEPT
PLANPHASING:

OPTION 1 (~$2.75M)

1. Entry plaza with tree shading & seating

2. Stabilized earthen trail loop with seating nodes (Excludes fitness, shade structures, & interpretive signs)

9. Portion of inclusive playgrounds, including 5-12 Play Area with Rock Climbing & Embankment Play (Assumes hydroseed flexible space for other play areas; Excludes shade structures)

11. Accessible parking (2 spaces)

12. Existing & future neighborhood connections

PREFERRED CONCEPT
PLAN PHASING:

OPTION 2 (~$2M)

1. Entry plaza with tree shading & seating

2. Paved looped pathway with picnic nodes
(Excludes fitness,shade structures, & interpretive signs)

11. Accessible parking (2 spaces)

12. Existing & future neighborhood connections

13. Vegetative buffer for neighbor privacy & noise pollution reduction Sitework Not Enumerated & Soft Costs: • Rough grading site for future improvements • Utility connections & infrastructure (Includes limited irrigation, water, & stormwater infrastructure & electrical conduits; Excludes electrical connection & fixtures) • Interim hydroseeding treatment across site (Excludes irrigation) • Interim LID features • Soft Costs: Construction documentation & review, Testing & inspections, Escalation&contingencies, Mobilization, SWPPP, etc.
315
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 6321, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Soledad Reinstating the Assistant City Manager Classification, Adding the Position to the Staffing Allocation Plan, and Approving Amendment No. 3 to the Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 2025/2026
TO: Honorable Mayor Velazquez and City Council
FROM: Megan Hunter, City Manager
MEETING DATE: January 14, 2026

CITY OF SOLEDAD

STAFF REPORT
THROUGH:

AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council of the City of Soledad approve Resolution No.6321, “Reinstating the Assistant City Manager Classification, Adding the Position to the Staffing Allocation Plan, and Approving Amendment No. 3 to the Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 2025/26”.

Executive Summary
The City of Soledad has experienced significant growth and increasing operational complexity over the past decade, while staffing levels have remained largely unchanged. Since the elimination of the Assistant City Manager (ACM) position in 2009 due to the recession, the City has relied heavily on consultants to address expanding administrative, financial, and strategic demands, resulting in higher long-term costs and reduced internal capacity. Recent turnover among key executives, coupled with the City Manager’s operational responsibilities and the adoption of an ambitious five-year Strategic Plan, has further strained executive capacity and delayed critical initiatives. Reinstating the ACM position would restore balance to the City’s leadership structure, provide continuity of operations, strengthen succession planning, and allow for the transition of key financial services in-house. By offsetting much of the cost through the elimination of contracted financial services, the ACM position represents a fiscally responsible investment that will enhance oversight, improve service delivery, reduce organizational risk, and better position the City to achieve its strategic and revenue-generating goals. If the position and salary scheduled are approved, the City Manager expects to hire an ACM by March/April.

Background
Historically, the City of Soledad maintained an Assistant City Manager (ACM) position. In 2007, Adela Gonzalez was appointed to the role and subsequently served as Interim City Manager before being appointed City Manager in 2008. Upon her appointment, the City backfilled the ACM position to 316
maintain executive capacity. However, in 2009, following the departure of the ACM and amid the Great Recession and uncertainty surrounding the future of redevelopment funding, the City made the difficult decision to eliminate the position.

Since that time, the City has recovered from the economic downturn and experienced significant growth. Between 2010 and 2020, Soledad’s population increased by approximately 3,000 residents, and 648 new housing units were added. Despite this growth and the corresponding increase in service demands, City staffing levels have remained largely flat, increasing from 82 employees to only 85.8 employees today. As a result, City staff are being asked to manage substantially more work with limited additional resources.

This constrained capacity has led the City to rely increasingly on consultants and contracted services to address both operational and strategic needs. While necessary, this approach has become more costly over time and has reduced the City’s ability to build institutional knowledge and achieve long-term efficiencies. Reestablishing the Assistant City Manager position would allow the City to rebuild internal leadership capacity, improve fiscal and operational oversight, better manage expenditures, and proactively pursue revenue opportunities. In addition, the ACM position would support the transition of key financial services in-house, strengthening internal controls and positioning the City for sustainable growth.

Review & Analysis
Since 2023, the City Manager has had to manage an extraordinary level of organizational disruption due to the departure of several key executives and managers, including two Community and Economic Development Directors, the IT Director, the Police Chief, the Community Engagement Manager, and most recently the Parks and Recreation Director. These departures required the City Manager to assume direct responsibility for multiple departments and critical operational functions, often on an interim basis.

This situation has significantly limited the City Manager’s ability to focus on strategic leadership, policy implementation, and City Council priorities. In many cases, Council-directed projects and initiatives have been delayed simply due to a lack of executive capacity.

In addition to overseeing all City departments, the City Manager also serves in multiple statutory and operational roles, including City Clerk and Personnel Director. This concentration of responsibilities further compounds capacity challenges and creates organizational risk, particularly during periods of turnover or emergency.

GrowingAdministrative and Financial Complexity
Two of the City’s most critical functions—legal services and financial management—are currently provided through contracted services. While this approach has been effective in the past, the City’s financial and administrative operations have grown significantly in scope and complexity. The expansion of utility services, increased grant funding, a higher volume of contracts, and more complex invoicing, reporting, and compliance requirements now require a greater level of internal oversight, coordination, and accountability. Bringing these functions in-house would strengthen fiscal oversight, enhance internal controls and data security, and improve responsiveness to organizational needs. This approach is consistent with practices in nearly all Monterey County jurisdictions, with the exception of the smallest cities—Sand City, Del Rey Oaks, Gonzales, and King City. The addition of an Assistant City Manager would provide the leadership capacity necessary for the City of Soledad to transition these functions in-house and support the City’s continued growth and operational demands. 317
In November 2025, the City Council adopted a comprehensive Strategic Plan exceeding 100 pages, with 179 objectives and hundreds of related actions to be implemented over the next five years. The City Manager is directly responsible for carrying out 54 of these objectives, many of which relate to economic development, housing, infrastructure, and core City Council priorities. Without additional executive support, the timely and effective implementation of the Strategic Plan is at risk.

Key projects have already been delayed due to limited executive capacity, including:

The Miramonte Development Agreement
Fleet Management Plan
Comprehensive Grants Management System
Citywide Facility Assessments
In addition, the City Manager’s limited availability has constrained proactive economic development efforts, such as recruiting major retailers and employers, activities that peer cities’ managers are able to prioritize. Similarly, the City’s capital campaign has stalled due to insufficient time to engage potential major donors. With additional capacity, the City Manager could directly support revenue-generating efforts without incurring comparable consulting costs.

Role and Value of theAssistant City Manager
Reestablishing the Assistant City Manager (ACM) position would significantly rebalance the City’s executive workload and strengthen overall organizational effectiveness. While the position represents an additional salary cost, the investment is expected to be largely offset through increased operational efficiency, reduced reliance on consultants, improved contract and grant management, and enhanced revenue generation and cost recovery.

The ACM would serve as the designated Acting City Manager when the City Manager is unavailable, providing continuity of leadership and decision-making. Currently, the City Manager has had to assign this responsibility to various executive staff on an ad hoc basis, limiting continuity and placing additional strain on an already overextended Executive Team. Establishing a permanent ACM ensures consistent leadership coverage and allows the City to respond more effectively during absences, emergencies, or periods of transition.

In addition, the ACM position strengthens the City’s succession planning. It creates a clear pathway for internal leadership development and provides the City with a qualified executive who could serve as an interim or permanent City Manager should the need arise, reducing organizational risk and recruitment costs.

The ACM would oversee core administrative functions, including Finance, Utility Administration, and Human Resources, and would be responsible for several critical initiatives such as:

Fleet Maintenance Plan
Utility rate updates
Comprehensive re-evaluation of City fees
Health benefits administration and oversight of the MBASIA insurance pool Oversight of CAL FIRE and Monterey County 911 contracts The ACM would also play a key role in supporting Public Works and Community Development by improving grant management, reimbursement tracking, developer accounts, and invoicing processes.

This support would directly improve cash flow, compliance, and project delivery. 318
Information Technology would ultimately transition to the ACM’s oversight once the City Manager completes ongoing networking projects and the onboarding of a new IT Manager, ensuring a smooth and stable transition.

Cost Management and Fiscal Responsibility
To minimize the net fiscal impact of creating the ACM position, staff proposes eliminating the contracted Finance Director position. Under this model, the Assistant City Manager would oversee financial services and bring most functions back in-house, with the exception of payroll, which would remain outsourced at an estimated annual cost of $25,000–$30,000.

Terminating the Finance Director contract is projected to result in annual savings of approximately $150,000–$175,000, significantly offsetting the cost of the ACM position while improving internal coordination and accountability.

Regional Context
It is important to note that the City of Soledad previously operated successfully with an Assistant City Manager, and most cities in Monterey County currently maintain an ACM position, including Carmelby-the-Sea, Marina, Monterey, Seaside, and Salinas. While other South County cities do not have an ACM, Soledad is more populous, manages a higher volume of complex projects, and is the only South County city operating a water reclamation facility, factors that substantially increase administrative and operational demands.

In terms of compensation, the proposed compensation of $234,623 is consistent with multiple jurisdictions in the region with Assistant City Managers. For ease of comparison, the top step is shown on an annual basis.

Jurisdiction Salary
Carmel by the Sea $244,927
Hollister $231,842
Marina $247,644
Monterey $259,704
Seaside $246,992
Watsonville $232,440
The proposed salary range maintains the required 5% differential between the Assistant City Manager and the City Manager. However, in anticipation that comparable cities will soon implement cost-ofliving adjustments, it is recommended that the ACM salary be adjusted to $241,662, reflecting a 3% increase consistent with the City Manager’s adjustment while preserving the contractual 5% differential. As noted above, the Assistant City Manager will directly oversee the Finance Department and effectively serve in a dual executive–director role. The scope and complexity of these responsibilities support the recommended compensation level.

Conclusion
Given the City’s growth, complexity, staffing constraints, and ambitious Strategic Plan, reestablishing the Assistant City Manager position is both necessary and prudent. This position would restore balance to the City’s executive structure, improve service delivery, reduce reliance on consultants, enhance revenue-generating opportunities, and ensure the City is positioned to meet both current demands and future challenges.
319
Resolution No. 6321
Exhibit A
Attachment No. 1
Financial Considerations
The fully loaded annual cost of the Assistant City Manager position is estimated at approximately $300,000. Establishing this position would allow the City to discontinue its contracted financial services, while continuing to contract out payroll services. This change would result in an estimated annual savings of $175,000, yielding a net incremental cost of approximately $125,000 per year.

Importantly, this investment would provide the City with approximately 70% of a full-time equivalent (FTE) of executive-level financial and administrative oversight, compared to the approximately 30% of a Finance Director’s time currently received through contracted services. This represents a substantial increase in internal capacity, institutional knowledge, and operational continuity.

If an Assistant City Manager is hired during the current fiscal year, the estimated cost for the remainder of the year is approximately $36,500. At this time, these costs are expected to be absorbed through existing salary savings and would not require a budget amendment for FY 2025–26.

By increasing executive-level capacity, the City anticipates freeing up City Manager time to focus on revenue-generating and strategic initiatives, including economic development, grant acquisition, partnerships, expenditure reduction, and improved contract oversight. Over time, these benefits are expected to partially offset the net cost of the position while strengthening the City’s overall financial and operational performance.

Alternatives
Adopt the resolution as proposed.

Modify the resolution.

Do not adopt the resolution. This is not recommended as without additional staffing support implementation of many actions in the Strategic Plan may be delayed.

Planning/CEQA
The reinstatement of the Assistant City Manager position and related amendments to the Salary Schedule are administrative in nature and do not constitute a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), and therefore no further environmental review is required.

Public Notice Requirements
Not required.

Attachment(s):
320
1 RESOLUTION NO. 6321

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOLEDAD

REINSTATING THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER CLASSIFICATION, ADDING

THE POSITION TO THE STAFFING ALLOCATION PLAN, AND APPROVING AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE SALARY SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025/2026 WHEREAS, the City of Soledad previously maintained an Assistant City Manager (ACM) position, which was eliminated in 2009 due to the Great Recession and uncertainty surrounding redevelopment funding; and
WHEREAS, since that time, the City has recovered economically and experienced significant growth, including an increase of approximately 3,000 residents and the addition of 648 housing units, while City staffing levels have remained largely unchanged; and WHEREAS, the City has experienced increasing administrative, financial, and operational complexity, including expanded utility services, increased grant activity, higher contract volumes, and more complex compliance and reporting requirements; and WHEREAS, recent turnover among key executive and management positions has significantly limited the City Manager’s capacity to focus on strategic leadership, policy implementation, and City Council priorities; and
WHEREAS, in November 2025, the City Council adopted a comprehensive five-year Strategic Plan with 179 objectives, many of which are assigned directly to the City Manager and are at risk of delay without additional executive capacity; and WHEREAS, the City has increasingly relied on consultants and contracted services to address capacity constraints, resulting in higher long-term costs and reduced internal institutional knowledge; and
WHEREAS, adding the Assistant City Manager as a full-time position would restore balance to the City’s executive structure, improve fiscal and operational oversight, enhance succession planning, provide continuity of leadership, and allow for the transition of key financial services in-house; and
WHEREAS, most cities in Monterey County maintain an Assistant City Manager position, and Soledad’s size, complexity, and unique operational responsibilities justify comparable executive staffing; and
WHEREAS, the added cost of the Assistant City Manager position would be approximately $125,000 per year, but is expected to be substantially offset by eliminating the contracted Finance Director position, resulting in improved coordination, accountability, and fiscal management; and
321
2 WHEREAS, the proposed compensation for the Assistant City Manager maintains the required 5% differential from the City Manager’s salary, is consistent with regional market comparables, and reflects the scope and complexity of the position’s responsibilities; and WHEREAS, upon approval of this action, the City Manager anticipates recruiting and hiring an Assistant City Manager by March or April 2026.

WHEREAS, the reinstatement of the Assistant City Manager position and related amendments to the Salary Schedule are administrative in nature and do not constitute a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), and therefore no further environmental review is required.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Soledad that:

1. The Assistant City Manager classification is hereby reinstated.

2. The Assistant City Manager position is added to the City’s Staffing Allocation Plan.

3. Amendment No. 3 to the Fiscal Year 2025/2026 Salary Schedule is hereby approved, establishing the Assistant City Manager salary consistent with the terms presented to the City Council.

4. The City Manager is authorized to take all necessary actions to implement this resolution, including recruitment and appointment of the Assistant City Manager.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Soledad duly held on the 14th day of January 2026, by the following vote:

AYES, and in favor thereof, Councilmembers:

NOES, Councilmembers:

ABSENT, Councilmembers:

ABSTAIN, Councilmembers:

ANNA M. VELAZQUEZ, Mayor
ATTEST:

MEGAN HUNTER, City Clerk
322
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 ELECTED OFFICIALMayor and City Council N/A N/A N/A 5.00 COUNCIL ELECTED OFFICIALPlanning Commission N/A N/A N/A 5.00TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX OVERSIGHT COMMITTEECommittee Member N/A (3) N/A N/A 7.00EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT GROUP (EM)City Manager Exempt (4) N/A N/A 1.00Assistant City Manager Exempt (9) N/A N/A $16,395.50 $17,133.30 $17,904.30 $18,709.99 $19,551.94 1.00Director of Information Technology Exempt (1) 78 EM $11,411.27 $11,924.78 $12,461.40 $13,022.16 $13,608.16 0.00Parks and Recreation Director Exempt (1) 78 EM $11,411.27 $11,924.78 $12,461.40 $13,022.16 $13,608.16 1.00Community & Economic Development Director Exempt (1) 91 EM $13,463.18 $14,069.02 $14,702.13 $15,363.73 $16,055.09 1.00Public Works Director Exempt (8) 96 EM $14,646.49 $15,305.59 $15,994.34 $16,714.08 $17,466.22 1.00Police Chief Exempt (1) 86 EM $15,235.36 $15,920.95 $16,637.40 $17,386.08 $18,168.45 1.00UNREPRESENTED CONFIDENTIAL GROUP (CF)Administrative Assistant (Confidential) (1) 52 CF $5,065.08 $5,293.01 $5,531.20 $5,780.10 $6,040.20 0.80Police Administrative Services Manager Exempt (1) 55 CF $6,423.76 $6,712.83 $7,014.91 $7,330.58 $7,660.46 1.00Executive Assistant to the City Manager (1) 58 CF $6,913.57 $7,224.68 $7,549.80 $7,889.54 $8,244.57 1.00Management Analyst Exempt (1) 62 MM $8,011.19 $8,371.69 $8,748.42 $9,142.09 $9,553.49 3.00 Human Resources Manager Exempt (1) 70 CF $8,690.82 $9,081.91 $9,490.60 $9,917.67 $10,363.97 1.00Information Technology Manager Exempt (5) 70 CF $8,690.82 $9,081.91 $9,490.60 $9,917.67 $10,363.97 1.00Community Engagement Manager Exempt (1) 70 CF $8,690.82 $9,081.91 $9,490.60 $9,917.67 $10,363.97 1.00Public Works Manager Exempt (1) 71 CF $9,874.25 $10,318.59 $10,782.93 $11,268.16 $11,775.23 2.00Water Resources Manager Exempt (1) 88 CF $12,189.72 $12,738.26 $13,311.48 $13,910.50 $14,536.47 1.00Police Lieutenant Exempt (1) 90 CF $12,314.26 $12,868.40 $13,447.48 $14,052.61 $14,684.98 1.00Deputy Police Chief Exempt (1) 83 CF $12,718.61 $13,290.95 $13,889.04 $14,514.05 $15,167.18 1.00PROFESSIONAL/MID-MGMT (MM)Police Records Supervisor (1) 47 MM $5,554.54 $5,804.49 $6,065.69 $6,338.65 $6,623.89 1.00Property and Evidence Supervisor (1) 47 MM $5,554.54 $5,804.49 $6,065.69 $6,338.65 $6,623.89 1.00Information Technology Technician (1) 47 MM $5,554.54 $5,804.49 $6,065.69 $6,338.65 $6,623.89 1.00Economic Development Coordinator Exempt (1) 52 MM $6,276.97 $6,549.06 $6,854.61 $7,163.07 $7,485.41 1.00Community Engagement Coordinator Exempt (1) 52 MM $6,276.97 $6,549.06 $6,854.61 $7,163.07 $7,485.41 1.00Homeless Services Coordinator (Grant-Funded through 6/30/27) Exempt (1) 52 MM $6,276.97 $6,549.06 $6,854.61 $7,163.07 $7,485.41 **Associate Planner Exempt (1) 52 MM $6,276.97 $6,549.06 $6,854.61 $7,163.07 $7,485.41 1.00Recreation Supervisor Exempt (1) 55 MM $6,300.24 $6,583.75 $6,880.02 $7,189.62 $7,513.16 1.00Assistant Engineer (1) 66 MM $6,852.97 $7,161.36 $7,483.62 $7,820.38 $8,172.30 1.00Utility Maintenance Supervisor (1) 59 MM $7,443.61 $7,778.57 $8,128.61 $8,494.40 $8,876.65 1.00Wastewater Collections System Supervisor (1) 59 MM $7,443.61 $7,778.57 $8,128.61 $8,494.40 $8,876.65 1.00Water Reclamation Shift Supervisor (1) 59 MM $7,443.61 $7,778.57 $8,128.61 $8,494.40 $8,876.65 2.00Senior Planner Exempt (1) 67 MM $8,036.29 $8,397.92 $8,775.83 $9,170.74 $9,583.43 **Engineering Project Manager Exempt (6) 67 MM $8,036.29 $8,397.92 $8,775.83 $9,170.74 $9,583.43 1.00Associate Civil Engineer Exempt (1) 78 MM $9,183.64 $9,596.90 $10,028.76 $10,480.06 $10,951.66 0.00Water Reclamation Chief Plant Operator Exempt (1) 72 MM $9,541.03 $9,970.38 $10,419.05 $10,887.91 $11,377.86 1.00 Salary Range Salary Schedule

FOUR AND ONE-HALF PERCENT STEP ADVANCEMENT
$50/meeting

MONTHLY SALARY
EXHIBIT "A"
Section One of Classification and Compensation Plan

SUMMARY OF JOB CLASSIFICATIONS AND SALARY SCHEDULE
# Auth. Positions
Mayor; $1,050/month and City Council; $950/month
$150/meeting
$20,581.166/month
Classification FLSA Exempt Status See Footnote
Approved with FY 2025/26 Budget - 6/18/25 Reso. No. 6245/ SA-2025-01Amendment No. 1 - Reso. No. 6304 - 2026 Minimum wage increase.Amendment No. 2 - Reso. No. 6314 - PW Director COLAAmendment No. 3 - Reso. No. 6321 - ACM 323
Salary Range Salary Schedule Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8

FOUR AND ONE-HALF PERCENT STEP ADVANCEMENT

MONTHLY SALARY
EXHIBIT "A"
Section One of Classification and Compensation Plan

SUMMARY OF JOB CLASSIFICATIONS AND SALARY SCHEDULE
Classification FLSA Exempt Status See Footnote # Auth. Positions Approved with FY 2025/26 Budget - 6/18/25 Reso. No. 6245/ SA-2025-01Amendment No. 1 - Reso. No. 6304 - 2026 Minimum wage increase.Amendment No. 2 - Reso. No. 6314 - PW Director COLAAmendment No. 3 - Reso. No. 6321 - ACM CLASSIFIED (CL)Maintenance Worker (1) 38 CL $4,703.29 $4,914.94 $5,136.11 $5,367.24 $5,608.76 7.00Customer Service Utility Billing Technician (1) 39 CL $4,818.01 $5,034.82 $5,261.38 $5,498.15 $5,745.56 2.00Administrative Assistant (1) 39 CL $4,818.01 $5,034.82 $5,261.38 $5,498.15 $5,745.56 1.00Recreation Program Coordinator (1) 39 CL $4,818.01 $5,034.82 $5,261.38 $5,498.15 $5,745.56 2.00Senior Maintenance Worker (1) 41 CL $5,058.91 $5,286.56 $5,524.45 $5,773.05 $6,032.84 1.00Mechanic/Maintenance Worker (1) 43 CL $5,311.85 $5,550.89 $5,800.68 $6,061.71 $6,334.48 1.00Community Services Officer (1) 46 CL $5,334.71 $5,574.78 $5,825.64 $6,087.80 $6,361.75 3.00Victim Assistance Advocate (1) 46 CL $5,334.71 $5,574.78 $5,825.64 $6,087.80 $6,361.75 1.00Building Permit Technician (1) 48 CL $5,331.67 $5,571.59 $5,822.32 $6,084.32 $6,358.11 0.00Development Services Technician (1) 48 CL $5,331.67 $5,571.59 $5,822.32 $6,084.32 $6,358.11 2.00Utility Maintenance Mechanic (1) 49 CL $5,738.07 $5,996.28 $6,266.12 $6,548.09 $6,842.76 2.00Fleet Mechanic (1) 50 CL $5,766.20 $6,025.68 $6,296.83 $6,580.19 $6,876.30 1.00Electrician (1) 51 CL $6,456.59 $6,747.14 $7,050.76 $7,368.04 $7,699.60 1.00Senior Utility Maintenance Mechanic (1) 51 CL $6,456.59 $6,747.14 $7,050.76 $7,368.04 $7,699.60 1.00 Water Systems Operator (1) 51 CL $6,456.59 $6,747.14 $7,050.76 $7,368.04 $7,699.60 4.00Executive Assistant (1) 53 CL $6,202.18 $6,481.28 $6,772.94 $7,077.72 $7,396.22 1.00Water Reclamation Operator-In-Training (1) 38 CL $4,703.29 $4,914.94 $5,136.11 $5,367.24 $5,608.76 Water Reclamation Operator I (1) 45 CL $5,577.44 $5,828.43 $6,090.71 $6,364.79 $6,651.21Water Reclamation Operator II (1) 51 CL $6,456.59 $6,747.14 $7,050.76 $7,368.04 $7,699.60POLICE SERGEANT (PS)Police Sergeant* (2) 59 PS $10,018.71 $10,469.56 $10,940.68 $11,433.02 $11,947.50 $12,485.14 $13,046.97 $13,634.08 4.00 POLICE OFFICER (PO)Police Officer (2) 45 PO $7,289.52 $7,617.55 $7,960.34 $8,318.55 $8,692.89 Police Officer II* (2) 45 PO $7,289.52 $7,617.55 $7,960.34 $8,318.55 $8,692.89 $9,084.07 $9,492.85 $9,920.03SEASONAL/PART-TIME (HOURLY RATE)Police Cadet - Trainee $27.00Intern/Youth Commissioner (7) $16.90 $17.66 $18.46 $19.29 $20.15Facility Custodial Lead $18.00 $18.81 $19.66 $20.54 $21.47Recreation Instructor (7) $18.50 $19.33 $20.20 $21.11 $22.06Recreation Leader II (7) $17.40 $18.18 $19.00 $19.86 $20.75Recreation Leader I (7) $16.90 $17.66 $18.46 $19.29 $20.15Recreation Program Assistant $20.00 $20.90 $21.84 $22.82 $23.85Program Instructor II $24.00 $25.08 $26.21 $27.39 $28.62Program Instructor III $27.00 $28.22 $29.48 $30.81 $32.20Footnotes: 103.80

86.80 (1) Pursuant to Resolution No. 6245/ SA-2025-01, effective 7/5/25, three and one-quarter percent (3.25%) COLA increase for certain Executive Management classifications, Unrepresented and Confidential classifications, Professional/Mid-Management Unit classifications, and General Unit classification. (2) Pursuant to Resolution No. 6245/ SA-2025-01, effective 7/5/25, three and one-half percent (3.5%) COLA increase for Police Sergeant and Police Officer classifications. (3) Pursuant to Resolution No. 6141, Council approved compensation for the City of Soledad Transactions and Use Tax Oversight Committee in the amount of fifty dollars ($50) for each committee meeting attended.(4) Pursuant to Resolution No. 6275, Council approved compensation for City Manager retroactive to 5/15/25.(5) Pursuant to Resolution No. 6282, Council approved Information Technology Manager classification and Salary Range. Director of Information Technology to remain unfunded. (7) Pursuant to Resolution No. 6304, Council approved 2026 minimum wage increase.(8) Pursuant to Resolution No. 6314, effective 1/3/26, three and one-quarter percent (3.25%) COLA increase for Public Works Director position. (9) Pursuant to Resolution No. 6321, Council approved reinstatement of the ACM classification, one (1) additional FTE, and Salary Schedule. (6) Pursuant to Resolution No. 6282, Council approved reclassifying one (1) Assistant Engineer position to Engineering Project Manager.

Total Authorized Positions:
* Upon completion of Employee's 5th year of service in Police Officer or Police Sergeant classification, Employee will be eligible to receive 3 future step increases

13.00 Total FTEs:

6.00 324
Attachment No. 1
CITY OF SOLEDAD Amended: 1/14/26
FLSA: EXEMPT

ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER

DEFINITION
Under general administrative direction, assists the City Manager in planning, organizing, managing, and overseeing all City functions and operations; coordinates assigned activities with City departments, officials, outside agencies, and the public; fosters cooperative working relationships among City departments and various community and regulatory agencies; provides highly responsible and complex administrative support to the City Manager and City Council; May serve as acting City Manager during the City Manager’s absence, as designated; performs related work as required. At the discretion of the City Manager provides direct oversight of the Finance, Human Resources, and Information Technology Departments and other City departments as assigned.

SUPERVISION RECEIVED AND EXERCISED
Receives administrative and general policy direction from the City Manager. Exercises general direction and supervision over management, supervisory, professional, technical and clerical staff through subordinate levels of supervision.

CLASS CHARACTERISTICS
This single-position classification assists the City Manager in the overall administration and management of all City operations and services. The Assistant City Manager provides executive-level support and leadership and is responsible for overseeing assigned internal administrative functions, which may include Finance, Human Resources and other departments as designated.

The classification works closely with the City Manager, City Council, and department directors, and other stakeholders to coordinate projects, analyze information, and advance organizational objectives.

Successful performance of the work requires broad knowledge of municipal operations, public administration, finance, human resources, public policy, as well as clear understanding of the roles and responsibilities of an elected City Council. This position is responsible for planning, coordinating, and overseeing complex programs, projects, and initiatives that often cross departmental lines. . This class performs the duties of the City Manager in the City Manager’s absence.

EXAMPLES OF ESSENTIAL JOB FUNCTIONS (Illustrative Only) Management reserves the right to add, modify, change or rescind the work assignments of different positions and to make reasonable accommodations so that qualified employees can perform the essential functions of the job.
 Assists the City Manager in the development, direction, coordination, and implementation of the City’s Strategic Plan, policies, procedures, and performance standards for the City.  Oversees the internal administrative functions including the Finance and Human Resources Departments and at the discretion of the City Manager may provide direct oversight to other city departments.
o Finance Department: Leads the development and administration of the City’s budget under the direction of the City Manager; Guides departments in forecasting funding needs for 325
Assistant City Manager

Page 2 of 4 ends

staffing equipment and supplies; Manages the City’s digital finance and payroll system and monitors employee use; monitors and approves expenditures and oversees the preparation and implementation of budget adjustments.
o Human Resources Department: Manages the City’s human resources functions including recruitment, selection, benefits administration, worker’s compensation training, and personnel records management.
 Contributes to the overall quality of the City’s service by developing, reviewing and implementing policies and procedures to meet legal requirements and City needs; evaluates the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery methods and procedures; assesses the distribution of work, support systems, and internal reporting relationships; identifies opportunities for improvement; directs the implementation of change.
 Manages staff selection, training, development, evaluation, and discipline; offers policy guidance and interpretation.
 Serves on the labor negotiations team and negotiates contracts and agreements with employee association representatives.
 Implements directives and policies issued by the City Manager; coordinates with City departments to ensure effective execution; identifies and resolves organizational and operational challenges; ensures the successful completion of assigned initiatives and projects.  Conducts citywide organizational and operational studies and investigations; recommends modifications to programs, policies, and procedures as appropriate.  Participates on boards, commissions and professional committees as assigned; attends professional meetings; stays abreast of current trends, innovations, and best practices in government administration.
 Prepares, reviews, and presents various staff reports, management and information updates, and reports on special projects to the City Manager, City Council, and the public.  Responds to public inquiries and complaints and assists with resolutions and alternative recommendations; responds to sensitive inquiries on behalf of the City Manager as appropriate.  Serves as acting City Manager in the City Manager’s absence.  Performs other duties as assigned.

QUALIFICATIONS
Knowledge of:
 Administrative principles and practices, including goal setting, financial analysis and taxation, program development, implementation and evaluation, and supervision of staff, either directly or through subordinate levels of supervision.
 Principles, practices, and procedures of public administration in a municipal setting.  Functions, services, and funding sources of a municipal government.  Functions, authority, responsibilities, and limitations of an elected City Council.  Applicable Federal, State, and local laws, codes, ordinances, and regulations.  Principles and practices of municipal budget development, administration, and accountability.  Principles, practices, and legal elements of California economic and community development and redevelopment.
 Current social, political, and economic trends affecting City government and service provision.  Principles practice and procedures related to human resources administration.  Techniques for providing a high level of customer service to the public and City staff, in person and over the telephone.
326
Assistant City Manager

Page 3 of 4 ends

Ability to:
 Develop and implement goals, objectives, policies, procedures, work standards, and internal controls for the City and assigned program areas.
 Prepare and administer large and complex budgets; allocate limited resources in a cost effective manner.
 Interpret, apply, and ensure compliance with Federal, State, and local policies, procedures, laws, and regulations.
 Plan, organize, direct, and coordinate the work of management, supervisory, professional, and technical personnel; delegate authority and responsibility.  Research, analyze, and evaluate new service delivery methods, procedures, and techniques.  Effectively administer special projects with contractual agreements and ensure compliance with stipulations.
 Prepare clear and concise reports, correspondence, policies, procedures, and other written materials.  Effectively represent the City in meetings with governmental agencies, community groups, and various businesses, professional, and regulatory organizations, and in meetings with individuals.  Organize and prioritize a variety of projects and multiple tasks in an effective and timely manner; organize own work, set priorities, and meet critical time deadlines.  Operate modern office equipment, including computer equipment and specialized software applications programs.
 Use English effectively to communicate in person, over the telephone, and in writing.  Use tact, initiative, prudence, and independent judgment within general policy, procedural, and legal guidelines.
 Establish and maintain effective working relationships with those contacted in the course of the work.

Education and Experience:

Any combination of training and experience that would provide the required knowledge, skills and abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the required qualifications would be:

Equivalent to graduation from an accredited four-year college or university with major coursework in business, accounting, finance, planning, or public administration, or a related field, and seven (7) years of increasingly responsible administrative experience, including three (3) years of management and supervisory experience. Possession of a Master’s Degree is highly desirable.

License:
 Valid California class C driver’s license with satisfactory driving record.

PHYSICAL DEMANDS
Must possess mobility to work in a standard office setting and use standard office equipment, including a computer; to operate a motor vehicle and to visit various City and meeting sites; vision to read printed materials and a computer screen; and hearing and speech to communicate in person, before groups and over the telephone. This is primarily a sedentary office classification although standing in work areas and walking between work areas may be required. Finger dexterity is needed to access, enter and retrieve data using a computer keyboard, typewriter keyboard or calculator and to operate standard office equipment. Positions in this classification occasionally bend, stoop, kneel, reach, push and pull drawers open and closed to retrieve and file information. Employees must possess the ability to lift, carry, push, and pull materials and objects necessary to perform job functions. 327
Assistant City Manager

Page 4 of 4 ends

ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
Employees work in an office environment with moderate noise levels, controlled temperature conditions and no direct exposure to hazardous physical substances. Employees may interact with upset staff and/or public and private representatives in interpreting and enforcing departmental policies and procedures. 328

Soledad City CouncilJanuary 14, 2026

Soledad City Council
January 14, 2026