Agenda packet — South Lake Tahoe City Council, June 2, 2026 (part 3 of 3)

AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
State of Florida, County of Orange, ss:

Anjana Bhadoriya, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: That (s)he is a duly authorized signatory of Column Software, PBC, duly authorized agent of Tahoe Daily Tribune now is, and during all times herein named, was a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, and now is, and during all times herein named was the printer of Tahoe Daily Tribune, a newspaper of general circulation, as defined by section 6000 of the Government Code of the State of California, printed and published daily (Sundays excepted) in the City of South Lake Tahoe, County of El Dorado, State of California, and that affiant is the principal clerk of said Nevada County Publishing Co.

That the printed advertisement hereto annexed was published in the said Tahoe Daily Tribune, for the full required period of 1 time(s) commencing on May. 8, 2026, and ending on May. 8, 2026, all days inclusive.

PUBLICATION DATES: May. 8, 2026
NOTICE ID: TCtQwHL1Ia7B0dLPYLKj
PUBLISHER ID: 402580
NOTICE NAME: CSA No. 3 Parcel Assessment
Publication Fee: $151.62
I certify, under penalty of perjury, the forgoing is true and correct. [$signersig ]
(Signed)______________________________________ [$seal]

VERIFICATION
State of Florida
County of Orange
Subscribed in my presence and sworn to before me on this: [$date] [$notarysig ]
______________________________
Notary Public
[$disclosure]
See Proof on Next Page
CSA No. 3 Parcel Assessment - Page 1 of 2
05/08/2026
Notarized remotely online using communication technology via Proof. 1238
CSA No. 3 Parcel Assessment - Page 2 of 2
1239
City of South Lake Tahoe
Agenda Item Executive Summary
Hilary Roverud, Interim City Manager
__________________________________
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Agenda Item #:10
Agenda Item: Ordinance Amending Chapter 4.60 of the South Lake Tahoe City Code (Nuisances Consisting of Abandoned or Substantially Damaged Nondwelling Structures) to Expressly Authorize Daily Citations (First Reading)
Executive Summary: On March 2, 1993, City Council adopted Ordinance 814 adding South Lake Tahoe City Code (SLTCC) Article VI to Chapter 17 and amending Chapter 8 to establish a process for remedying nuisances consisting of abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structures. On March 26, 2024, City Council adopted Ordinance 2024-1182 amending SLTCC Chapters 4.60 (Nuisances consisting of abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structures) and 4.65 (Nuisances consisting of abandoned or substantially damaged dwelling structures) to include structures that are in a partial state of construction in the definition of abandoned building and to create consistency in remedying nuisances associated with nondwelling and dwelling structures. At the City Council meeting on March 10, 2026, Councilmember Robbins requested, and Councilmember Horgan seconded, an item to bring back SLTCC Chapter 4.60 for possible amendment to require daily administrative citation for covered nondwelling structures. This item includes a first reading of a proposed ordinance to amend SLTCC Chapter 4.60, along with a discussion of applicable law and legal recommendations to limit the scope of the proposed amendment.

Requested Action / Suggested Motions: Pass a Motion to hold a first reading (by title only) of an Ordinance amending Chapter 4.60 of the South Lake Tahoe City Code (Nuisances Consisting of Abandoned or Substantially Damaged Nondwelling Structures) to expressly authorize daily citations, and refer second reading and adoption to the June 16, 2026, meeting.

Responsible Staff Member: Dan Bardzell, Assistant City Attorney Reviewed and Approved By: Susan Blankenship, City Clerk Olga Tikhomirova, Director of Finance Heather Stroud, City Attorney
Attachments:
01 - Staff Report Abandoned Property Ordinance
02 - Ordinance Abandoned Property
03 - Abandoned Property Code Sections (Chapter 4.60) Amendment (Redline) 1240
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 1 of 3
City of South Lake Tahoe
Report to City Council
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Title: Ordinance Amending Chapter 4.60 of the South Lake Tahoe City Code (Nuisances consisting of abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structures) to Expressly Authorize Daily Citations
Location: Citywide
Responsible Staff Members: Dan Bardzell, Assistant City Attorney (530) 542-6046 Background: On March 2, 1993, City Council adopted Ordinance 814 adding South Lake Tahoe City Code (SLTCC) Article VI to Chapter 17 and amending Chapter 8 to establish a process for remedying nuisances consisting of abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structures. On March 26, 2024, City Council adopted Ordinance 2024-1182 amending SLTCC Chapters 4.60 (Nuisances consisting of abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structures) and 4.65 (Nuisances consisting of abandoned or substantially damaged dwelling structures) to include structures that are in a partial state of construction in the definition of abandoned building and to create consistency in remedying nuisances associated with nondwelling and dwelling structures.

On March 10, 2026, Councilmember Robbins (seconded by Councilmember Horgan) requested an agenda item to bring back SLTCC Chapter 4.60 (Nuisances Consisting of Abandoned or Substantially Damaged Nondwelling Structures) for possible amendment to require daily administrative citation for covered nondwelling structures.

The proposed ordinance expressly authorizes, but does not require daily citations. Staff recommends the issuance of citations, including frequency for same, remain at the discretion of the City Building Official or their designee. Staff has identified additional possible amendments, discussed below, that would facilitate the prompt and equitable issuance of citations for such nuisance issues, as appropriate. (See Ordinance and redline of SLTCC Chapter 4.60 amendments, Attachments 2-3 hereto.)
Issue and Discussion: Under Government Code section 53069.4, the City is authorized to make any violation of any ordinance enacted by the City subject to an administrative fine. The City shall set forth by ordinance the administrative procedures that shall govern the imposition, enforcement, collection, and administrative review by the City of those administrative fines. (See Government Code section 53069.4(a)(1).) Pursuant to SLTCC section 2.30.010(B) and state law, the current maximum daily fine that may be imposed for a violation of SLTCC Chapter 4.60 is $1000.

City Council’s requested amendments to SLTCC Chapter 4.60 are considered in the proposed amendment to the extent same would be consistent with existing law, as summarized below. 1241
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 2 of 3
The proposed amendment would revise SLTCC section 4.60.030 (Remedies) to add a subsection creating a detailed framework for issuing administrative citations to a property owner in instances where the City determines their property has any condition which constitutes an abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structure. For the purpose of SLTCC Chapter 4.60, an abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structure means a structure which meets any of the following:

1. Whenever the building or structure has been so damaged by fire, wind, earthquake, snow, flood, or has otherwise become so dilapidated or deteriorated as to become:
a. An attractive nuisance to children; or
b. A harbor for vagrants; or as to
c. Enable persons to resort thereto or loiter therein for the purpose of committing unlawful acts; or

2. Whenever any structure is in such a condition as to constitute a public nuisance in any manner, under any provision of law or in equity; or

3. Whenever any portion of a structure remains on a site after the demolition or destruction of the structure or whenever any structure is abandoned for a period in excess of 180 days so as to constitute such structure or portion thereof a public or attractive nuisance or hazard to the public;

4. Whenever a structure has remained in a state of partial construction for a period of 180 days or more, and where the continuation of the condition is unsightly or hazardous to the public health, safety, or welfare.

The proposed amendment would first provide that, upon the City Building Official’s or their designee’s determination that a structure is an abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structure, the owner of the property shall be deemed to have violated SLTCC Chapter 4.60 pertaining to nuisances consisting of such structures. Upon such a finding, the City may issue the property owner an administrative citation in accordance with SLTCC Chapters 2.30 and 4.60.

Under the proposed amendment, City Council may set the amount of the administrative citation per resolution, subject to applicable law. This supports Council’s flexibility to determine appropriate citation amounts without the need to make such future changes by ordinance.

Second, except for circumstances in which a structure creates an immediate danger to public health or safety, the proposed amendment would provide the property owner with a reasonable period of time to correct the condition for a first violation. Said reasonable time would be determined by the Building Official, or their designee. Although not included in the ordinance, it is recommended that for subsequent violations, the Building Official may, at their discretion, conduct a site inspection before issuing an additional citation to determine whether new or continuing violations exist.

Third, the proposed ordinance expressly provides that each additional day within one year from the date of the first violation during which the Building Official, or their designee, finds a property constitutes an abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structure shall constitute a separate violation and, at the discretion of the Building Official, or their designee, the City may issue a daily administrative citation. The proposed amendment also makes related changes.

Staff researched whether or not the City could by code require daily fines to be issued to a property which is in violation of SLTCC Chapter 4.60. Based on such research, staff does not recommend requiring daily citations.
1242
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 3 of 3
The Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits, in part, “excessive fines.” To determine whether a fine is excessive, the guiding question is whether the fine is grossly disproportional to the gravity of the offense.

The federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently addressed this issue in Thomas v. County of Humboldt and determined that the plaintiffs in that case – residents of Humboldt County who allege that they have been aggrieved by the County's enforcement of its cannabis-abatement regulatory scheme including potential daily fines – could plausibly allege that the County's system of administrative penalties violates the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. See Thomas v. County of Humboldt, California (9th Cir. 2024) 124 F.4th 1179, 1193-94 (administrative penalty framework which could include daily fines collectively reaching millions of dollars was found to support a viable claim of an Eighth Amendment violation.) While there may be some instances where daily fines could be warranted for a limited period of time, a “one size fits all” approach of required daily fines is not recommended based on these Eighth Amendment concerns. The City’s Building Official is the staff member best situated to assess enforcement timing and need based on their expertise. The amended ordinance would provide the Building Official, or their designee, with the express discretion to take enforcement action based on City priorities and capacity.

Environmental Considerations: This Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.

Financial Implications: The recommended amendments to provide a more defined framework for issuing citations to property owners who are in violation of SLTCC Chapter 4.60 could encourage increased utilization of the administrative citation process and could lead to a possible increase in code enforcement revenue. It is not possible to forecast a specific financial benefit to the City associated with such measures.

While the amendments would not directly change the cost of administrative citations issued under SLTCC Chapter 4.60, the amendments support City Council’s discretion to change such costs in the future by resolution thus making program cost recovery more flexible.

Policy Implications: The proposed Ordinance would generally support the City of South Lake Tahoe Strategic Plan 2025-2030, Priority Three: Enhance Public Safety; and Priority Four:

Grow and Diversify the Economy.
1243
Ordinance 2026-XXX June 2, 2026 Page 1 of 3
Ordinance 2026-XXX
Adopted by the City of South Lake Tahoe
City Council
June 16, 2026
Ordinance Amending Chapter 4.60 of the South Lake Tahoe City Code (Nuisances consisting of abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structures) to Expressly Authorize Daily Citations

FINDINGS
A. On March 2, 1993, City Council adopted Ordinance 814 adding South Lake Tahoe City Code (SLTCC) Article VI to Chapter 17 and amending Chapter 8 to establish a process for remedying nuisances consisting of abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structures.

B. On March 26, 2024, City Council adopted Ordinance 2024-1182 amending SLTCC Chapters 4.60 (Nuisances consisting of abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structures) and 4.65 (Nuisances consisting of abandoned or substantially damaged dwelling structures) to include structures that are in a partial state of construction in the definition of abandoned building and to create consistency in remedying nuisances associated with nondwelling and dwelling structures.

C. At the City Council meeting on March 10, 2026, Councilmember Robbins requested, and Councilmember Horgan seconded, an item to bring back SLTCC Chapter 4.60 for possible amendment to require daily administrative citation for covered nondwelling structures.

D. The present Ordinance brings this item back for a first reading of a proposed ordinance.

E. California Government Code section 53069.4 authorizes the City to make any violation of any ordinance enacted by the City subject to an administrative fine. The City shall set forth by ordinance the administrative procedures that shall govern the imposition, enforcement, collection, and administrative review by the City of those administrative fines. (California Government Code section 53069.4(a)(1).)
Now, Therefore, the City Council of City of South Lake Tahoe does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 4.60.030 (Remedies) of Chapter 4.60 (Nuisances Consisting of Abandoned or Substantially Damaged Nondwelling Structures) of the South Lake Tahoe City Code is amended to read in its entirety as follows:

4.60.030 Remedies.

A. Abatement. Upon the building official's determination that a structure is an abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structure, the city may choose to abate the public nuisance under Chapter 4.40 SLTCC or under any alternative abatement process permitted under state law. Nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the city's ability to concurrently or consecutively use any of those proceedings as the city may deem effective.
1244
Ordinance 2026-XXX June 2, 2026 Page 2 of 3
B. Administrative Citation.

1. Upon the building official’s, or their designee’s, determination that a structure is an abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structure, the property owner(s) shall be deemed to have violated Chapter 4.60 SLTCC and the city may issue the property owner(s) an administrative citation in accordance with Chapter 2.30 SLTCC and this Chapter. City Council may set the amount of the administrative citation per resolution, subject to California Government Code Section 36900. For any administrative citation issued pursuant to Chapter

4.60 SLTCC, this Chapter shall control over any conflicting requirement set forth in Chapter

2.30 SLTCC.

2. Unless the abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structure creates an immediate danger to public health or safety, the property owner(s) shall be provided, for a first violation, with a reasonable period of time to correct the condition as determined by the building official, or their designee. Failure to correct shall be deemed a continuing violation until the specified violation(s) are verified as corrected by the building official or their designee.

3. Each additional day within one year from the date of the first violation during which the building official, or their designee, finds a property has any condition which constitutes an abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structure shall constitute a separate violation and, at the discretion of the building official, or their designee, a daily administrative citation may be issued to the property owner(s).

SECTION 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision will not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 3. The City Council finds that this Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 4. The City Clerk is directed to certify this Ordinance and cause it to be published in the manner required by law.

SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days following its adoption.

Adopted by the City of South Lake Tahoe City Council on June 16, 2026 by the following vote:

Yes:

No:

Abstain:

Absent:
________________________ Date:_________
Cody Bass, Mayor
1245
Ordinance 2026-XXX June 2, 2026 Page 3 of 3
Attest:
________________________
Susan Blankenship, City Clerk
First Reading:

Published:

Second Reading:

Effective:

The presence of electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the South Lake Tahoe City Council.
1246
Chapter 4.60 (Nuisances Consisting of Abandoned or Substantially Damaged Nondwelling Structures) of the South Lake Tahoe City Code

4.60.010 Recitals.

The existence of abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structures, as defined herein, is considered an attractive nuisance, as such structures are found to constitute neighborhood blight and deterioration in the community. Further, these structures represent a significant safety hazard to the surrounding neighborhood and the community as they attract children and others to the dangerous condition of the abandoned or substantially damaged structures.

4.60.020 Definitions.

A. "Abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structure" means a structure which meets any of the following:

2. Whenever any structure is in such a condition as to constitute a public nuisance in any manner, under any provision of law or in equity; or

B. "Nondwelling unit" means a structure not designed or intended to be used for occupancy for living and sleeping purposes.

4.60.030 Remedies.

A. Abatement.

Upon the building official's determination that a structure is an abandoned or substantially damaged nondwelling structure, the city may choose to abate the public nuisance under Chapter 4.40 SLTCC or under any alternative abatement process 1247
permitted under state law, or issue administrative citations under Chapter 2.30 SLTCC.

Nothing in this section shall be construed as limiting the city's ability to concurrently or consecutively use any of those proceedings as the city may deem effective.

B. Administrative Citation.

4.60.040 Authority not exclusive.

The authority conferred by this chapter is not exclusive. Dwelling unit buildings and/or structures which may meet the criteria for abandonment pursuant to the Uniform Building Code and other applicable provisions of state law are addressed in Chapter

6.15 SLTCC and abatement of such structures shall be administered by the city building department.
1248
City of South Lake Tahoe
Agenda Item Executive Summary
Hilary Roverud, Interim City Manager
__________________________________
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Agenda Item #:11
Agenda Item:

Amendment to Pride Month Resolution to Include Annual Proclamation Executive Summary: On June 3, 2025, Councilmember Robbins requested (with Councilmember Bass seconding) a revised Pride Month Resolution be brought forward to include the annual issuance of a Proclamation Recognizing June as â€œPride Month." Traditionally Proclamations are requested by a member of the public who would then accept the Proclamation on behalf of an organization or group. In this case, without an identified recipient the Resolution includes the posting of the Proclamation at City Hall for the entire month of June.

Requested Action / Suggested Motions: Pass a Resolution recognizing June as “Pride Month” in the City of South Lake Tahoe and directing the City Clerk to prepare and post an annual Proclamation recognizing June as “Pride Month” at City Hall.

Responsible Staff Member: Susan Blankenship, City Clerk Reviewed and Approved By: Olga Tikhomirova, Director of Finance Heather Stroud, City Attorney Attachments:
01-Staff Report-Amendment to Pride Month Resolution.docx 02-Resolution-Recognizing Pride Month to include Annual Proclamation.docx 03-Proclamation - June 2026 Pride Month.docx
1249
Council Agenda Report- June 2, 2026 Page 1 of 1
City of South Lake Tahoe
Report to City Council
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Title: Amendment to Pride Month Resolution to Include Annual Proclamation Location: Citywide
Responsible Staff Member: Susan Blankenship, City Clerk Background: On June 7, 2022, City Council issued their first “Pride Month” Proclamation. In 2023, a similar Proclamation was issued with the addition of an “Inclusive Progress Pride Flag” painted on a City crosswalk near Lakeview Commons. On May 7, 2024, City Council adopted Resolution 2024-056 recognizing June as Pride Month continuously and including annual Pride crosswalk maintenance.

On June 3, 2025, Councilmember Robbins (Seconded by Councilmember Bass) requested that the Pride Resolution be amended to include the annual issuance of a Proclamation Recognizing June as “Pride Month”.

Issue and Discussion: Traditionally Proclamations are requested by a member of the public who would then accept the Proclamation on behalf of an organization or group. In this case, without an identified recipient the Resolution includes the posting of the Proclamation at City Hall for the entire month of June.

Financial Implications: There are no substantial financial implications for the addition of annual Proclamation issuance.

Environmental Considerations: This action is not a “project” requiring environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) (organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment).

Policy Implications: The issuance of a Resolution recognizing June as “Pride Month” and including an annual Proclamation demonstrates the City’s Vision of being a “Welcoming Community.”
1250
Resolution 2026-XXX May 7, 2024 Page 1 of 2
Resolution 2026-XXX
Adopted by the City of South Lake Tahoe
City Council
June 2, 2026
Recognizing June as “Pride Month” in the City of South Lake Tahoe (Replacing Resolution 2024-056)

BACKGROUND
A. In 2010 President Barack Obama declared June to be LGBT Pride Month, stating, ”I call upon all Americans to observe this month by fighting prejudice and discrimination in their own lives and everywhere it exists.”
B. This nation was founded on the principle that every individual has inherent dignity and worth, and the City Council calls upon the people of South Lake Tahoe to embrace this principle and work to eliminate prejudice everywhere it exists.

C. The City of South Lake Tahoe’s vibrant community comprises individuals, families, and allies identifying as LGBTQ+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning, Plus others) who demonstrate pride in and commitment to our City throughout the year.

D. Celebrating Pride Month influences awareness and provides support and advocacy for the City of South Lake Tahoe’s LGBTQ+ community and is an opportunity to take action and engage in dialogue to strengthen alliances, build acceptance and advance equal rights.

E. On June 7, 2022, City Council issued their first “Pride Month” Proclamation.

F. In June 2023, a similar Proclamation was issued with the addition of an “Inclusive Progress Pride Flag” painted on a City crosswalk near Lakeview Commons.

G. On May 7, 2024, the City Council passed Resolution 2024-056 Recognizing June as “Pride Month” continuously and including maintaining an Inclusive Progress Pride Flag (or similar) painted sidewalk to honor the history of the LGBTQ+ liberation movement and to support the rights of all citizens to experience equality and freedom from discrimination.

H. On June 3, 2025, Councilmember Robbins (Seconded by Councilmember Bass) requested that the Pride Resolution be amended to include the annual issuance of a Proclamation Recognizing June as “Pride Month”.

BASED ON THE FACTS SET FORTH IN THE BACKGROUND, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of South Lake Tahoe:

1. Directs the City Clerk to prepare and post an annual Proclamation Recognizing June as “Pride Month” at City Hall.

Adopted by the City of South Lake Tahoe City Council on June 2, 2026, by the following vote:

Yes:

No:

Absent:

Abstain:
1251
Resolution 2026-XXX May 7, 2024 Page 2 of 2
________________________ Date:_________
Cody Bass, Mayor
Attest:
________________________
Susan Blankenship, City Clerk
The presence of electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the South Lake Tahoe City Council.
1252
City of South Lake Tahoe
Proclamation
Recognizing June 2026 as
“Pride Month”
Whereas, the City of South Lake Tahoe is a welcoming community and an exceptional place to live, learn, work, play, and raise a family; and Whereas, the City recognizes the importance of equality and freedom; and Whereas, the nation was founded upon and is guided by a set of principles that includes that every person has been created equal, that each has rights to their life, liberty and pursuit of happiness and that each shall be accorded the full recognition and protection of law; and
Whereas, the City of South Lake Tahoe’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex community are a vital part of all fields and professions and contribute to a stronger community; and
Whereas, the City is dedicated to fostering acceptance of all its citizens and preventing discrimination and bullying based on sexual orientation and gender identity; and
Whereas, the City of South Lake Tahoe is strengthened by and thrives upon the rich diversity of ethnic, cultural, racial, gender and sexual identities of its residents; all of which contribute to the vibrant character of our City.

Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of South Lake Tahoe does hereby proclaim and recognize June 2026 as “Pride Month” in the City of South Lake Tahoe and urge citizens to recognize the contributions made by members of the LGBTQI community and LGBTQI Organizations to actively promote the principles of equality and liberty.
________________________ __________________________
Cody Bass, Mayor Susan Blankenship, City Clerk
1253
City of South Lake Tahoe
Agenda Item Executive Summary
Hilary Roverud, Interim City Manager
__________________________________
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Agenda Item #:12
Agenda Item: Draft Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan and FY 26-27 Budget Recommendations Executive Summary: The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) addresses the Cityâ€™s needs for acquiring, expanding, rehabilitating, and replacing long-lived assets. The CIP serves as a planning instrument to identify needed capital projects and coordinate the financing and timing of improvements to maximize the return to the public. The Fiscal Year 26-30 draft five-year capital plan and the 26-27 budget requests are being proposed for future adoption during the Cityâ€™s annual budget process. The plan details the funding and expenses of all projects within the five-year timeline, including all projects funded by state, federal, and local grants. For this agenda item, we are introducing and discussing the Fiscal Year 26-27 capital appropriation requests to reinforce project priorities and review the proposed appropriations before adoption on August 25, 2026.

Requested Action / Suggested Motions: Pass a Motion either directing staff to bring back the FY 26- 27 Budget Recommendation and Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan for approval at the City Council meeting on August 25, 2026, or directing staff to make any changes to the Plan.

Responsible Staff Member: Ricky Riddle, Construction Manager, Capital Improvements and Facilities Program Manager
Reviewed and Approved By: Mohammad Qureshi, Director of Public Works Susan Blankenship, City Clerk Olga Tikhomirova, Director of Finance Heather Stroud, City Attorney Attachments:
01-Staff_Report_-_Draft_5Year_Capital_Improvement_Plan_and_FY_26- 27_Budget_Recommendations Final.docx
02- Current & Targeted Funds.pdf
03-Unfunded CIP.pdf
04 - FY 25-26 CIP Presentation Final.pptx
1254
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 1 of 11
City of South Lake Tahoe
Report to City Council
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Title: Draft Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan and FY 2026/27 Budget Recommendations
Location: Citywide
Responsible Staff Member: Ricky Riddle, Construction Manager/Capital Improvements Program Manager/Facilities Program Manager
Background: The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) addresses the City's needs for public and infrastructure improvements, including the acquisition, expansion, rehabilitation, and replacement of long-lived assets. The CIP serves as a planning instrument to identify the needed capital projects and coordinate the financing and timing of improvements in a way that maximizes the return to the public and preserves City assets. It provides a planned and programmed approach to utilizing the City's financial resources in a responsible and efficient manner to meet its service and facility needs. It serves as a "blueprint" for the community's future and is a dynamic tool, not a static document.

A critical element of a balanced CIP is the establishment of funds to both preserve or enhance existing assets and provide new assets to respond to changing service needs and community evolution.

The City's Preserving Capital Investments Policy states the following:
“The City invests in capital assets such as property, plant, equipment, facilities, and infrastructure. Preservation of such investments through regular maintenance and a longterm renovation plan is necessary to preserve their value. The city must also plan for the replacement of capital investments (particularly vehicles and equipment). The following policy requirements are intended to ensure the proper accounting and preservation of capital investments and to provide a sound economic base for their replacement.

1. The budget should provide sufficient funding for adequate maintenance, renovation, and the orderly replacement of capital assets such as equipment, fleet, facilities, streets, and parks.

2. All capital assets should be maintained at a level that protects capital investment and minimizes future maintenance and replacement costs.

3. A five-year schedule of equipment replacement and maintenance needs, as well as facilities, streets and parks renovation and maintenance needs should be prepared on an annual basis. Expenditures consistent with such plans shall be included in annual budget appropriations.”
1255
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 2 of 11
Over the past few years, the Department of Public Works has made significant progress toward evaluating the condition of existing assets across all classes. Infrastructure decline is an ongoing cycle, and considerable work remains in planning for the replacement of assets within the city’s operation and maintenance (O&M) responsibilities.

The CIP displays all projects scheduled for the five-year timeline, whether they are currently in the design phase or fully funded. As a fundamental tool for scheduling anticipated capital projects and costs, the CIP is critical for planning and controlling future budget and debt service requirements. For this reason, the CIP includes projects where needs have been defined, but specific funding solutions have not been identified (unfunded). By providing unfunded projects in the timeline, we acknowledge the need and recognize a commitment to schedule and pursue additional funding.

City staff are skilled at securing grants to support needs across various CIP Categories.

Whether it is FAA support of the airport, various state and federal grants supporting transportation and water quality projects, or grants aimed at reducing hazardous fuel and promoting sustainability. Our staff is exceptionally skilled at securing funding sources outside the City’s general or local fund pool to support the Capital Program. Over the next few years, staff will place greater emphasis on applying for and securing various grants to fund future projects. In FY2025/26, the Public Works Department retained a qualified Grant Writing firm to assist in applying for grants for larger-scale projects. However, most grant sources require a monetary match from the awarding agency. Typically, 10% to 20%, depending on the source. The grant matching funds are usually derived from the city’s general fund. By committing to funding a project through grant revenue, the city also commits to the matching funds, thereby restricting available limited dollars for non-grant applicable operational and capital needs. While leveraging match funds from undesignated general funds for larger-scale grant acquisition is generally positive and maximizes project success, the city and staff should be aware of the potential to “overload” the CIP with grantfunded projects, thereby further restricting available funding for operations and non-grantrelated capital.

As part of the grant writing consulting services procured by the City for FY 2025/26, a preliminary analysis was conducted of the City’s CIP projects against available federal, state, and regional grant opportunities. This review identified approximately 35 distinct grant programs that may align with the City’s prioritized projects in active transportation, parks and recreation, stormwater and environmental improvements, public safety facilities, sustainability/EV infrastructure, and complete streets.

Furthermore, most grants require the project to be “shovel ready.” Preliminary studies, conceptual designs, preliminary environmental documentation, detailed cost estimates, public outreach, and other project development metrics are typically required for successful grant consideration. These initial tasks often rely on the City’s undesignated general fund reserves to “seed” the project, thereby restricting available general fund dollars for nongrant-funded capital projects. Finally, the entire grant process—from application through procurement, implementation, reporting, and close-out—is very time-intensive and requires significant staff support.

In 2009, the City initiated a formal evaluation of its roadway paving network. Subsequently, 1256
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 3 of 11
Measure S was approved by the voters in 2020, and annual funding is now being applied to the asset class. In 2023, the City completed a condition assessment and Pavement Condition Index (PCI), which aids in determining the true needs and developing a multitude of pavement rehabilitation schemes to extend the life of roadways in South Lake Tahoe.

The City maintains 257 lane-miles of roadway. The standard anticipated lifespan for asphalt pavement is 20 years. This lifespan is estimated based on a properly maintained roadway, including the divergence of storm water that inundates the structural section. The current construction cost for new full depth roadway (asphalt concrete over aggregate base) is approximately $1,000,000 per lane-mile, the anticipated total cost for pavement rehabilitation is roughly $257 million over the next two decades or roughly $12.85 million per year. This estimation does not account for roadway sections that have been previously built to a full engineered structural section. Apart from the most recent annual roadway rehabilitation project, and recent complete street's projects (Sierra Blvd, for example) there is no record of prior emphasis on full depth roadway reconstruction. This cost estimate is not inclusive of the required maintenance to protect structural integrity of prior completed roadways. This cost estimate does not include the necessary stormwater improvements required to achieve a 20-year roadway life, which are addressed below. These cost assumptions are preliminary and subject to change based on future construction market conditions, material costs, and labor rates. With the combination of Measure S funds, State Gas Tax SB1 (RMRA) funds, and Utility In-Lieu fees, the City will likely allocate nearly $80 million to roadway network rehabilitation over the next twenty years at current funding levels. The City currently allocated only approximately $4 million per year dedicated to road rehabilitation — far below the level needed to keep pace with the 20-year life-cycle needs.

These funding gaps are reflected in the unfunded projects shown in Attachment 02. To meet the life-cycle goal, an additional $8.85 million per year in road rehabilitation funding would be needed (for a total of $12.85 million annually).

Starting FY 2025/26, the City placed additional emphasis on Pavement Maintenance to complement the Pavement Rehabilitation program. Pavement maintenance funds are being utilized via two separate mechanisms: in-house maintenance, and contracted maintenance.

Starting in FY 2025/26, additional funding and staffing resources have been allocated towards in-house maintenance. Scope of services provided by in-house maintenance involves utilizing city employees and equipment to repair major potholes and perform crack filling. Contracted maintenance is being implemented via a cape seal process to extend the pavement’s lifespan that is being completed by outside contractors. Funding for in-house pavement maintenance will be requested separately as part of the street’s operations budget. Funding for contracted maintenance has been committed at $1 million per year utilizing additional Measure S funds, starting in FY2025/26. In FY 2026/27 and FY2027/28, this program is reflected as funded, in addition to the funding request for pavement rehabilitation (reconstruction).

Additionally, staff is presenting estimated costs for full City-wide implementation of the forthcoming Stormwater Master Plan. This preliminary estimate totals $500 million and is subject to refinement as the plan is further developed with detailed engineering and cost estimates. These costs are reflected in the 5-Year Unfunded Needs (Table 3/ Attachment 02) as approximately $25 million per year starting in FY 2027/28 once the Master Plan is 1257
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 4 of 11
completed. To maximize efficiency, minimize repeated construction disruption, and reduce overall project costs, staff strongly recommends implementing the Stormwater Master Plan concurrently with the roadway rehabilitation program. Coordinating these two major infrastructure efforts will allow the City to leverage the same construction windows, contractor mobilizations, traffic control, and trench restoration, delivering substantial cost savings and improved outcomes for both the traveling public and Lake Tahoe’s water clarity.

This coordinated, long-term strategy underscores the critical need for increased and stable funding sources — including aggressive pursuit of state and federal grants — to address these intertwined infrastructure priorities over the next 20 years.

In 2010, the staff brought forward concerns with the condition of various park assets, including the recreation center. In November 2016, voters passed Measure P, a citywide increase of the transient occupancy tax (TOT) by 2 percent with funds earmarked for a new recreation complex. The first phase of the new Multi-Generational Recreation and Aquatics Center was completed in 2024, and the final phase was completed in April 2026.

In 2023, staff completed a Conditions Assessment for all City facilities (FCA), with an estimated total upgrade & deferred maintenance need of $47.8 million. This figure includes $11.2 million identified at the airport, which are being accomplished/funded separately by the Airport. This figure has been utilized as a benchmark and staff has kept track of improvements/maintenance completed since the FCA report was generated. Through prior CIP projects and funding allocations, the City has completed, or allocated funding for $4 million in improvements/maintenance. The City has also elected to move forward with the new Fire Station 3 facility and is removing the remaining $1 million identified in the FCA from further tracking metrics. In total, staff is reporting $32 million in remaining improvements/maintenance towards facilities, plus an additional $11 million for the Airport.

The city also completed an ADA Transition Plan for citywide upgrades, with an estimated cost of $14 million for full implementation. Staff have been implementing ADA upgrades on an annual basis. In 2024, we completed the Lakeview and Harrison Avenue ADA upgrades.

Since the completion of the ADA transition plan, the city has completed $100k in dedicated upgrades, in addition to the ADA improvements that are standardized in implementation of other CIP projects.

The city’s surplus funds, or undesignated general fund reserves, calculated annually, are not solely obligated for capital programming. The city’s general fund reserves aim to balance needs across all city operations, programs, and capital projects. Thus, there are many competing interests for the funds. Actual funds available for capital needs are not known until all other cost accounting takes place, and as such, the planning of the annual CIP is dynamic.

Issue and Discussion: Capital improvement programming guides the efficient and effective delivery of public facilities, systems, and infrastructure. Programming capital projects over time can promote better use of the City’s limited financial resources and assist in coordinating public and private development.

The attached draft Five-year (FY ending 2027-2031) capital improvement plan document is being proposed for adoption and iconsideration in the City’s annual budget process, subject 1258
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 5 of 11
to funding availability. It details the funding and expenses of all projects within the five-year timeline, including those funded by state, federal, and local grants. For this agenda item, we are introducing and discussing the FY2026/27 capital appropriation requests and priorities from all departments. The proposed CIP program will be finalized once a clear picture of available funding is known and before budget adoption on August 25, 2026.

CIP Recommendations: For this year, City staff, comprising the city manager's office, public works, parks and recreation, finance, public safety, planning, police, and fire, reviewed departmental needs in May 2026. This team conducted an in-depth analysis of the capital program's impact on cash flow and expenses, as well as the City's ability to finance, design, construct, and ultimately maintain and operate projects. Each department completed its projects and funding requests.

Financial Implications: The FY 2026/27 Capital Improvement Plan initiates the delivery of specific projects and maintenance tasks necessary to protect and upgrade existing assets, as well as plan and construct new assets, in accordance with the City's existing goals, objectives, plans, and policies.

For reference, the following table (Table 1) reflects the City’s current funding allocations including rollfroward of remaining funds from prior fiscal years, in addition to the FY 2025/26 allocations. These funding totals do not represent total project costs. These totals are intended to reflect the current value of work funded and planned for implementation in FY 2025/26.

Table 1: Status of Funded Capital Projects (Already adopted or expected funding – informational status report only; detailed line-item financials in Attachment 01) South Lake Tahoe
Capital Improvement Program
2026 through 2030

CURRENT STATUS OF FUNDING - PROJECTS BY

DEPARTMENT
Fiscal Impact Category Rollforward 25/26 Total Current Funding AP - Airport/Aviation
Airport Master Plan Update - Phases 1 & 2 $ 70,277
$
-
$
70,277
Airport Pavement Repair and Taxiway Rehab $ 66,042
$
-
$
66,042
Runway Rehabilitation Project $ -
$
630,000
$
630,000
AP - Airport/Aviation Total $ 136,319
$
630,000
$
766,319
AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes,
Sidewalk)
1259
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 6 of 11
Bijou Bike Park Improvements $ 35,000
$
-
$
35,000
Bijou Park Connector Project $ 1,449,056
$
-
$
1,449,056
Citywide ADA Upgrades $ 100,000
$
-
$
100,000
Dennis Machida Memorial Bike Way Phase 1C $ -
$
744,939
$
744,939
South Tahoe Bikeway Wayfinding and Amenities $ 30,000
$
1,902
$
31,902
Sugar Pine Multi-Use Trails - AHSC Grant $ 2,422,543
$
-
$
2,422,543
Tahoe Valley Greenbelt Lighting Improvements $ -
$
450,000
$
450,000
Upper Truckee River Scour Protection $ 358,500
$
-
$
358,500
AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes,
Sidewalk) Total $ 4,395,099 $ 1,196,841
$
5,591,940
FA - Facilities & Buildings
Ice Arena HVAC and Dehumidification Equipment
Replacement $ -
$
350,000
$
350,000
Long Term Capital Replacement $ 376,837
$
655,000
$
1,031,837
Misc. Maintenance - Minor Capital $ 28,301
$
-
$
28,301
Multi-Generational Recreation Center $ - $ 15,936,579
$
15,936,579
Services Center Renovations $ 116,980
$
-
$
116,980
FA - Facilities & Buildings Total $ 522,118 $ 16,941,579 $
17,463,697
PA - Parks and Grounds
Al Tahoe Cemetery Security Improvements $ 35,418
$
-
$
35,418
Bijou Park Skate Park Renovations $ 21,957
$
-
$
21,957
Community Fields Restroom $ 14,223
$
-
$
14,223
Community Playfields $ 3,630
$
-
$
3,630
El Dorado Beach Boat Ramp Dock $ -
$
100,000
$
100,000
El Dorado Beach Revetment & Improvements
Project $ 1,217,357
$
-
$
1,217,357
Lakeview Commons and Ski Run Blvd Electrical
Upgrades $ 80,000
$
-
$
80,000
Regan Beach Renovations $ 950,000
$
-
$
950,000
PA - Parks and Grounds Total $ 2,322,585 $ $
1260
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 7 of 11
100,000 2,422,585
PS-F - Public Safety - Fire
Fire Station 1 Upgrades $ 85,877
$
-
$
85,877
Fire Station 2 Rehab $ 75,000
$
-
$
75,000
Fire Station 3 New Building $ 1,171,996
$
-
$
1,171,996
PS-F - Public Safety - Fire Total $ 1,332,873
$
-
$
1,332,873
PS-P - Public Safety - Police
Bellamy Parking Garage Painting and Lighting $ -
$
700,000
$
700,000
Police Department Parking & Drainage Upgrade $ -
$
150,000
$
150,000
Police Department Roof Replacement $ 836,011
$
-
$
836,011
PS-P - Public Safety - Police Total $ 836,011
$
850,000
$
1,686,011
PWD - Public Works Admin
Grant Application Consulting Services $ -
$
100,000
$
100,000
PWD - Public Works Admin Total $ -
$
100,000
$
100,000
ST - Complete Streets
Annual Sealing Project $ - $ 1,250,000
$
1,250,000
Annual Streets and Roads Paving and
Rehabilitation $ 486,238 $ 4,232,936
$
4,719,174
Misc. Traffic Safety and Calming Projects $ 125,056
$
-
$
125,056
Multimodal Mainstreet Corridor Plan US50/89
Corridor $ 475,000
$
-
$
475,000
Pioneer Trail Improvements - Phase II $ 2,919,615 $ 3,481,048 $
6,400,663
Stateline Avenue Complete Streets Project $ 105,217
$
255,852
$
361,069
US 50/89 Road Safety Audit Implementation $ 46,487
$
-
$
46,487
ST - Complete Streets Total $ 4,157,613 $ 9,219,836
$
13,377,449
SUS - Sustainability
Citywide Sustainability and Energy Upgrade
Project $ 6,720,610 $ 1,247,223
$
7,967,833
1261
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 8 of 11
EV Charging Public & Micro Transit $ 150,000
$
500,000
$
650,000
Public Works and Fire Department Backup Power $ 150,000 $
-
$
150,000
Water Fountain Stations $ 53,322
$
-
$
53,322
SUS - Sustainability Total $ 7,073,932 $ 1,747,223
$
8,821,155
SW - Stormwater and Environmental
Improvements
Bijou Park Creek -Upper Watershed $ 571,647
$
690,024
$
1,261,671
Drainage Improvements - Micro Areas - City Wide $ 689,594 $
-
$
689,594
Drainage Master Plan Update $ 35,000
$
700,000
$
735,000
Drainage Pipe Replacement $ 1,149,319
$
-
$
1,149,319
James & Eloise Drainage Pipe Replacement $ 112,418
$
800,000
$
912,418
Ruby Way Erosion Control Project $ 191,278
$
21,591
$
212,869
Tahoe Valley Stormwater and Greenbelt
Improvement Project $ 2,412,711 $ 3,446,612
$
5,859,323
SW - Stormwater and Environmental
Improvements Total $ 5,161,967 $ 5,658,227
$
13,320,194
Total $ 26,138,517 $ 37,013,706
$
63,152,223
Considerations for the FY 2026/27 CIP are addressed by two sections:

1. Critical Budget Needs for FY 2026/27.

2. Additional Funding Needs for the 5-Year CIP. This also includes projected total funding necessary to complete known projects.

Table 2: FY 2026/27 Recommended Funding for High-Priority Unfunded Projects (High-priority needs identified in Attachment 02 – to be considered by Council approval as new appropriations.) South Lake Tahoe
Capital Improvement Program
2026 through 2030
1262
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 9 of 11

CRITICAL UNFUNDED - PROJECTS BY DEPARTMENT
Fiscal Impact Category 26/27
AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes, Sidewalk)
Dennis Machida Memorial Bike Way Phase 1C $ 350,000
AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes, Sidewalk) Total $ 350,000 FA - Facilities & Buildings
Long Term Capital Replacement $ 500,000
FA - Facilities & Buildings Total $ 500,000
PA - Parks and Grounds
El Dorado Beach Revetment & Improvements Project $ 500,000 *Existing Recreation Center Demolition/Site Restoration $ 2,100,000 *Contingent upon council direction for re-use
Golf Course Improvements – Planning Efforts $ 150,000
New Parks Shop $ 600,000
Rec Center Snowmelt Boiler $ 250,000
PA - Parks and Grounds Total $ 3,600,000
PS-P - Public Safety - Police
Police Department Parking & Drainage Upgrade $ 350,000
PS-P - Public Safety - Police Total $ 350,000
PWD - Public Works Admin
Grant Application Consulting Services $ 100,000
PWD - Public Works Admin Total $ 100,000
ST - Complete Streets
Misc. Traffic Safety and Calming Projects $ 250,000
ST - Complete Streets Total $ 250,000
SW - Stormwater and Environmental Improvements
Bijou Park Creek -Upper Watershed $ 800,000
Drainage Pipe Replacement $ 1,000,000
SW - Stormwater and Environmental Improvements Total $ 1,800,000 VE - Vehicles & Equipment
Public Works Sweeper & Vactor Truck
Funds/Partial Funds from TRPA Mitigation Fees $ 1,165,452 VE - Vehicles & Equipment Total $ 1,165,452
Total $ 8,115,452
1263
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 10 of 11
Table 3: 5-Year Funding Needs for Remaining Important Unfunded Projects (Optional Funding opportunities if surplus budget remains available after higher-priority items. These projects are all important but not critical for immediate funding and are being planned for future years or grant opportunities accordingly.)
South Lake Tahoe
Capital Improvement Program
2026 through 2030

ADDITIONAL UNFUNDED - PROJECTS BY

DEPARTMENT
Fiscal Impact Category 26/27
AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes, Sidewalk)
Citywide ADA Upgrades $ 250,000
Sidewalk and Trail Maintenance Program $ 250,000
Winnemucca Cul-de-sac $ 200,000
AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes, Sidewalk)
Total $ 700,000
ST - Complete Streets
Annual Streets and Roads Paving and Rehabilitation $ 9,500,000 Johnson Boulevard Complete Street Project $ 250,000
US 50/89 Road Safety Audit Implementation $ 250,000
Pioneer Trail / Ski Run Blvd Intersection Upgrade $ 200,000 ST - Complete Streets Total $ 10,200,000
SW - Stormwater and Environmental Improvements
Drainage Improvements - Micro Areas - City Wide $ 50,000 Ruby Way Erosion Control Project $ 300,000
SW - Stormwater and Environmental Improvements
Total $ 350,000
VE - Vehicles & Equipment
New Holland Tractor & Attachments – Golf Course $ 50,000 VE - Vehicles & Equipment Total $ 50,000
Total $ 11,300,000
Note: High-priority unfunded projects (yellow-highlighted in Attachment 02) are addressed in Table

2. The projects in Table 3 are important but not critical for immediate FY 2026/27 funding and can be considered if surplus budget is available.

Summary of 2026/27 Budget Requests by Funding Source:
o Measure S / SB1: ~$9.2M (Complete Streets + Annual Paving) 1264
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 11 of 11
o General Funds: Balance of requests (including major Facilities and Stormwater)
o Airport Enterprise / Grants: Airport-specific
o VHR Program / Other: Police / Sustainability
o Future Bonds: Fire Station 3 (reimbursement resolution adopted May 5, 2026) Attachment 01: Funded Projects CIP (already adopted or expected funding).

Attachment 02: Unfunded Projects CIP (with yellow-highlighted high-priority needs).

Environmental Considerations: Receiving this report and providing direction to staff is not approval of a project subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Guidelines sections 15352 and 15378 because it does not commit the City to a definite course of action regarding the projects listed within the Capital Improvement Plan and does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment.

Policy Implications: The proposed CIP requests and Policies are consistent with the recently adopted 2025-2030 Strategic Plan goals:
 Priority 5 – Improve Transportation
 Priority 6 – Protect the Natural Environment
 Priority 7 – Recreation and Equitable Access for All
In addition, the CIP is consistent with following General Plan policies:
 General Plan Policy TC‐1.4: Capital Improvement Program Funding.  General Plan Policy TC‐1.5: Street Repair Program.
 General Plan Policy PQP‐1.6: Capital Improvement Program.  General Plan Policy PQP‐1.8: Financing and Prioritizing Maintenance of Existing Infrastructure.
1265
Fiscal Impact Category Rollforward 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 Future 5 Year Funding Target AP - Airport/Aviation
Airport Fence Line $ - $ - $ - $ 350,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 350,000 Airport Master Plan Update - Phases 1 & 2 $ 70,277 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 70,277 Airport Pavement Repair and Taxiway Rehab $ 66,042 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 66,042 Runway Rehabilitation Project $ - $ 630,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 630,000 Taxiway Alpha Mill and Fill $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 15,000,000 $ - $ - $ 15,000,000 AP - Airport/Aviation Total $ 136,319 $ 630,000 $ - $ 350,000 $ 15,000,000 $ - $ - $ 16,116,319 AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes, Sidewalk)
Bijou Bike Park Improvements $ 35,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 35,000 Bijou Park Connector Project $ 1,449,056 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,449,056 Citywide ADA Upgrades $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 Dennis Machida Memorial Bike Way Phase 1C $ - $ 744,939 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 744,939 South Tahoe Bikeway Wayfinding and Amenities $ 30,000 $ 1,902 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 31,902 Sugar Pine Multi-Use Trails - AHSC Grant $ 2,422,543 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,422,543 Tahoe Valley Greenbelt Lighting Improvements $ - $ 450,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 450,000 Upper Truckee River Scour Protection $ 358,500 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 358,500 AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes, Sidewalk) Total $ 4,395,099 $ 1,196,841 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 5,591,940 FA - Facilities & Buildings
Ice Arena HVAC and Dehumidification Equipment Replacement $ - $ 350,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 350,000 Long Term Capital Replacement $ 376,837 $ 655,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,031,837 Misc. Maintenance - Minor Capital $ 28,301 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 28,301 Multi-Generational Recreation Center $ - $ 15,936,579 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 15,936,579 Services Center Renovations $ 116,980 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 116,980 FA - Facilities & Buildings Total $ 522,118 $ 16,941,579 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 17,463,697 PA - Parks and Grounds
Al Tahoe Cemetery Security Improvements $ 35,418 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 35,418 Bijou Park Skate Park Renovations $ 21,957 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 21,957 Community Fields Restroom $ 14,223 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 14,223 Community Playfields $ 3,630 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 3,630 El Dorado Beach Boat Ramp Dock $ - $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 El Dorado Beach Revetment & Improvements Project $ 1,217,357 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,217,357 Lakeview Commons and Ski Run Blvd Electrical Upgrades $ 80,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 80,000 Regan Beach Renovations $ 950,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 950,000 South Lake Tahoe
Capital Improvement Program
2026 through 2030

TARGETED & ALLOCATED FUNDS - PROJECTS BY DEPARTMENT
1266
PA - Parks and Grounds Total $ 2,322,585 $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,422,585 PS-F - Public Safety - Fire
Fire Station 1 Upgrades $ 85,877 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 85,877 Fire Station 2 Rehab $ 75,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 75,000 Fire Station 3 New Building $ 1,171,996 $ - $ 3,000,000 $ - $ 17,000,000 $ - $ - $ 21,171,996 PS-F - Public Safety - Fire Total $ 1,332,873 $ - $ 3,000,000 $ - $ 17,000,000 $ - $ - $ 21,332,873 PS-P - Public Safety - Police
Bellamy Parking Garage Painting and Lighting $ - $ 700,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 700,000 Police Department Parking & Drainage Upgrade $ - $ 150,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 Police Department Roof Replacement $ 836,011 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 836,011 PS-P - Public Safety - Police Total $ 836,011 $ 850,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,686,011 PWD - Public Works Admin
Grant Application Consulting Services $ - $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 PWD - Public Works Admin Total $ - $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 ST - Complete Streets
Annual Sealing Project $ - $ 1,250,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 6,250,000 Annual Streets and Roads Paving and Rehabilitation $ 486,238 $ 4,232,936 $ 3,054,898 $ 3,054,898 $ 3,054,898 $ 3,054,898 $ 3,054,898 $ 19,993,664 Johnson Boulevard Complete Street Project $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 Misc. Traffic Safety and Calming Projects $ 125,056 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 125,056 Multimodal Mainstreet Corridor Plan US50/89 Corridor $ 475,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 475,000 Pioneer Trail Improvements - Phase II $ 2,919,615 $ 3,481,048 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 6,400,663 Stateline Avenue Complete Streets Project $ 105,217 $ 255,852 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 361,069 US 50/89 Road Safety Audit Implementation $ 46,487 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 46,487 ST - Complete Streets Total $ 4,357,613 $ 9,219,836 $ 4,054,898 $ 4,054,898 $ 4,054,898 $ 4,054,898 $ 4,054,898 $ 33,851,939 SUS - Sustainability
Citywide Sustainability and Energy Upgrade Project $ 6,720,610 $ 1,247,223 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 7,967,833 EV Charging Public & Micro Transit $ 150,000 $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 650,000 Public Works and Fire Department Backup Power $ 150,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 150,000 Water Fountain Stations $ 53,322 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 53,322 SUS - Sustainability Total $ 7,073,932 $ 1,747,223 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 8,821,155 SW - Stormwater and Environmental Improvements
Bijou Park Creek -Upper Watershed $ 571,647 $ 690,024 $ 2,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 3,761,671 Drainage Improvements - Micro Areas - City Wide $ 689,594 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 689,594 Drainage Master Plan Update $ 35,000 $ 700,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 735,000 Drainage Pipe Replacement $ 1,149,319 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,149,319 James & Eloise Drainage Pipe Replacement $ 112,418 $ 800,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 912,418 Ruby Way Erosion Control Project $ 191,278 $ 21,591 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 212,869 1267
Tahoe Valley Stormwater and Greenbelt Improvement Project $ 2,412,711 $ 3,446,612 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 5,859,323 SW - Stormwater and Environmental Improvements Total $ 5,161,967 $ 5,658,227 $ 2,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 13,320,194 Total $ 26,138,517 $ 36,343,706 $ 9,554,898 $ 4,404,898 $ 36,054,898 $ 4,054,898 $ 4,054,898 $ 120,606,713 1268
Fiscal Impact Category Rollforward 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 Future Total AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes, Sidewalk)
Citywide ADA Upgrades $ - $ - $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 1,250,000 Dennis Machida Memorial Bike Way Phase 1C $ - $ - $ 350,000 $ - $ 8,000,000 $ - $ - $ 8,350,000 Sidewalk and Trail Maintenance Progam $ - $ - $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 1,250,000 Upper Truckee River Scour Protection $ - $ 400,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 400,000 Winnemucca Cul-de-sac $ - $ - $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 200,000 AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes, Sidewalk) Total $ - $ 400,000 $ 1,050,000 $ 500,000 $ 8,500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 11,450,000 FA - Facilities & Buildings
Long Term Capital Replacement $ - $ - $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 2,500,000 Misc. Maintenance - Minor Capital $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Services Center Renovations $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,200,000 $ 1,200,000 FA - Facilities & Buildings Total $ - $ - $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 1,700,000 $ 3,700,000 PA - Parks and Grounds
56 Acres Master Plan $ - $ - $ - $ 2,000,000 $ 20,000,000 $ - $ - $ 22,000,000 Conolley Beach Restrooms $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 $ 900,000 $ - $ 1,000,000 El Dorado Beach Revetment & Improvements Project $ - $ - $ 500,000 $ - $ 3,000,000 $ - $ - $ 3,500,000 Existing Recreation Center Demolition/Site Restoration $ - $ - $ 2,100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,100,000 Golf Course Improvements $ - $ - $ 150,000 $ 350,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 500,000 New Parks Shop $ - $ - $ 600,000 $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 2,100,000 Parks Interim Trailer $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 Rec Center Snowmelt Boiler $ - $ - $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 250,000 Regan Beach Renovations $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 11,000,000 $ 11,000,000 PA - Parks and Grounds Total $ - $ - $ 3,600,000 $ 3,950,000 $ 23,100,000 $ 900,000 $ 11,000,000 $ 42,550,000 PS-F - Public Safety - Fire
Fire Station 1 Upgrades $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Fire Station 2 Roof Repairs $ - $ - $ - $ 60,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 60,000 Fire Station 3 New Building $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - PS-F - Public Safety - Fire Total $ - $ - $ - $ 60,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 60,000 PS-P - Public Safety - Police
Bellamy Parking Garage Boilers $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 Bellamy Parking Garage Painting and Lighting $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Explore Tahoe CSO-PA and Supervisors workspace build out $ - $ 170,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 170,000 Police Department Parking & Drainage Upgrade $ - $ - $ 350,000 $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,850,000 SLTPD building expansion $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 PS-P - Public Safety - Police Total $ - $ 170,000 $ 350,000 $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ 4,000,000 $ 6,020,000 PWD - Public Works Admin
Grant Application Consulting Services $ - $ - $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 500,000 PWD - Public Works Admin Total $ - $ - $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 500,000 ST - Complete Streets
Al Tahoe / Johnson Signal Upgrade $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 600,000 $ 600,000 Al Tahoe/Pioneer Signal Upgrade $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 600,000 $ 600,000 Annual Streets and Roads Paving and Rehabilitation $ - $ - $ 9,500,000 $ 9,500,000 $ 9,500,000 $ 9,500,000 $ 202,500,000 $ 240,500,000 Johnson Boulevard Complete Street Project $ - $ - $ 250,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 10,000,000 $ - $ - $ 11,250,000 Misc. Traffic Safety and Calming Projects $ - $ - $ 250,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 650,000 Multimodal Mainstreet Corridor Plan US50/89 Corridor $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 19,000,000 $ 19,000,000 New Signal at Viking Way and Lake Tahoe Blvd $ - $ - $ - $ 60,000 $ - $ 1,000,000 $ - $ 1,060,000 South Lake Tahoe
Capital Improvement Program
2026 through 2030

UNFUNDED - PROJECTS BY DEPARTMENT

Page 1 of 2 ends

Fiscal Impact Category Rollforward 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 Future Total Pioneer Safety Project - Phase 2 $ - $ - $ - $ 250,000 $ - $ 1,000,000 $ - $ 1,250,000 Pioneer Trail / Ski Run Blvd Intersection Upgrade $ - $ - $ 200,000 $ - $ 2,000,000 $ - $ - $ 2,200,000 Stateline Avenue Complete Streets Project $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,000,000 $ 12,000,000 $ - $ 14,000,000 US 50/89 Road Safety Audit Implementation $ - $ - $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 250,000 ST - Complete Streets Total $ - $ - $ 10,450,000 $ 10,910,000 $ 23,600,000 $ 23,600,000 $ 222,800,000 $ 291,360,000 SUS - Sustainability
Public Works and Fire Department Backup Power $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ 300,000 SUS - Sustainability Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ 300,000 SW - Stormwater and Environmental Improvements
Bijou Park Creek -Upper Watershed $ - $ - $ 800,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 5,832,000 $ 6,632,000 Drainage Improvements - Micro Areas - City Wide $ - $ - $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ - $ 200,000 Drainage Master Plan - Implementation $ - $ - $ - $ 25,000,000 $ 25,000,000 $ 25,000,000 $ 400,000,000 $ 475,000,000 Drainage Master Plan Update $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Drainage Pipe Replacement $ - $ - $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 53,000,000 $ 57,000,000 James & Eloise Drainage Pipe Replacement $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Ruby Way Erosion Control Project $ - $ - $ 300,000 $ 3,000,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 3,300,000 SW - Stormwater and Environmental Improvements Total $ - $ - $ 2,150,000 $ 29,050,000 $ 26,050,000 $ 26,050,000 $ 458,832,000 $ 542,132,000 VE - Vehicles & Equipment
New Holland Tractor & Attachments - Parks Shop $ - $ - $ 50,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 50,000 Public Works Sweeper & Vactor Truck $ - $ - $ 1,165,452 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,165,452 VE - Vehicles & Equipment Total $ - $ - $ 1,215,452 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,215,452 Total $ - $ 570,000 $ 19,415,452 $ 46,570,000 $ 82,150,000 $ 51,650,000 $ 698,932,000 $ 899,287,452 FY 2026/27 Total Critical Needs $8,115,452.00
Total Additional Needs (Non-Critical) $11,300,000.00

Page 2 of 2 ends

Draft Five-Year Capital Improvement
Program (FY2027-31) and FY 2026/27
Budget Recommendations
1 CIP
Presentation to Council
June 2nd, 2026
1271
Purpose of This Presentation
2 • Status report of CIP projects & funding
• (where we are)
• CIP Funding Recommendations for FY 2026/27
• (where we’re going)
• Provide Recommendations on Long Term Program Needs
• (where we want to be)
City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation
1272
CIP Process
City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation 3
• Department-Based Needs
• Coordination Across City Departments
• Conditions Assessment
• Asset Management
• Public Input
• Complete Program
• Final adoption by City Council
1273
Summary of FY 2026/27 Funding Recommendations
City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation 4
• $64.9 Million currently being implemented
• $8.1 million critical funding needs for FY 2026/27
• $11.3 Million Additional Funding Needs for FY
2026/27
1274
Airport – Funded by Airport Enterprise Funds
5 • For FY 2026/27 the airport is closing out prior projects. • Large Taxiway project planned for 2028/29 with FAA grant funds City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation
Fiscal Impact Category
*Rollforward
d 26/27 - Needed 26/27 - Funded
AP - Airport/Aviation
Airport Fence Line $ -
$
-
$
-
Airport Master Plan Update - Phases 1 & 2 $ 70,277
$
-
$
-
Airport Pavement Repair and Taxiway Rehab $ 66,042
$
-
$
-
PAPI Replacement $ -
$
-
$
-
Runway Rehabilitation Project $ 630,000
$
-
$
-
Taxiway Alpha Mill and Fill $ -
$
-
$
-
1275
Active Transportation
(Trails, Bikes and Sidewalk)
6 • Critical - $350,000 for Easement
Acquisitions in Dennis Machida
Bikeway Phase 1C
City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation
AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes, Sidewalk)
Citywide ADA Upgrades $ 250,000
Sidewalk and Trail Maintenance Progam $ 250,000
Winnemucca Cul-de-sac $ 200,000
AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes, Sidewalk) Total $ 700,000 Additional Needs
1276
Building and Facilities
City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation 7
•Critical - $500,000 for Long
Term Capital Replacement
• Continued Progress towards FCA
• Deferred Maintenance
• Upgrades
1277
Parks and Grounds
8 City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation
• Critical:
• $500,000 - El Dorado Beach Revetment (Ph.3 Design)
• $2,100,000 - Existing Rec Center Demo*
• $150,000 – Golf Course Improvements (Planning Efforts) • $600,000 – New Parks Shop (Planning & Site Prep)
• $250,000 – New Rec Center Snowmelt Boiler
*pending council direction on potential re-use
1278
Public Safety - Fire
9 • No new allocation requested
for 2026/27
• New Fire Station 3 Design
Procurement In Progress
(Funded by Future Bond
Proceeds)
• Replacement Backup
Generator being designed
for Fire Station 1 & 2
City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation
1279
Public Safety - Police
10 • Critical - $350,000 Police Department Parking
and Drainage Upgrade for final design & BMP
certificate to address drainage and pavement
issues, with full implementation in 2028/29.

City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation
1280
Sustainability Projects
City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation 11
• No Critical Funding Needs FY 2026/27
• Continued implementation of City-Wide Sustainability Project • Continued design & implementation towards Micro Transit EV • Continued design & implementation of Backup Power generators (Public Works/Fire)
• LEED Gold – New Recreation & Aquatics Center
1281
Vehicles and Equipment
*Trucks/Employee Pool Vehicles are included separately in annual operating budget City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation 12 Fiscal Impact Category 26/27 - Needed
VE - Vehicles & Equipment
Public Works Sweeper & Vactor Truck $ 1,107,404
Parks Equipment $ 50,000
VE - Vehicles & Equipment Total $ 1,157,404
Public Works Requests
Owen Vactor 2100i Truck Mounted $ 671,409
Owen Sweeper RegenX $ 435,995
Funding/Partial Funding via TRPA Mitigation Fees $ 1,107,404 Parks Equipment
New Holland Tractor with Plug aerator and bucket (golf
course) $ 50,000
Replace to new emissions standards $ 50,000
1282
Complete Streets
13 • Critical - $250,000 for Misc. Traffic Safety and Calming Projects • Vision Zero program and the ongoing Traffic Calming Study for the City, enabling the lowcost implementation of improvements citywide. 1283
Complete Streets (Continued)
14 • Annual Street Rehabilitation – $3,054,898 + any In-lieu fees. This is the City’s annual pavement reconstruction and is funded by Measure S, SB1 Gas Tax, and any pavement in-lieu fees. • Annual Pavement Maintenance – This category reinforces the City’s commitment to maintaining its existing infrastructure. This is critical to continue funding $1,000,000 annually. • These annual roadway funds has been reflected in adopted/anticipated funds based on prior CIP • Road Rehabilitation – Additional Funding – To be addressed in following slides. • US 50/89 Road Safety Audit Implementation – Similarly to the misc. traffic safety, this budget allows for implementation of improvements on US 50/89.
• Ski Run and Pioneer Intersection Upgrade —$200,000 for design services. Funding for implementation will be requested in 2028. This project would be ideally designed concurrently with the Greenway Bikeway Project.

ST - Complete Streets
Annual Streets and Roads Paving and Rehabilitation $ 9,500,000 Johnson Boulevard Complete Street Project $ 250,000
Pioneer Trail / Ski Run Blvd Intersection Upgrade $ 200,000 US 50/89 Road Safety Audit Implementation $ 250,000
ST - Complete Streets Total $ 10,200,000
1284
Stormwater and Environmental Improvement Projects
City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation 15
*$2.5 million Funding earmarked via LTRA (26/27).
• Critical:
• $1,000,000 Drainage Pipe Replacement (Design & Implementation) • Recommended by 2022 drainage pipe evaluation and study. Goal is to combine the pipe replacement with the annual roadway rehabilitation to better address drainage impacts on new pavement.
• $800,000 Bijou Park Creek – Upper Watershed
• $300,000 for Environmental Document Development (CEQA) • $500,000 for matching funds towards LTRA Grant (Implementation) 1285
Stormwater and Environmental Improvement Projects
(Continued)
16 • Drainage Improvements – Micro Areas. $50,000. Starting in 2022, the city has been implementing dry wells or other low-cost upgrades to address localized flooding. This program has been successful in addressing these issues.
• Ruby Way – Funding for environmental study (NEPA) to qualify for future federal funding. Additionally, to redesign access path & perform geotechnical report.

City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation
Additional Needs
1286
Long Term Roadway Needs
17 1287
Roadways Future Needs
18 • Asphalt Pavement can have a lifespan of 20 years if:

1. Installed to properly engineered design standards

2. Proper maintenance is completed

3. The roadways are not flooded
• CSLT Currently Maintains 257 Lane Miles of Roadway
• Estimated cost is $1 million per lane mile (full depth replacement) (1) • $1 million per year is currently appropriated for maintenance (2) • Stormwater Master Plan is being designed (3)
• Preliminary Estimates to Implement the Stormwater Master Plan = $500 million
• The City does not currently have stormwater drainage in many areas 1288
20 Year Life Cycle – Roadways
19 20 Year Life Cycle Analysis - Funding
Description Cost Per Lane Mile (257) Total Cost Cost Per Year (20) ST - Complete Streets
Annual Streets and Roads Paving and Rehabilitation $ 1,000,000.00 $ 257,000,000.00 $ 12,850,000.00 ST - Complete Streets Total $ 1,000,000.00 $ 257,000,000.00 $ 12,850,000.00 SW - Stormwater and Environmental Improvements
Stormwater Master Plan - Implementation $ 1,945,525.29 $ 500,000,000.00 $ 25,000,000.00 SW - Stormwater and Environmental Improvements Total $ 1,945,525.29 $ 500,000,000.00 $ 25,000,000.00 Total $ 2,945,525.29 $ 757,000,000.00 $ 37,850,000.00
1289
5 Year CIP
20 How can we pay for this?
• Focus more on grant funding.
• Other funding options must be explored - Even with grant funding, the City needs matching funds ~ $ 100 million
City of South Lake Tahoe Draft CIP Presentation
Fiscal Impact Category Rollforward 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30 Future Total AP - Airport/Aviation Total $ 136,319 $ 630,000 $ - $ 350,000 $ 15,000,000 $ - $ - $ 16,116,319 AT - Active Transportation (Trails, Bikes, Sidewalk) Total $ 4,395,099 $ 1,596,841 $ 1,050,000 $ 500,000 $ 8,500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 17,041,940 FA - Facilities & Buildings Total $ 522,118 $ 16,941,579 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 1,700,000 $ 21,163,697 PA - Parks and Grounds Total $ 2,322,585 $ 100,000 $ 3,600,000 $ 3,950,000 $ 23,100,000 $ 900,000 $ 11,000,000 $ 44,972,585 PS-F - Public Safety - Fire Total $ 1,332,873 $ - $ 3,000,000 $ 60,000 $ 17,000,000 $ - $ - $ 21,392,873 PS-P - Public Safety - Police Total $ 836,011 $ 1,020,000 $ 350,000 $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ 4,000,000 $ 7,706,011 PWD - Public Works Admin Total $ - $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 600,000 ST - Complete Streets Total $ 4,357,613 $ 9,219,836 $ 14,504,898 $ 14,964,898 $ 27,654,898 $ 27,654,898 $ 226,854,898 $ 325,211,939 SUS - Sustainability Total $ 7,073,932 $ 1,747,223 $ - $ - $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ 9,121,155 SW - Stormwater and Environmental Improvements Total $ 5,161,967 $ 5,658,227 $ 4,650,000 $ 29,050,000 $ 26,050,000 $ 26,050,000 $ 458,832,000 $ 555,452,194 VE - Vehicles & Equipment Total $ - $ - $ 1,215,452 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,215,452 Total $ 26,138,517 $ 37,013,706 $ 28,970,350 $ 50,974,898 $ 118,204,898 $ 55,704,898 $ 702,986,898 $ 1,019,994,165 Current CIP Implementation $63,152,223
5 Year Needs
(Orange + Green) $317,007,267
1290
Questions?
21 1291
City of South Lake Tahoe
Agenda Item Executive Summary
Hilary Roverud, Interim City Manager
__________________________________
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Agenda Item #:13
Agenda Item: Urgency Ordinance Establishing Temporary Moratorium on Tobacco Retailers Executive Summary: On May 5, 2026, Councilmember Horgan (seconded by Councilmember Robbins) requested an agenda item to consider an ordinance to regulate tobacco retail businesses including buffer zones from sensitive uses such as schools and enforcement of underage purchases. In order to preserve the status quo while City Council and staff study this issue and develop reasonable regulations, staff suggests passing an urgency ordinance to establish a temporary moratorium on approval of new tobacco retailer applications.

Requested Action / Suggested Motions: Pass Urgency Ordinance establishing temporary moratorium on approval of new tobacco retailer applications for all purposes pending study and development of reasonable regulations.

Responsible Staff Member: Heather Stroud, City Attorney Reviewed and Approved By: Susan Blankenship, City Clerk Olga Tikhomirova, Director of Finance Attachments:
01 - Staff Report - Urgency Ordinance Moratorium.docx
02 - Urgency Ordinance Moratorium.docx
03 - Matrix of Policies with Tobacco Retailer Regulations (Jan 2024).pdf 04 - California Cigarette & Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003 â€“ Retailer License.pdf 05 - California Attorney General - Unflavored Tobacco List Regulations .pdf 1292
Council Agenda Report- June 2, 2026 Page 1 of 3
City of South Lake Tahoe
Report to City Council
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Title: Urgency Ordinance to Establish Temporary Moratorium on Approval of New Tobacco Retailer Applications for All Purposes Pending the Study and Development of Reasonable Regulations
Location: Citywide
Responsible Staff Members: Heather Stroud, City Attorney (530) 542-6046 Background: On May 5, 2026, Councilmember Horgan (seconded by Councilmember Robbins) requested an agenda item to consider an ordinance to regulate tobacco retail businesses including buffer zones from sensitive uses such as schools and enforcement of underage purchases. In order to preserve the status quo while City Council and staff study this issue and develop reasonable regulations, staff suggests passing an urgency ordinance to establish a temporary moratorium on approval of new tobacco retailer applications.

On December 12, 2023, City Council received a presentation from El Dorado County Public Health on this topic. No action was taken at that time, but City Councilmembers expressed general support for considering a tobacco retail license ordinance.

Around the same time, El Dorado County and the City of Placerville began to consider adopting tobacco retail license ordinances. On January 30, 2024, El Dorado County adopted an urgency ordinance to establish a temporary moratorium on tobacco retailer applications, which was subsequently extended for 10 months. On November 5, 2024, the Board of Supervisors adopted ordinances establishing a tobacco retail license ordinance and zoning ordinance establishing buffer zones from sensitive uses. However, on July 29, 2025, the Board of Supervisors voted to repeal both ordinances, citing loss of tax revenue.

On March 12, 2024, the City of Placerville adopted an urgency ordinance establishing a temporary moratorium on new tobacco retailers, which was subsequently extended. On March 25, 2025, the City of Placerville considered adopting a tobacco retailer ordinance, but voted 4-1 to discontinue work on the ordinance after extended public comment and council debate.

Currently, the City does not regulate tobacco retailers differently than any other type of retail business.

Issue and Discussion: Under Government Code section 65858(a), the City is authorized to adopt an interim urgency ordinance to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by establishing a temporary moratorium on uses that may be in conflict with a land use measure proposal that the City Council is studying or intends to study in a reasonable time. A four-fifths 1293
Council Agenda Report- June 2, 2026 Page 2 of 3
vote of City Council is required to pass such an ordinance. The interim urgency ordinance shall be in effect for no more than 45 days from its adoption, but can be extended if needed after notice and a public hearing. An urgency ordinance is effective immediately upon adoption.

The proposed interim urgency ordinance would establish a 45-day moratorium on approving tobacco retailer applications for all purposes to provide the City Council with time to study this issue and make amendments to the South Lake Tahoe City Code to regulate tobacco retail businesses, which may include a local license requirement, changes to zoning, and other reasonable regulations to mitigate public health impacts.

Information about state regulation of tobacco retailers is included in the attachments to this staff report.

Such amendments could possibly include:
 A local license requirement with inspections and enforcement.  Prohibition of free samples and/or discounts on tobacco products.  Regulation of pack size of tobacco products other than cigarettes.  Establishment of minimum price of tobacco products.
 Prohibit or restrict sale of electronic smoking devices (i.e. vapes).  Prohibit sale of flavored tobacco products in a manner more strict than state law (Health & Safety Code § 104559.5(i)).
 Zoning changes to require a buffer between tobacco retailers and sensitive uses such as schools, youth centers, day cares, parks, etc.
 Zoning changes to include a cap on the number of tobacco retailers.  Amortization period to phase out existing tobacco retailers that are within any established buffer or in excess of the cap.

Staff seeks direction on these potential amendments, as well as on the desired process to establish regulations in this new area. For example, does City Council desire any particular type of outreach to existing tobacco retailers and other stakeholders in South Lake Tahoe. Such outreach could include direct contact such as email or mailers, convening a stakeholder meeting or series of meetings to include the businesses and representatives from health care and interested nonprofits such as the Tahoe Alliance for Safe Kids (TASK), or such other outreach as Council desires.

If City Council adopts the proposed Urgency Ordinance establishing a moratorium, a special meeting would need to be held before its expiration on July 17, 2026, in order to extend the moratorium. If desired, the moratorium could be extended at that time for up to 10 months and 15 days to allow sufficient time to study the issue and develop regulations, under Government Code section 65858(a).

Environmental Considerations: The proposed interim urgency ordinance does not require review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15060(c)(2) (activity will not result in the direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes in the environment); 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378); and 15061(b)(3), because the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. The proposed ordinance maintains the status quo and prevents changes in the environment pending the completion of the potential amendments South Lake Tahoe City Code. Because there is no 1294
Council Agenda Report- June 2, 2026 Page 3 of 3
possibility that this ordinance may have a significant adverse effect on the environment, the adoption of the ordinance is not a project requiring review under CEQA.

Financial Implications: The proposed ordinance would preserve the status quo temporarily, such that there are no immediate financial implications.

Policy Implications: The proposed ordinance would protect public health, welfare, and safety while City Council studies and considers potential changes to the South Lake Tahoe City Code to regulate tobacco retailers, consistent with Government Code section 65858(a). 1295
Ordinance 2026-XXX June 2, 2026 Page 1 of 4
Ordinance 2026-XXX
Adopted by the City of South Lake Tahoe
City Council
June 2, 2026
An Urgency Ordinance Adopting a Temporary Moratorium on Approval of New Tobacco Retailer Applications for All Purposes Pending the Study and Development of Reasonable Regulations

FINDINGS
A. Pursuant to Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution, the City may make and enforce all regulations and ordinances using its police powers.

B. The City has seen a proliferation of tobacco retailer businesses, with 28 state licenses issued to tobacco retailers in the City as of May 5, 2026, which is two more than existed as of December 2023.

C. The City is concerned about the proliferation of tobacco retailer businesses and the harmful effects of tobacco on City residents and especially youth.

D. The City Council has a substantial interest in protecting City residents, particularly youth, from the harms of tobacco use.

E. Tobacco use is the number one cause of preventable death in California and continues to be an urgent public health issue, as evidenced by the following information from the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids: 40,000 adults die in the U.S. from their own smoking annually; more than 25 percent of all adult cancer deaths in California are attributable to smoking; smoking costs California $15.44 billion in annual health care expenses, $3.85 billion in Medicaid costs, and $28.1 billion in smoking-caused productivity losses.

F. According to the Centers for Disease Control, 5.6 million of Americans who are younger than 18 years of age are projected to die prematurely from a smoking-related illness.

G. Research indicates that the density and proximity of tobacco retailers increase smoking behaviors, including the number of cigarettes smoked per day, particularly in neighborhoods experiencing poverty.1

1 Chuang YC, Cubbin C, Ahn D, Winkleby MA. Effects of neighborhood socioeconomic status and convenience store concentration on individual level smoking. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005;59(7):568-573. doi: 10.1136/jech.2004.029041. 1296
Ordinance 2026-XXX June 2, 2026 Page 2 of 4
H. The density of tobacco retailers near adolescents’ homes has been associated with increased youth smoking rates2 and initiation of noncigarette tobacco product use.3 I. Adults who smoke are likely to have a harder time quitting when residential proximity to tobacco retailers is closer4 and density is higher.5
J. The 2023 National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) identified a concerning trend that has emerged among middle-school students with a significant rise in the use of any tobacco product reaching 6.6 percent in 2023, up from 4.5 percent in 2022, which is an increase of over 46 percent.6
K. In 2023, 10 percent of middle and high school students (2.8 million) reported use of any tobacco product within the previous 30 days.7
L. Polices to reduce tobacco retailer density have been shown to be effective and can reduce or eliminate inequities in the location and distribution of tobacco retailers.8 M. The City has no specific regulations for tobacco retailers that would protect minors, such as distance requirements from schools and other youth-oriented areas.

N. The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 preserves state and local authority to regulate the “sale, distribution, possession, exposure to, [or] access to” tobacco products. 21 U.S.C. § 387p.

O. On May 5, 2026, Councilmember Horgan (seconded by Councilmember Robbins) requested that staff bring an ordinance to regulate tobacco retail businesses including buffer zones from sensitive uses such as schools and enforcement of underage purchases.

P. California Government Code section 65858(a) provides that for the purpose of protecting the public health, safety, and welfare, the City Council may adopt, as an urgency ordinance, an interim ordinance preventing any uses that may be in conflict with a land use measure proposal that the City Council is studying or intends to study in a reasonable time.

2 Finan LJ, Lipperman-Kreda S, Abadi M, et al. Tobacco Outlet Density and Adolescents’ Cigarette Smoking: A Meta-Analysis. Tob Control. 2019;28(1):27-33. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-054065. 3 Abdel Magid HS, Halpern-Felsher B, Ling PM, et al. Tobacco Retail Density and Initiation of Alternative Tobacco Product Use Among Teens. J Adolesc Health. 2020;66(4):423-430. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.09.004. 4 Reitzel LR, Cromley EK, Li Y, et al. The effect of tobacco outlet density and proximity on smoking cessation. Am J Public Health. 2011;101(2):315-320. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2010.191676.
5 Cantrell J, Anesetti-Rothermel A, Pearson JL, Xiao H, Vallone D, Kirchner TR. The impact of the tobacco retail outlet environment on adult cessation and differences by neighborhood poverty. Addiction. 2015;110(1):152-161. doi: 10.1111/add.12718. 6 Tobacco Product Use Among U.S. Middle and High School Students — National Youth Tobacco Survey, 2023 (cdc.gov). 7 Id.
8 Ribisl KM, Luke DA, Bohannon DL, Sorg AA, Moreland-Russell S. Reducing Disparities in Tobacco Retailer Density by Banning Tobacco Product Sales Near Schools. Nicotine Tob Res. 2017;19(2):239-244. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntw185. 1297
Ordinance 2026-XXX June 2, 2026 Page 3 of 4
Q. Absent the adoption of this Ordinance, the number and location of tobacco retailers is likely to continue to increase substantially with the negative public health impacts indicated above.

Now, Therefore, the City Council of City of South Lake Tahoe does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. Urgency. The recitals to this Ordinance are true and correct, constitute a substantive part of this Ordinance, and are incorporated herein by reference. Based on those facts, the City Council finds, determines, and declares that this Ordinance is necessary as an emergency measure for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety pursuant to, and as authorized by, California Government Code section 65858(a). Accordingly, this Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption.

SECTION 2. Moratorium. For the reasons set forth in the recitals, it is necessary to establish a temporary, forty-five (45) day moratorium on approval of new tobacco retailer applications for all purposes, pending study and completion of possible amendments to the South Lake Tahoe City Code to regulate tobacco retailers including such issues as licensing, zoning, and density and reasonable regulations to mitigate impacts.

For the purpose of this Ordinance, “tobacco product” means any product containing, made of, or derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended for human consumption and likely to be consumed, whether inhaled, absorbed, or ingested by any other means, including but not limited to, a cigarette, a cigar, pipe tobacco, chewing tobacco, snuff, or snus, and any electronic smoking device and any substance that may be aerosolized or vaporized by such device, whether or not the substance contains nicotine, but not including drugs, devices, or combination products authorized for sale by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration; and “tobacco retailer” means any person who sells, offers for sale, or exchanges, or offers for exchange for any form of consideration tobacco products, without regard to the quantity of tobacco products sold, offered for sale, exchanged, or offered for exchange.

During the term of this Ordinance, as may be extended, the City shall not issue any City permit, registration, or approval of any type to a tobacco retailer. This Ordinance shall not apply to an application determined to be complete and in compliance with Government Code section 65943 prior to the effective date of this Ordinance.

SECTION 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision will not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 4. CEQA. The City Council finds that this Ordinance does not require review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15060(c)(2) (activity will not result in the direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes in the environment); 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378); and 15061(b)(3), because the activity is covered by the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. The proposed ordinance maintains the status quo and prevents changes in the environment pending the completion of the potential amendments to the City Code. Because there is no possibility that this ordinance may have a 1298
Ordinance 2026-XXX June 2, 2026 Page 4 of 4
significant adverse effect on the environment, the adoption of the ordinance is not a project requiring review under CEQA.

SECTION 5. Publication. The City Clerk is directed to certify this Ordinance and cause it to be published in the manner required by law.

SECTION 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance is an Urgency Ordinance enacted under California Government Code section 65858, and is therefore immediately effective upon adoption by a fourfifths (4/5) vote of the City Council.

Adopted by the City of South Lake Tahoe City Council on June 2, 2026, by the following vote:

Yes:

No:

Abstain:

Absent:
________________________ Date:_________
Cody Bass, Mayor
Attest:
________________________
Susan Blankenship, City Clerk
Published:

Effective:

The presence of electronic signature certifies that the foregoing is a true and correct copy as approved by the South Lake Tahoe City Council.
1299
1 Matrix of Policies Regulating Tobacco Retail Sales in California January 2024
California municipalities have led the way in the U.S. in adopting tobacco retail sales policies, and communities continue to consider and adopt innovative policies with the goal of reducing access to and the availability of tobacco products in the community. This matrix provides an overview of select key policy provisions in the municipalities that have enacted policies that regulate tobacco retail sales in some manner.

Jurisdictions qualify for this Tobacco Retail Sales matrix if they have 1 or more of these policy provisions: no free samples, no discounts, minimum pack size, minimum price, tobacco free pharmacies, ending the sale of electronic smoking devices (ESDs), and ending the sale of tobacco products. Additionally, the matrix notes if these jurisdictions also require a TRL and/or regulate the sale of flavored tobacco. This matrix does not include the full list of jurisdictions that require a TRL, nor the full list of jurisdictions that regulate the sale of flavored tobacco.

For more information on those topics, see the list of Municipalities with Tobacco Retailer Licenses and the Matrix of Policies Regulating the Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products.

Note: This matrix includes both policies that are on the PETS website, which is current through March 31, 2021, and more recently enacted and amended policies that have been analyzed but are not yet in the PETS database. Jurisdictions and/or policy provisions on this matrix that are not yet on PETS are identified with ~.

The best practice is for municipalities to adopt tobacco retail sales restrictions within a framework of requiring a tobacco retailer license.

Currently, at least 230 municipalities require a local tobacco retailer license to sell tobacco products. For more information, see the list of California Municipalities with Tobacco Retailer Licenses. This matrix also includes policies in municipalities that have tobacco retail sales requirements but do not require a local tobacco retailer license.

Currently, 149 California municipalities have enacted policies that regulate tobacco retail sales in the following ways:
• 84 municipalities fully prohibit or partially regulate the distribution of free samples of tobacco leaf products; 28 of these fully prohibit the distribution of free samples of tobacco leaf products.
• 42 municipalities fully or partially require full price (no coupons/discounts) for tobacco leaf products. • 55 municipalities regulate the pack size/volume of one or more types of regulated products other than cigarettes. • 36 municipalities require a minimum price for one or more types of regulated products. 1300
2 • 54 municipalities prohibit the sale of tobacco leaf products in pharmacies and retailers that contain a pharmacy counter, including 44 municipalities whose policies also prohibit the sale of ESDs in pharmacies. • 19 municipalities fully prohibit the sale of all ESDs, and 28 municipalities partially prohibit the sale of ESDs with limited exemptions (see Definitions on p. 11).
• 1 municipality fully prohibits the sale of all tobacco leaf products, excluding ESDs, and 2 municipalities partially prohibit the sale of tobacco leaf products with limited exemptions (see Definitions on p. 11). • 59 municipalities on this matrix prohibit the sale of all flavors of all tobacco products, including menthol, at all venues, and another 33 municipalities regulate the sale of flavored tobacco products in some manner. To see all jurisdictions that regulate the sale of flavored tobacco products, see Matrix of Policies Regulating the Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products in California.

See Definitions and Explanatory Notes starting on page 11.

Policy Provisions Required for this Matrix Supplemental Information
Municipality County
Most Recent

Enactment
Date
Population No Free
Samples
No
Discounts
Minimum
Pack Size
Minimum
Price
Tobacco
Free
Pharmacies
Ends
Sale of
ESDs
Ends
Sale of
Tobacco
TRL
Required
Regulates
Sale of
Flavored
Tobacco

1. Alameda Alameda 11/27/2018 77,565 Partial Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

2. Alameda
County Alameda 3/10/2020 150,015 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

3. Albany Alameda 4/15/2019 20,027 Yes Yes Yes Yes Partial

4. Alhambra~ Los
Angeles 5/10/2021 82,295 Yes Yes Yes Yes

5. Antioch~ Contra
Costa 3/8/2022 115,016 Partial Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

6. Arroyo
Grande
San Luis
Obispo 11/26/2019 18,435 Partial Yes

7. Avalon Los
Angeles 12/13/2000 3,441 Partial No

8. Benicia Solano 12/3/2019 27,040 Yes Yes Yes Yes Partial Yes Yes

9. Berkeley Alameda 9/10/2019 121,385 Partial Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

10. Beverly Hills Los
Angeles 6/4/2019 32,406 Yes Partial Partial -Venues Yes Yes 1301
3 Policy Provisions Required for this Matrix Supplemental Information
Municipality County
Most Recent

Enactment
Date
Population No Free
Samples
No
Discounts
Minimum
Pack Size
Minimum
Price
Tobacco
Free
Pharmacies
Ends
Sale of
ESDs
Ends
Sale of
Tobacco
TRL
Required
Regulates
Sale of
Flavored
Tobacco

11. Brisbane San Mateo 12/17/2015 4,756 Partial Yes

12. Buena Park~ Orange 7/27/2021 83,542 Yes Yes Partial

13. Calabasas~
Los
Angeles 5/27/2020 23,106 Partial Yes Partial

14. Camarillo Ventura 9/28/2016 70,622 Partial No

15. Carpinteria Santa
Barbara 11/12/2019 13,187 Partial Yes Partial

16. Carson Los
Angeles 1/14/2020 94,475 Partial Yes Partial

17. Cathedral
City Riverside 7/13/2016 51,964 Partial Yes Yes

18. Cerritos Los
Angeles 11/14/2019 49,016 Partial Yes

19. Chico Butte 12/18/2007 102,790 Partial No

20. Clayton Contra
Costa 5/1/2018 11,070 Partial Yes

21. Cloverdale Sonoma 11/14/2017 8,964 Yes Yes Yes No Partial

22. Clovis Fresno 9/8/2014 120,607 Yes No

23. Coachella~ Riverside 1/23/2019 42,279 Partial Partial Yes Yes

24. Colton San
Bernardino 11/5/2019 53,959 Yes Yes

25. Compton Los
Angeles 5/12/2020 94,822 Yes Yes Partial

26. Concord Contra
Costa 5/22/2001 125,007 Partial Yes

27. Contra
Costa
County
Contra
Costa 11/19/2019 176,166 Yes Partial Yes Yes Yes Partial Yes Partial 1302
4 Policy Provisions Required for this Matrix Supplemental Information
Municipality County
Most Recent

Enactment
Date
Population No Free
Samples
No
Discounts
Minimum
Pack Size
Minimum
Price
Tobacco
Free
Pharmacies
Ends
Sale of
ESDs
Ends
Sale of
Tobacco
TRL
Required
Regulates
Sale of
Flavored
Tobacco

28. Corte
Madera Marin 3/19/2019 10,155 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

29. Covina Los
Angeles 3/4/2014 50,717 Partial Partial No

30. Cudahy~ Los
Angeles 10/16/2018 22,657 Yes Yes Yes Yes

31. Cupertino Santa Clara 2/28/2020 59,763 Yes Yes Yes Yes

32. Daly City~ San Mateo 9/14/2015 103,648 Yes Partial Yes Yes

33. Danville Contra
Costa 2/18/2020 43,449 Partial Yes

34. Dinuba Tulare 1/9/2018 24,713 Partial No

35. Duarte Los
Angeles 8/26/2014 21,686 Yes Yes

36. Dublin Alameda 2/4/2020 71,068 Partial Yes Yes Yes

37. East Palo
Alto
San Mateo 5/19/2020 29,520 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

38. Eastvale~ Riverside 1/26/2011 69,594 Partial Partial Yes Yes

39. El Cajon San Diego 8/12/2014 105,721 Partial Yes

40. El Cerrito Contra
Costa 10/6/2015 25,869 Partial Partial Yes Yes Yes Partial

41. El Monte Los
Angeles 6/23/2020 108,682 Yes Yes Yes Yes

42. Encinitas San Diego 9/9/2020 61,942 Partial No Partial

43. Fairfax~ Marin 11/3/2021 7,567 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

44. Firebaugh Fresno 5/20/2019 8,139 Partial Yes

45. Foster City~ San Mateo 11/21/2022 33,215 Partial Yes Partial

46. Fremont Alameda 10/8/2019 228,795 Partial Yes Yes Yes Yes 1303
5 Policy Provisions Required for this Matrix Supplemental Information
Municipality County
Most Recent

Enactment
Date
Population No Free
Samples
No
Discounts
Minimum
Pack Size
Minimum
Price
Tobacco
Free
Pharmacies
Ends
Sale of
ESDs
Ends
Sale of
Tobacco
TRL
Required
Regulates
Sale of
Flavored
Tobacco

47. Gardena Los
Angeles 7/10/2012 60,377 Yes Yes

48. Guadalupe~ Santa
Barbara 7/28/2020 8,272 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

49. Half Moon
Bay San Mateo 10/16/2018 11,633 Partial Yes Yes Yes

50. Hayward Alameda 7/21/2020 160,602 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Partial -
Product
s
Yes Yes

51. Healdsburg Sonoma 11/3/2014 11,481 Yes Yes

52. Hermosa
Beach
Los
Angeles 2/11/2020 19,551 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

53. Hesperia San
Bernardino 6/6/2017 99,878 Yes Yes Yes

54. Hollister San Benito 6/15/2015 42,093 Yes Yes

55. Huntington
Park
Los
Angeles 11/21/2011 54,547 Partial Yes Yes

56. Jurupa
Valley Riverside 1/26/2010 105,672 Partial Yes Yes

57. Kerman Fresno 11/2/2016 15,980 Partial No

58. Kern
County~
Kern 6/14/2016 307,395 Partial Yes

59. La Mesa San Diego 2/22/2000 60,888 Partial No

60. Lafayette Contra
Costa 5/28/2019 25,310 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

61. Laguna
Niguel Orange 11/19/2019 64,259 Partial No Partial

62. Larkspur Marin 4/3/2019 12,969 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

63. Livermore Alameda 7/8/2019 87,154 Partial Partial Yes Yes 1304
6 Policy Provisions Required for this Matrix Supplemental Information
Municipality County
Most Recent

Enactment
Date
Population No Free
Samples
No
Discounts
Minimum
Pack Size
Minimum
Price
Tobacco
Free
Pharmacies
Ends
Sale of
ESDs
Ends
Sale of
Tobacco
TRL
Required
Regulates
Sale of
Flavored
Tobacco

64. Long Beach~
Los
Angeles 4/15/2021 462,293 Yes Yes Yes

65. Los Altos Santa Clara 2/11/2020 31,133 Yes Yes Yes Partial

66. Los
Angeles~
Los
Angeles 6/10/2022 3,881,041 Yes Yes Partial

67. Los Angeles
County
Los
Angeles 10/1/2019 1,012,265 Yes Yes Yes Yes

68. Los Gatos Santa Clara 11/19/2019 33,093 Yes Yes Yes Yes

69. Lynwood Los
Angeles 10/16/2012 66,346 Yes Yes

70. Manhattan
Beach
Los
Angeles 2/18/2020 35,123 Yes Partial Yes Yes Yes

71. Marin
County Marin 11/6/2018 67,676 Yes Yes Yes

72. Martinez Contra
Costa 1/17/2001 37,093 Partial No

73. McFarland Kern 12/14/2017 13,971 Partial Yes

74. Menlo Park San Mateo 12/17/2019 33,324 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

75. Mill Valley Marin 10/5/2020 14,199 Yes Yes Yes

76. Monterey~ Monterey 8/2/2022 30,007 Partial Yes Partial

77. Moraga~ Contra
Costa 10/26/2022 16,859 Yes Yes Partial No Yes

78. Morgan Hill Santa Clara 12/18/2019 45,291 Yes Yes Partial

79. Morro Bay San Luis
Obispo 4/28/2020 10,766 Yes Yes Yes Partial Yes Partial

80. National City San Diego 6/3/2003 56,345 Partial No

81. Nevada City Nevada 7/6/2016 3,142 Yes Yes Yes

82. Newark Alameda 1/25/2018 47,470 Partial No
1305
7 Policy Provisions Required for this Matrix Supplemental Information
Municipality County
Most Recent

Enactment
Date
Population No Free
Samples
No
Discounts
Minimum
Pack Size
Minimum
Price
Tobacco
Free
Pharmacies
Ends
Sale of
ESDs
Ends
Sale of
Tobacco
TRL
Required
Regulates
Sale of
Flavored
Tobacco

83. Novato~ Marin 10/26/2021 53,055 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

84. Oakland Alameda 5/12/2020 437,825 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

85. Oceanside San Diego 9/9/2020 173,722 Partial Yes

86. Ojai Ventura 12/14/1993 7,610 Partial Partial No

87. Orange Cove Fresno 9/28/2019 9,635 Partial No

88. Orinda Contra
Costa 5/4/2010 19,477 Yes Partial Partial

89. Oxnard Ventura 12/17/2019 202,279 Partial Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

90. Pacifica~ San Mateo 3/8/2022 38,048 Yes Partial Yes Partial

91. Palm
Springs~
Riverside 10/17/2018 44,935 Partial Partial Yes Yes

92. Palo Alto~ Santa Clara 8/3/2020 67,901 Yes Yes Yes Yes

93. Pasadena~ Los
Angeles 11/1/2021 137,554 Partial Yes Yes

94. Petaluma~ Sonoma 12/6/2021 59,682 Yes Partial Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

95. Pico Rivera~ Los
Angeles 3/8/2022 61,561 Yes Yes Yes Yes

96. Pinole Contra
Costa 9/17/2019 18,946 Yes Yes Yes Partial

97. Pittsburg Contra
Costa 7/21/2014 76,419 Partial No

98. Pleasant
Hill~
Contra
Costa 2/7/2022 34,504 Partial Partial No Partial

99. Pleasanton Alameda 8/18/2020 78,691 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 100. Portola
Valley
San Mateo 9/12/2018 4,397 Yes Yes Yes
101. Rancho
Mirage Riverside 6/15/2017 17,257 Partial Partial Yes Yes 1306
8 Policy Provisions Required for this Matrix Supplemental Information
Municipality County
Most Recent

Enactment
Date
Population No Free
Samples
No
Discounts
Minimum
Pack Size
Minimum
Price
Tobacco
Free
Pharmacies
Ends
Sale of
ESDs
Ends
Sale of
Tobacco
TRL
Required
Regulates
Sale of
Flavored
Tobacco
102. Redwood
City~ San Mateo 12/21/2021 83,077 Yes Partial Yes Partial 103. Richmond Contra
Costa 9/21/2019 115,619 Yes Yes Yes Yes Partial Yes Yes 104. Riverside
County~
Riverside 1/26/2010 394,388 Partial Partial Yes Yes
105. San
Anselmo Marin 5/28/2019 12,761 Yes Yes Yes Yes Partial
106. San Benito
County**~
San Benito 8/23/2022 20,684 Partial No
107. San Carlos San Mateo 4/8/2019 30,490 Yes Yes Yes
108. San Diego~ San Diego 10/2/2014 1,383,987 Partial Yes Partial 109. San Diego
County San Diego 1/28/2020 514,736 Partial Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Partial 110. San
Francisco
San
Francisco 6/28/2019 851,036 Partial Yes Partial Yes Yes 111. San Jose~ Santa Clara 1/11/2011 1,001,176 Yes Partial Yes Partial 112. San
Leandro~
Alameda 10/16/2017 89,723 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
113. San Luis
Obispo~
San Luis
Obispo 2/4/2020 47,529 Partial Yes Partial
114. San Luis
Obispo
County~
San Luis
Obispo 1/14/2020 122,822 Partial Yes
115. San Marcos San Diego 2/12/2019 94,360 Partial Yes
116. San Mateo San Mateo 10/5/2020 104,165 Yes Partial Yes Yes 1307
9 Policy Provisions Required for this Matrix Supplemental Information
Municipality County
Most Recent

Enactment
Date
Population No Free
Samples
No
Discounts
Minimum
Pack Size
Minimum
Price
Tobacco
Free
Pharmacies
Ends
Sale of
ESDs
Ends
Sale of
Tobacco
TRL
Required
Regulates
Sale of
Flavored
Tobacco
117. San Mateo
County San Mateo 11/12/2019 62,509 Yes Yes Partial Yes Yes 118. San Pablo Contra
Costa 12/17/2018 31,907 Yes Yes Yes Yes
119. San Rafael Marin 6/17/2019 60,891 Yes Yes Yes
120. San Ramon Contra
Costa 11/26/2019 86,119 Partial Yes
121. Sanger Fresno 6/1/2017 26,553 Partial No
122. Santa
Barbara
County
Santa
Barbara 12/17/2019 137,659 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
123. Santa Clara
County Santa Clara 11/19/2019 89,803 Yes Yes Yes Yes
124. Santa Maria Santa
Barbara 12/3/2019 109,543 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
125. Santee San Diego 4/24/2019 59,497 Partial No
126. Saratoga Santa Clara 9/16/2020 30,771 Yes Yes Yes Partial 127. Seal Beach Orange 2/10/2014 25,046 Partial No
128. Seaside Monterey 2/6/2020 32,291 Yes Yes
129. Sebastopol~ Sonoma 9/15/2020 7,503 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 130. Solana
Beach San Diego 6/11/2014 12,946 Partial Yes Yes
131. Solano
County Solano 11/26/1991 19,277 Partial No
132. Soledad~ Monterey 5/18/2022 24,781 Partial Yes Partial 1308
10 Policy Provisions Required for this Matrix Supplemental Information
Municipality County
Most Recent

Enactment
Date
Population No Free
Samples
No
Discounts
Minimum
Pack Size
Minimum
Price
Tobacco
Free
Pharmacies
Ends
Sale of
ESDs
Ends
Sale of
Tobacco
TRL
Required
Regulates
Sale of
Flavored
Tobacco
133. Sonoma~ Sonoma 6/1/2015 10,702 Yes Yes Yes Partial 134. Sonoma
County Sonoma 4/19/2016 133,557 Yes Yes Yes
135. South San
Francisco San Mateo 10/9/2019 65,596 Yes Partial Yes Partial 136. Stanton Orange 11/26/2019 38,271 Yes Yes Yes Yes
137. Tiburon Marin 9/2/2020 9,115 Yes No Yes
138. Union City Alameda 12/10/2013 69,502 Partial Yes Yes 139. Vallejo Solano 4/23/1991 125,132 Partial No
140. Ventura~ Ventura 1/13/2020 110,358 Partial Partial Yes Partial 141. Victorville San
Bernardino 8/18/2015 134,417 Yes Yes No
142. Walnut~ Los
Angeles 3/9/2022 28,212 Yes Yes Yes Yes
143. Walnut
Creek~
Contra
Costa 11/6/2021 69,809 Yes Yes Partial
144. Watsonville Santa Cruz 10/22/2019 52,457 Yes Partial Yes Yes 145. West
Hollywood~
Los
Angeles 2/16/2021 35,358 Yes Yes Yes Partial
146. West
Sacramento Yolo 1/15/2020 54,163 Partial Yes Yes
147. Windsor~ Sonoma 8/18/2021 26,320 Yes Partial Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 148. Winters~ Yolo 12/6/2022 7,270 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 149. Yolo
County~ Yolo 11/22/2022 27,278 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
1309
11 Explanatory Notes:

The population data in this matrix is from the U.S. Census Bureau 2018-2022 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. ~ Not in PETS: Jurisdiction has new or updated policy provisions that are not yet available on the PETS website. ** San Benito County’s policy covers the cities of Hollister and San Juan Bautista.

Definitions:

Most Recent Enactment Date: Jurisdictions may have enacted multiple policies regulating the sale of tobacco, such as amending prior policy provisions. The matrix lists the most recent date that a policy addressing the sale of tobacco for the topics covered by this matrix was enacted or amended.

No Free Samples:

Yes = Policy fully requires payment (as opposed to distribution of free samples) for tobacco leaf products and/or paraphernalia.

Partial = Policy requires payment (as opposed to distribution of free samples) for tobacco leaf products and/or paraphernalia in some but not all circumstances.

No Discounts:

Yes = Policy prohibits discounts and requires full price for tobacco leaf products and/or paraphernalia.

Partial = Policy regulates discounts on tobacco leaf products and/or paraphernalia in some manner but does not completely prohibit them.

Minimum Pack Size:

Yes = Policy regulates the pack size/volume of one or more types of tobacco, ESD, and/or nicotine products, other than cigarettes.

Minimum Price:

Yes = Policy requires a minimum price for one or more types of tobacco, ESD, and/or nicotine products.

Tobacco Free Pharmacies:

Yes = Policy prohibits the sale of tobacco leaf products in pharmacies and retailers that contain a pharmacy counter.

Ends Sale of ESDs:

Yes = Policy fully ends the sale of all ESDs including but not limited to e-cigarettes, e-hookah, vape pens, e-liquids, etc. 1310
12 Partial = Policy ends the sale of all ESDs including but not limited to e-cigarettes, e-hookah, vape pens, e-liquids, etc., except for limited exemptions. Common exemptions resulting in Partial include allowing the sale of ESDs in adult-only/specialty retailers, or allowing the sale of ESDs authorized for sale under the FDA’s premarket review process, or allowing the sale of ESDs that do not contain nicotine.

Ends Sale of Tobacco:

Yes = Policy ends the sale of all tobacco leaf products, whether smoked or ingested (excluding ESDs).

Partial = Policy ends the sale of all tobacco leaf products, whether smoked or ingested (excluding ESDs), except for limited exemptions.

Partial is typically the result of an exemption that allows the sale of tobacco leaf products at certain venues, such as adult-only/specialty retailer or cigar bars or hookah venues, or an exemption that allows the sale of certain tobacco leaf products, such as cigars or hookah/shisha.

TRL Required:

Yes = Policy requires merchants to obtain a local tobacco retail license (TRL) to sell tobacco products.

Partial = Policy requires some but not all merchants to obtain a local tobacco retail license (TRL) to sell tobacco products.

Regulates Sale of Flavored Tobacco:

Yes = Policy prohibits the sale of all flavors of all tobacco products, including menthol, at all venues.

Partial = Policy regulates the sale of flavored tobacco products, but contains one or more exemptions, such as exempting menthol products, exempting flavored hookah/shisha products, or allowing the sale of flavored tobacco at certain locations, such as adult-only tobacco retailers.

Note: For more detailed information on jurisdictions with flavored tobacco policy provisions, see Matrix of Policies Regulating the Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products in California.

ANR Foundation is actively collecting policies for the PETS Database. If you know of local laws that you think should be included in this matrix, or want to inquire about additional information on particular laws, please contact the ANR Foundation at [email protected]. © 2024, California Department of Public Health. This material may not be reproduced or disseminated without prior written permission from the California Department of Public Health. 1311
California Cigarette &
Tobacco Products
Licensing Act of 2003
–Retailer License
What is a cigarette and
tobacco products retailer?
A cigarette and tobacco products retailer is a person who sells cigarettes or tobacco products directly to the public from a California retail location.

Who is required to obtain
and maintain a cigarette and
tobacco products retailer's
license?
In accordance with the California Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003 (Act), every retailer who sells or will sell cigarettes or tobacco products in California is required to obtain a cigarette and tobacco retailer's license from the California Department of Tax and Fee
Administration (CDTFA) and renew it annually. This
licensing requirement is in addition to other permits and licenses that may be required depending on your business operations. A valid cigarette and tobacco retailer's license is required before you begin making sales of cigarettes and tobacco products in California.
1312
"Retailer" means a person who sells cigarettes or tobacco products directly to the public from a California retail location, including vending machines.

As of June 9, 2016, state law expanded the definition of a tobacco product, for cigarette and tobacco products retail licensing purposes, to include:
 Any product containing, made, or derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended for human consumption.
 Any electronic smoking or vaping device that delivers nicotine or other vaporized liquids.
 Any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco
product, whether or not sold separately.

Examples include, but are not limited to, electronic
cigarettes, atomizers, vaping tanks or mods, and eLiquid or eJuice. A tobacco product does not include a product that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved as a cessation product or for other therapeutic purposes (e.g., nicotine patches).

Effective January 1, 2017, any retailer who sells any
products included in the expanded definition of a tobacco product is required to obtain and maintain a retailer license from the CDTFA in order to engage in the retail sale of these products.

Will I need to apply for any
other permits?
Depending on your business operations, you may be
required to obtain more than just a cigarette and tobacco products retailer's license. If you are a new retailer you may need to obtain a seller's permit from the CDTFA to report sales and use tax. Retailers also operating as distributors or wholesalers may need to obtain cigarette and/or tobacco products distributor or wholesaler licenses under the Act. 1313
For more information, call the customer service center at 1- 800-400-7115 and select "Special Taxes and Fees" from the main menu.

What are the requirements
to obtain and maintain a
retailer's license?
Every cigarette and tobacco products retailer that sells cigarettes or tobacco products, which include, any product containing, made, or derived from nicotine that is intended for human consumption; any electronic smoking or vaping device that delivers nicotine or other vaporized liquids; or any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product, whether or not sold separately, must apply for and obtain a cigarette and tobacco products retailer's license prior to making retail sales. All new applications must be submitted with a license fee payment for each retail location. Each retail location must have a separate license for that
location. A cigarette and tobacco retail license is valid for a 12-month period, is not assignable or transferable, and must be renewed annually. If you add another retail
location, your license will be renewed for that location based on a 12-month period. This 12-month period would
begin in the month you obtained your license for your first retail location. See our rates page (cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-andfees/special-taxes-and-fees-tax-rates/) for the current license fee amount.

Beginning January 1, 2017, you will be required to pay an annual renewal fee for each retail location (Business and Professions Code sections 22972 (d), 22973 (e), and
22973.3 (e)). If you fail to renew your license(s) timely, your license(s) will expire. Please remember that you may not sell cigarettes or tobacco products, including, any product containing, made, or derived from nicotine that is intended 1314
for human consumption; any electronic smoking or vaping device that delivers nicotine or other vaporized liquids; or any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product, whether or not sold separately, without a valid Cigarette and Tobacco Products Retailer License.

Online Registration
You may register for a cigarette and tobacco products
retailers license through our online registration system (https://onlineservices.cdtfa.ca.gov/eserv/?Link=RegLanding) .

Online registration is the convenient way to register and is available 24 hours a day.

What are my responsibilities
as a holder of a cigarette
and tobacco products
retailer's license under this
Act?
As a retailer of cigarettes or tobacco products you must:
 Conspicuously display the license at each retail
location in a manner visible to the public.

The following requirements do not apply to any product
containing, made, or derived from nicotine that is intended for human consumption; any electronic smoking or vaping device that delivers nicotine or other vaporized liquids; any component, part, or accessory of a tobacco product,
whether or not sold separately:
 Keep complete and legible purchase invoices for
cigarettes and tobacco products for four (4) years. See specific invoice requirements below.
1315
 Keep these invoices at the location indicated on your license for the first year after purchase.
 Allow CDTFA staff or law enforcement agencies to
review your invoices upon request.

The law also adds recordkeeping requirements and other
provisions related to your purchase of cigarettes and
tobacco products. Your cigarette and tobacco product
purchase invoices must meet certain legal requirements.

Each invoice must be legible, readable, and include:
 The wholesaler or distributor's name, address,
telephone number, and their California Cigarette and
Tobacco Products Wholesaler or Distributor's license
number. (It is illegal to buy cigarettes or tobacco
products from a person who does not have a license.)
 Your name, address, and California Cigarette and
Tobacco Products Retailer's License number.
 An itemized list of the cigarette or tobacco products you purchased. Cigarettes must be listed by the brand
and style names, flavor, filter, and/or packaging when
applicable, number of cartons or packs sold, and the
sales price. Tobacco products must be listed by brand,
type (such as pipe, cigars, or roll-your-own), flavor,
packaging (such as pouches, tins, or boxes), quantity
sold, and sales price.
 The date you purchased the cigarette or tobacco
products.
 The amount of California excise taxes due to the CDTFA by the distributor on the sale of cigarettes and tobacco products listed on the invoice.
 However, a licensed cigarette and tobacco products
distributor that is also a licensed cigarette and tobacco products retailer or manufacturer may include this
statement on each invoice for the sale of cigarettes or 1316
tobacco products instead of listing the amount of
excise taxes due to the CDTFA: "All California cigarette and tobacco product taxes are included in the total
amount of this invoice."
Cigarette and tobacco products retailers should also be aware that it is illegal to sell cigarettes and roll-your-own products that are not listed on the Attorney General's
California Tobacco Directory. Please remember to refer to the California Tobacco Directory for a list of manufacturers and brand families that are certified as being in compliance with California law. Please refer to the Attorney General's Directory (https://ag.ca.gov/tobacco/directory.php) . This requirement does not apply to products that were recently added to the definition of a tobacco product for licensing purposes such as electronic cigarettes, atomizers, vaping tanks or mods and eLiquid or eJuice.

Violations of the law are subject to civil and criminal penalties, and products not listed on the Tobacco Directory in a retailer's possession can be seized and forfeited to the State.

Penalties
You must maintain accurate and complete records,
including purchase invoices. Failure to do so is a
misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed five
thousand dollars ($5,000), or imprisonment not to exceed one year in a county jail, or both. This requirement does not apply to products such as electronic cigarettes, atomizer, vaping tanks or mods and eLiquid or eJuice.

As a cigarette and tobacco products retailer, it is illegal for you to purchase cigarettes from a manufacturer, importer, distributor, wholesaler, or any other person who is not licensed pursuant to this Act, or whose license has been suspended or revoked. Doing so could result in suspension or revocation of your license, fines, seizure of the products, 1317
and/or imprisonment. If a retailer purchases tobacco
products from an unlicensed person located out of state, the retailer then becomes responsible for the excise tax and must register with the CDTFA as a distributor (see
information above regarding the need to have more than
one business license). These requirements do not apply to products such as electronic cigarettes, atomizers, vaping tanks or mods, and eLiquid or eJuice.

The Investigations Division of the CDTFA may issue
citations to a licensee that is not in compliance with the provisions of the Act or the Cigarette and Tobacco Products Tax Law. Two types of citations may be issued: civil
citations and criminal citations. The criminal citation is a Notice to Appear in court. Both types of citations are
subject to civil penalties.

Criminal citations are processed through the court system.

Depending on the violation(s) cited, the court may impose fines, jail time or both. Once the criminal proceedings are complete, the CDTFA may impose additional civil penalties.

A civil appeals process is available to the licensee for violations cited, civil penalties imposed, and suspension or revocation of a license. Additional information on the
California Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003-Civil Appeals Process is available on our
Investigation Division website (cdtfa.ca.gov/legal/citation.htm) . You can also review the Frequently Asked Questions (firstlevel-appeal-faq.htm) regarding the appeals process.

For additional information on penalties for noncompliance and enforcement provisions under this Act, visit the
Investigations Division
(cdtfa.ca.gov/legal/index.htm#Investigations) website or contact them by phone at 1-916-324-0105.

Other informative links
1318
 Publication 78, Sales of Cigarettes and Tobacco
Products in California-License Requirement for
Retailers (cdtfa.ca.gov/formspubs/pub78.pdf)
 Frequently Asked Questions -Retailers
(spcigtobaccofaqs.htm)
 Cigarette and Tobacco Product Retailers: Important
New License and Recordkeeping Requirements
(https://www.boe.ca.gov/pdf/ab71_webversion.pdf)
 Assembly Bill 71 (https://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03-
04/bill/asm/ab_0051-
0100/ab_71_bill_20031012_chaptered.pdf)
 Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003
(https://www.boe.ca.gov/sptaxprog/pdf/22970-
22995CAcodes.pdf)
 Attorney General's California Tobacco Directory
(https://ag.ca.gov/tobacco/directory.php)
 Tobacco 21
(https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DCDIC/CTCB/Pages/Tobacco21.as If you have additional questions about how the California Cigarette and Tobacco Products Licensing Act of 2003
applies to your business, you may also call our Customer Service Center at 1-800-400-7115 and select the Special Taxes and Fees option. Customer service representatives are available to assist you weekdays from 7:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. (Pacific time), except state holidays, or you may write to the California Department of Tax and Fee
Administration, Special Taxes and Fees, P.O. Box 948279, Sacramento, California, 94279-0088.
1319
 Subscribe to Our Newsletter

ROB BONTA
Attorney General
 Tobacco
Unflavored Tobacco List Regulations
Tobacco / Flavor Ban / Unflavored Tobacco List Regulations Notice of Proposed Readoption of
Emergency Regulations
Date: May 7, 2026
The Department of Justice (Department) proposes to readopt sections 942 through 957 of Title 11, Division 1, Chapter 11, of the California Code of Regulations, concerning Assembly Bill 3218, which went into effect on January 1, 2025.

A summary of the proposed emergency regulations, a copy of the public notice, and related documents are provided below.

The proposed regulations are, by legislative mandate, deemed emergency regulations necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety, and welfare under the governing statute. (Health & Saf. Code, § 104559.1, subd. (q).) Enter your email Subscribe
1320
Summary of Existing Laws and Regulations
In 2020, Senate Bill 793 banned flavored tobacco products (subject to certain exceptions) and tobacco product flavor enhancers in California. (Health & Saf. Code, § 104559.5.) Assembly Bill 3218, which went into effect on January 1, 2025, amended the flavor ban put in place by Senate Bill 793 and expanded on it. (Bus. & Prof. Code, §§ 22978.3, 22980, 22990; Health & Saf. Code, §§ 104559.1, 104559.5; Rev. & Tax. Code, § 30101.7.) It established the Unflavored Tobacco List (UTL), a list of covered tobacco products that are permissibly unflavored under the law. (Health & Saf. Code, § 104559.1, subd. (a).) Products not appearing on the list will be subject to seizure, and the Attorney General, the California Department of Public Health, and state and local law enforcement agencies are authorized to seek civil penalties against retailers of products not appearing on the list. (Health & Saf. Code, §§ 104559.1, subd. (g), 104559.5, subd. (b)(1); Bus. & Prof. Code, § 22974.2, subd. (a).) Assembly Bill 3218 requires the Attorney General to establish and maintain the UTL on or before December 31, 2025. (Health & Saf. Code, § 104559.1, subd. (m)).

The regulations implement Assembly Bill 3218, in part, by describing how manufacturers and importers of unflavored tobacco products may apply for the placement of their products on the UTL, what information those manufacturers and importers must provide, and the timing for applications and responses. The regulations also establish fees for initial and renewed placement on the list, and describe how civil penalties against distributors, wholesalers, and delivery sellers of products not appearing on the UTL may be assessed and appealed.

The Legislature authorized the Department to promulgate emergency regulations to implement Assembly Bill 3218. (Health & Saf. Code, § 104559.1, subd. (q).) The Department completed emergency rulemaking, and emergency regulations were approved on August 25, 2025, and were readopted, effective as of February 24, 2026. 1321
Sections Affected
California Code of Regulations, Title 11, Division 1, Chapter 11 Readopt Sections: Sections 942 through 957
Status of the Proposal
On August 25, 2025, the Office of Administrative Law approved the Department’s emergency action regarding Assembly Bill 3218 , and the emergency regulations became effective on August 25, 2025. The emergency regulations were readopted, effective February 24, 2026, and will expire on May 27, 2026, unless readopted. The Department proposes to readopt the emergency regulations without modification. The Department has initiated the process to adopt regulations concerning Assembly Bill 3218 by regular rulemaking. A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on those regulations was published on November 7, 2025, and the Department held a 15-day public comment period to receive comments on revisions to the proposed regulations. The 15-day comment period took place from February 19, 2026 to March 9, 2026. Currently, the Department is responding to public comments and finalizing the rulemaking process.

The Department plans to file the emergency readoption package with the Office of Administrative Law at least five working days from the date provided at the top of this notice. If you would like to comment on the Finding of Emergency or the proposed text, those comments must be made in writing only, must contain a notation that identifies the emergency regulation to which they relate, and must be received by both the Department and OAL within five calendar days of the Department’s filing with OAL. The Department may respond to comments at its discretion.
1322
Send comments simultaneously to:

Department of Justice
Taylor Ann Whittemore
1515 Clay Street, P.O. Box 70550
Oakland, CA 94612
E-mail: [email protected]
and
Office of Administrative Law
300 Capitol Mall, Suite 1250
Sacramento, CA 95814
Fax: (916) 445-9515
E-mail: [email protected]
The information below relates to recent rulemaking activity, including links to the regulations text and associated documents. Any person who has submitted a comment regarding a proposed action has the right to request a copy of the Final Statement of Reasons. The Final Statement will also be posted to this webpage upon completion of this rulemaking.

Second Readoption of Emergency
Regulations (May 7, 2026)
Finding of Emergency.pdf
Text of Proposed Regulations.pdf
Economic and Fiscal Impact Statement (STD 399).pdf
STD 399 Attachment.pdf
1323
15-Day Modifications (February 19, 2026)
Notice of Modifications to Text of Proposed Regulations Modified Text of Proposed Regulations
Readoption of Emergency Regulations
(January 30, 2026)
OAL Approval Letter.pdf
Finding of Emergency.pdf
Text of Proposed Regulations.pdf
Economic and Fiscal Impact Statement (STD 399).pdf
STD 399 Attachment.pdf
Public Notice and Related Documents
(November 7, 2025)
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.pdf
Text of Proposed Regulations.pdf
Initial Statement of Reasons.pdf
Economic and Fiscal Impact Statement (STD 399).pdf
STD 399 Attachment.pdf
Emergency Regulation Documentation
(August 6, 2025)
OAL Approval Letter
Finding of Emergency.pdf
Text of Proposed Regulations.pdf
1324
Economic and Fiscal Impact Statement (STD 399).pdf
STD 399 Attachment.pdf
NOTE: Regulation documents prepared by the Department may contain markup including underline, strikethrough, or highlight. While these documents are ADA-compliant, upon request, the Department can prepare a more screen reader-friendly version of these documents with annotations that explain the marked changes. Please submit all requests to [email protected].


FLAVOR BAN


UNFLAVORED TOBACCO LIST
PORTAL
Office of the Attorney General Accessibility Privacy Policy Conditions of Use Disclaimer © 2026 DOJ
1325
City of South Lake Tahoe
Agenda Item Executive Summary
Hilary Roverud, Interim City Manager
__________________________________
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Agenda Item #:14
Agenda Item: Unpermitted Vacation Home Rental Enforcement Executive Summary: On March 10, 2026, Councilmember Robbins requested, and Councilmember Roberts seconded, that staff bring back this report discussing the enforcement on hosting platforms of unpermitted Vacation Home Rentals in South Lake Tahoe.

Requested Action / Suggested Motions: Receive and file.

Responsible Staff Member: Jeff Roberson, Chief of Police, and Heather Stroud, City Attorney Reviewed and Approved By: Susan Blankenship, City Clerk Olga Tikhomirova, Director of Finance Attachments:
01 - Staff Report - Unpermitted VHR Enforcement.docx
02 - Courtesy Notice (Dec. 13, 2023).pdf
1326
City Council Report June 2, 2026 Page 1 of 3
City of South Lake Tahoe
Report to
City Council
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Title: Unpermitted Vacation Home Rental Enforcement
Location: Citywide
Responsible Staff Members: Jeff Roberson, Chief of Police and Heather Stroud, City Attorney

Background: On November 21, 2023, the City Attorney and former Code Enforcement Investigator provided a staff report to City Council regarding Vacation Home Rental (“VHR”) enforcement, especially as applied to potential enforcement for advertising unpermitted VHRs.

After receiving the report, Councilmember Robbins requested that a future agenda item be added for raising VHR citation fines and to begin enforcement against internet listing agencies (seconded by then-Councilmember Bass).

On December 13, 2023, the City Attorney sent to online advertising platforms a Courtesy Notice of Short-Term Rental Regulations Prohibiting Advertising of Unpermitted Properties. This Courtesy Notice was sent to Airbnb, Booking.com, Expedia, and VRBO. In response, each of the platforms requested a meeting. The City Attorney met with each of the platforms and they each agreed to cooperate with the City by removing listings for unpermitted properties.

On January 23, 2024, the City Attorney presented a staff report regarding increasing fines for VHR citations. City Council passed Resolution No. 2024-015, increasing fines to the maximum allowed under state law, to $1,500 for the first offense, $3,000 for the second offense within one year, and $5,000 for subsequent offenses within one year. These fines apply to all VHR violations including renting without a permit. The Police Department issues citations for renting without a permit to the owner and/or agent but has not been citing the online advertising platforms because of their cooperation with the City’s enforcement efforts.

On March 10, 2026, Councilmember Robbins requested, and Councilmember Roberts seconded, that staff bring back this report discussing the enforcement on hosting platforms of unpermitted VHRs in South Lake Tahoe.

Discussion: Advertising an unpermitted VHR is a violation of the City Code under Section

3.50.380(B) (Vacation Home Rental Permit Required to Operate), which states: “It shall be unlawful for any person or entity to rent, maintain, facilitate, advertise or list a dwelling unit as a short-term rental without a valid vacation home rental permit issued pursuant to this article.” As discussed, above, while an advertising platform could be an “entity” subject to enforcement, it has been the practice of code enforcement staff to issue citations for advertising unpermitted VHRs to the owner and/or property manager, and not to the online rental platforms. The primary reason for this approach is that the online advertising platforms have been cooperating with the City’s enforcement efforts against the owners and their agents. 1327
City Council Report June 2, 2026 Page 2 of 3
When contacted about properties that are unpermitted, the advertising platforms are diligent in removing properties that are not compliant with city code. The communication between advertising platforms and the Code Compliance Investigator is effective and cooperative. The advertising platforms request related documentation, such as violations, and reasons as to why a property should be removed from their site. Once the required information is provided, the platform will remove the listing from their website, rendering the property effectively unable to rent.

In sum, staff does not recommend issuing citations to the platforms that have been cooperative and are the source of data from which our unpermitted VHR investigations are currently resulting in citations to the owner/agent.

Without the cooperation of the hosting portals, the remaining investigative/enforcement option would be a complex and time-consuming VHR verification process. This would likely include back and forth communication between the hosting platform and Police Department staff about each property as a valid VHR permit prior to posting. This is not ideal given the number of VHR postings and the number of permits within the City. This alternate process, in which we proceed without the cooperation of the hosting platforms, would hamstring Police Department personnel and undermine our ability to provide efficient enforcement.

Summarily, there are benefits to maintaining the current enforcement approach:
1-if we cite the hosting company, they will take the VHR listing down, making identifying each property much more difficult and eliminating the utility of the platform we use. 2-sour the relationship with the hosting companies who provide much of the details on booking days/times, outstanding TOT, and are very responsive to our requests for assistance. 3-we do not have an investigative field team, our actions in the field, for the most part are reactive. This platform facilitates proactive enforcement against the owners/responsible parties. 4-push the VHR owners/agents to alternate platforms and undermine enforcement efforts.

Current Enforcement of Unpermitted Vacation Home Rentals Prior to 2022, the Police Department was using a software called Host Compliance for tracking VHRs online. In 2022, for the purpose of reducing the ongoing cost of VHR compliance confirmation the City entered into an agreement (C-273-2022) with Deckard Technologies for the use of their Rentalscape platform. Rentalscape reports on real estate property data for short-term rentals on all identifiable properties within the City of South Lake Tahoe based upon publicly available data and such other data provided by the City.

Rentalscape reports provide:
 How many VHRs are currently active in the City
 The aggregate revenue from actively listed bookings
 The average number of nights booked per reservation
 The platforms used by VHR hosts
 Average daily rates
 Booking trends during the Reporting Period
 Identify, by address, the following violations of VHR ordinances within the City of South Lake Tahoe
o Listings or advertisements that do not include an VHR permit number o Listings or advertisements that represent or offer occupancy in excess of the occupancy maximums in the City
1328
City Council Report June 2, 2026 Page 3 of 3
o Identify the actively listed VHRs by month and address  The total number of properties actively listed in the City each month during the reporting period
 List the property owners
 List the permit history of each property offering VHRs in the City This contract has been renewed for Rentalscape as the Code Compliance Investigator has found it to be useful platform in identifying unpermitted VHRs. The renewal fees are $15,750 for a yearly rate (1/1/2026-12/31/2026).

To date our collaborative approach with the hosting platforms and the use of Rentalscape has resulted in 511 citations for unpermitted rentals:
2022: 90 citations
2023: 169 citations
2024: 141 citations
2025: 70 citations
2026 (Jan.1-May 11): 41 citations
Notably, the Police Department receives complaints in which neighbors see different cars and people every weekend at a given location with the assumption that the location must be an unpermitted VHR. These neighbors express an expectation that, independently and proactively, the CSO division is investigating these location and people. To be clear, we do not have a CSO investigative team that surveils designated residences for changes in conditions that would lead us to believe that location would be an unpermitted VHR. Rentalscape facilitates the direction and amplitude of these investigations. These are leads generated by cooperation with the hosting platforms. Our response to unpermitted VHRs is reactive; we respond with data to complaints.

Few people want the police surveilling their homes for the potential of any violation without reasonable suspicion; we respect that. There are many conditions, unrelated to VHRs, for which turnover is common in a second home.

Financial Implications: There are no financial implications from this report.

Environmental Considerations: Receiving this report is not a “project” subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(2) (general policy and procedure making).

Policy Implications: This report supports 2025-2030 Strategic Priority Three: Ensure Public Safety 1329
1901 Lisa Maloff Way, Ste. 300 │ South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 │ (530) 542-6046 │www.cityofslt.us City Attorney’s Office

VIA EMAIL
December 13, 2023
RE: Courtesy Notice of Short-Term Rental Regulations Prohibiting Advertising of Unpermitted Properties To Online Short-Term Rental Advertising Platforms:

As you may be aware, in November 2018, the voters of South Lake Tahoe passed Measure T which phased out short-term rentals in residentially-zoned areas of the City of South Lake Tahoe by the end of 2021. The stated purpose of Measure T was to eliminate the nuisances caused by short-term rentals in residential neighborhoods and to alleviate the housing shortage for local workers. There continue to be areas within city limits where short-term rentals are allowed, such as the tourist core, and there are a number of permitted properties that may be advertised for rent. Code Enforcement staff, however, have observed that rental platforms have continued to advertise properties that do not have a City permit in violation of South Lake Tahoe City Code section 3.50.380(B), which provides: “It shall be unlawful for any person or entity to rent, maintain, facilitate, advertise or list a dwelling unit as a short term rental without a valid vacation home rental permit issued pursuant to this article.” (Emphasis added.) Further, Section 3.50.450 states:
“Owner(s) or their agent(s) found operating a VHR without a permit after [December 31, 2021] shall be fined a minimum of $1,000 per violation.”
The City thus far has focused its enforcement efforts on property owners, but continued noncompliance has warranted a broader approach. Our City Council recently directed staff to: (1) bring back a resolution to increase the citation amounts for operating a short-term rental without a permit to the statutory maximums in Senate Bill 60; and (2) commence enforcement against advertising platforms that continue to advertise unpermitted short-term rentals. To that end we are asking for your cooperation in not listing short-term rentals that do not have City permits to operate. The City maintains a publicly-available GIS database of permitted properties: City of South Lake Tahoe Vacation Home Rental Map Series (arcgis.com).

Advertisements of unpermitted short-term rentals that continue to be active 30 days from the date of this letter will be subject to administrative citations.

Respectfully,
/s/ Heather Stroud
City Attorney
cc: City Manager
Chief of Police
1330
City of South Lake Tahoe
Agenda Item Executive Summary
Hilary Roverud, Interim City Manager
__________________________________
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Agenda Item #:15
Agenda Item: Update on the El Dorado Beach Revetment and Improvements Project Executive Summary: Due to high lake levels and storm events, El Dorado Beach has eroded, exposing the plastic sandbag revetment installed in 2018. On January 13, 2026, City Council awarded a contract to Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. for design and permitting services; and staff received direction on the preferred outcome for the beach. Attachment 2 contains a presentation, informing City Council of the current status of design, permitting, and construction efforts for Phase 1 and 2, as well as the preliminary findings related to Phase 3 design.

Requested Action / Suggested Motions: Receive and file.

Responsible Staff Member: Brianna Greenlaw, Senior Civil Engineer Reviewed and Approved By: Mohammad Qureshi, Director of Public Works Susan Blankenship, City Clerk Olga Tikhomirova, Director of Finance Heather Stroud, City Attorney Attachments:
01-Staff Report-El Dorado Beach Revetment & Improvements Project, Phase 2 Update.docx 02-El Dorado Beach Update.pptx
1331
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 1 of 3
City of South Lake Tahoe
Report to City Council
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Title: El Dorado Beach Revetment & Improvements Project, Phase 2 Update Location: El Dorado Beach/Lakeview Commons
Responsible Staff Member: Brianna Greenlaw, Senior Civil Engineer Background: In 2018, severe erosion at El Dorado beach resulted in vertical drop offs of approximately four feet and the potential for undermining the structural foundations of the lower seating walls of Lakeview Commons. This occurred after consecutive years when the lake was at the maximum legal limit, coupled with storms bringing significant wave action to El Dorado Beach.

To ensure public safety and structural protection of Lakeview Commons assets, the City installed plastic super sack sandbags with various types of rock as a dynamic revetment, covered with layers of sand.

In late 2024, the sandbags and geotextile fabric began to become exposed on the beach.

Following spring snowmelt in 2025, staff assessed the conditions and began engagement with regulatory agencies to allow for beach replenishment. On June 17, 2025, City Council allocated $75,000 to complete design and permitting for temporary repairs (Resolution 2025-056).

Concurrently, a large storm in late June 2025 caused severe erosion and significantly accelerated exposure of sandbags. To ensure public safety, protection of Lakeview Commons infrastructure, and preservation of the beach, emergency beach replenishment was completed.

A portion of the funds allocated as part of Resolution 2025-056 were utilized for the materials for the emergency beach replenishment. As part of emergency permit closeout, the regulatory agencies agreed to 2027 permanent revetment implementation, committing the City to removal of the sandbags, with temporary permitting until then to allow for minor fixes/beach replenishment.

On January 13, 2026, staff provided an update to City Council on the history and status of El Dorado Beach and received directions that the preferred outcome for the beach was to remove the existing plastic sandbags as soon as possible. Additionally, City Council advised staff that the long-term preferred outcome is to protect Lakeview Commons infrastructure and preserve the beach if possible. Due to the high variability of work for El Dorado Beach dependent on City Council priorities and conversations with regulatory agencies, the design consultant scope of work was separated into five separate tasks. Phase 1 (since renamed Phase A) which primarily included assessments and surveying that would guide conversations and develop cost estimates, permitting/environmental document timelines, and schedules was awarded to Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (Stantec) at the January 13, 2026 Council Meeting for a not to exceed amount of $149,971.

As the project has progressed, it has been separated into three implementation phases due to permitting requirements and associated timelines. They are outlined in Table 1. 1332
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 2 of 3
Table 1. El Dorado Beach Revetment and Improvements Project Implementation Phases Phase of
Implementation
Description Approximate Implementation
Timeline
1 Replenish the beach following snow
melt to ensure further degradation to
sandbags does not occur, and to
allow for continued use of the beach.

To begin as soon as permits allow
(May 2026). Sand replenishment
will occur as needed throughout
summer until Phase 2
implementation.
2 Remove the plastic sandbags, install
rock below bottom step of Lakeview
Commons, and backfill with sand.

As soon as permits, contractor
procurement, and lake level allow
(likely mid-September – October
2026). Sand replenishment will be
needed periodically until Phase 3
implementation.
3 Final Permanent Improvements –
Details are to be determined after
conducting studies and engaging in
further conversations with agencies.

Phase 2 improvements will be
incorporated into the Phase 3
design.

To Be Determined
(Note: These timelines are approximate and are highly dependent on contractor procurement and permitting agencies.)
During mid-year budget FY25-26, $1,000,000 was allocated to the project for design and construction purposes. To stay on track to implement both Phase 1 and 2 implementations in the 2026 construction season, additional design funds ($332,057.50) were needed. Amendment 1 to Stantec’s design contract was approved by City Council on March 24, 2026.

Issue and Discussion: Attachment 2 contains a presentation, informing City Council of the status of design, permitting, and construction efforts for Phase 1 and 2 as well as preliminary findings related to the Phase 3 design. During the presentation on January 13, 2026, City Council requested that staff return with an update after initial design and permitting began and Phase 2 design and cost details could be provided.

Financial Implications: Of the $75,000 allocated to the project in June 2025, $11,183.23 was utilized on the 2025 emergency work to cover the exposed sandbags and open the beach up safely for the 4th of July holiday. This resulted in a remainder of $63,816.77 in the account that will be utilized towards interim beach replenishment measures part of Phase 1.

During mid-year budget FY25-26, $1,000,000 was allocated to the project for design and construction. After $332,057.50 was awarded to Stantec as Amendment 1 to their contract., a remainder of $667,942.50 will be available for the Phase 2 construction. 1333
Council Agenda Report June 2, 2026 Page 3 of 3
If construction bids for Phase 2 are higher than the allocated budget, additional funds may need to be allocated to the project to ensure completion of Phase 2 in the 2026 construction season.

The Phase 2 bid is being set up with a base bid (removing the existing sandbags) and a bid alternate (adding additional rock riprap along the east side of the beach) so there is flexibility in awarding to contractors. The bid alternate is needed, but staff have separated the work recognizing that financial constraints may be an issue. It is estimated that the available funding could be sufficient to award the base bid as currently designed but may not be enough to also award the alternate bid. Staff recommends to award both the base bid and bid alternate based on project need, permitting, and cost effectiveness but will defer requesting additional funds until the bids are opened.

Additionally, as described in the presentation, to reach City Council’s desired goal to maintain structural integrity of Lakeview Commons infrastructure and to preserve the existing beach, funding for Phase 3 design, permitting, and implementation will be needed. Removing the plastic sandbags will be a great accomplishment, but without additional improvements that will trap or retain sand at El Dorado Beach, the beach as we know it today will not exist in perpetuity.

Environmental Considerations: The City, as lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), has determined that both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 Projects are categorically exempt from CEQA under State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15304 (Class 4, Minor Alterations to Land) and 15307 (Class 7, Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources).

Additionally, the following permits were determined to be needed for Phase 1 and 2.

Phase 1
 Tahoe Regional Planning Agency: Shorezone Permit ERSP2026 0282  Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board: Clean Water Act § 401 – Individual Water Quality Certification
 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Clean Water Act § 404 – Nationwide Permit 13, Bank Stabilization; non reporting
 California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Fish and Game Code § 1602 – Emergency Notification pursuant to §1610
Phase 2
 Tahoe Regional Planning Agency: Shorezone Permit
 Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board: Clean Water Act § 401 – Individual Water Quality Certification
 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Clean Water Act § 404 – Nationwide Permit 13, Bank Stabilization; pre-construction notification required
 California Department of Fish and Wildlife: Fish and Game Code § 1602 – Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement
If federal funding is pursued for Phase 3, joint environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) will be required in addition to CEQA. The preferred design for Phase 3 will determine which permits from the various agencies and what level of environmental documents will be required.

Policy Implications: Completing Phase 2 of the El Dorado Beach Revetment & Improvements Project will assist in meeting City Council Strategic Priority, Protect the Natural Environment, by removing the plastic sandbags previously installed in 2018 as an emergency revetment at El Dorado Beach. This Project (Phases 1-3) also advances the City Council Strategic Priority, Recreation and Equitable Access for All, by facilitating design that can continue to provide access for people of all abilities to public spaces and ensuring public connectivity and safety at Lakeview Commons.
1334
El Dorado Beach
Revetment &
Improvement
Project
space
Progress Update
City Council Meeting
June 2, 2026
April 24, 2026
1335
2 • Phase 1 – clean and stabilize site (sand replenishment) • spring 2026 – initial sand replenishment complete
• summer 2026 – follow up replenishment as needed until Phase 2 • Phase 2 – remove super sacks and build revetment to control erosion, protect infrastructure, and maintain beach access
• fall 2026 – construct revetment
• summer 2027, 2028, 2029 – maintenance (sand replenishment) • Phase 3 – long-term protection of El Dorado Beach
• 2028+
Review Project – Three Phases
1336
Phase 1 -
Update
Before 5/22/26 During 5/22/26
After 5/22/26 After 5/24/26
1337
Phase 2 - Remove Super Sacks and Build Revetment
1338
5 Phase 2 - Remove Super Sacks and Build Revetment
1339
6 Phase 2 - Remove Super Sacks and Build Revetment
1340
7 Phase 2 – Construction Cost Estimate and Schedule
• Phase 2 Costs – Engineering Estimate
• Base Bid (area where supersacks are currently
located): $600-800K
• Bid Alternate (repair and replace rip rap and boulder revetment east of the stairs): $800K-1.1M
• Phase 2 Schedule (estimate)
• Permit applications submitted: end of May/early June
• Release bid for construction: July (3-week period)
• Permits approved: late August
• Bid award/ Council Meeting: August / September
• Construction: September thru October
• Maintenance/ sand replenishment: 2027, 2028, 2029
May 2026
1341
8 Phase 2 – Permitting and Environmental Compliance
Agency Permit / Authority
Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Shorezone Permit
Lahontan Regional Water Quality
Control Board Clean Water Act § 401 – Individual Water Quality Certification U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act § 404 – Nationwide Permit 13, Bank Stabilization; pre-construction notification required
California Department of Fish and
Wildlife
Fish and Game Code § 1602 – Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) – Categorically Exempt:
• Class 4, Minor Alterations to Land; and
• Class 7, Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of Natural Resources 1342
9 Public Outreach for Phase 1 and Phase 2
•Website
•Press release for noticing
in the newspaper
•Signage at Lakeview
Commons
•Concessionaire
notifications and
coordination with Parks &
Recreation
1343
10 Phase 3 – Long Term Protection of El Dorado Beach
• Goal: Protect the beach and avoid perpetual sand replenishment •Studies Underway
• Geotechnical /Soil Assessment
• Determine soil composition and lacustrine layer location • Informs potential construction of facilities in the lake • Wind Wave Modeling and Littoral Drift Assessment
• Understand wave conditions at site
• Understand how sediment moves at site
• Will feed into design of Phase 3
1344
11 Phase 3 – Long Term Protection of El Dorado Beach
•Next Steps
•Conduct Cross-Shore Sediment Modeling
•Analyze Results
•Develop Phase 3 Concepts (shoreline protection evaluation matrix)
1345
April 24, 2026 5/24/26
1346
City of South Lake Tahoe
Agenda Item Executive Summary
Hilary Roverud, Interim City Manager
__________________________________
Meeting Date: June 2, 2026
Agenda Item #:16
Agenda Item: Agenda Planning Calendar
Requested Action / Suggested Motions: Identify, with consent of at least two Council Members, any desired future agenda items, and/or modify the Agenda Planning Calendar as desired.

Responsible Staff Member: Susan Blankenship, City Clerk and Hilary Roverud, Interim City Manager Attachments:

APC 05 28 2026.pdf
1347
2026 Agenda Planning Calendar (Updated 05 28 2026)
Agenda Item Section
June 16, 4 p.m.

June 16, 5:30 p.m.City Attorney Ord-Non-Residential Structures Abandoned Construction (Second R Consent

CC-STRSA
Lukins Bros & TKWC Franchise Agreement Notice of Intention Consent Interim City Attorney Appointment NB
City Clerk Resolution Consolidating Election with EDC Consent City Manager Use of Cannabis Tax Revenue NB
Dev Services STR Delinquency Report PH
Finance Direct Charge of Mello-Roos Special Tax for CFD 1995-1 for FY 202 Consent Report on Collection Services for the Finance Department Consent Annual Special Tax for CFD 2001-1 Series 2015 Special Tax Refund Consent Disolution STJPPFA Consent
HR City Manager Contract Award NB
Parks & Rec Parks Equipment Purchase Consent
Public Works Award of Construction Contract for 2026 Cape Sealing Project Consent Reimbursement Agreement with STPUD for Road Rehab Project Consent Special Closed Session
1348
2026 Agenda Planning Calendar (Updated 05 28 2026)
Contract Extension SieraCon for Energy Savings Project Consent June 24, 2026, 5:30 p.m., LTCC, Special City Council Meeting-State of the City Address Aug 11, 9 a.m. Airport Award Runway 1836 Construction Contract and Grant Award Consent City Attorney Lukins Bros & TKWC Franchise Ordinance (First Reading) NB City Clerk Conflict of Interest Code Update Consent
City Manager 2026 National Community Survey Report NB
CivicSpark Budget Request Consent
Becoming a BearWise Community NB
Finance Financial Policies Update inc. Local, State & US Preference Consent Fire RFP Contract Award Cole Property project
Consent
Dev Services Evaluate Feasibility - Res. Area Plan/SB9 & Remove Tourist AccomoNB Tahoe Living Housing and Mobility Fees UB
Sign Ordinance Amendments (Sub Committee Recos) UB
Police Vista Rise Operating Agreement & Grant Report Consent Public Works Tamarack Culvert Bid Award Consent
El Dorado Beach Phase 2 Bid Award Consent
1349
2026 Agenda Planning Calendar (Updated 05 28 2026)
Drainage Master Plan Consultant Award Consent
Aug 25, 9 a.m. Budget Workshop
Sept 8, 9 a.m. Airport Airport Master Plan adoption NB
City Attorney Sale and Use of Glyphosate in the City NB City Manager Progress on Joining a CCA NB
Exploration of becoming a public electric utility NB
Informational item - Check Cashing + Bill Pay Services Options NB Dev Services Mid Town Area Plan Adoption PH
Quarterly Housing Report NB
Housing Element Final Draft Review NB
Finance Investment Policy Update Consent
Parks & Rec P&R Commission Policy Recos for Youth & Non Profit Service Fees NB Sept 22, 5:30 p.m. Finance Quarterly Budget and Financial Status Report as of June 2026 Consent Investment Portfolio Report as of June 2026 Consent
Parks & Rec Ice Arena Concessionaire Agreement NB
Oct 5, 5:30 p.m. City Clerk Ordinance Increasing City Council Compensation (First Reading) NB 1350
2026 Agenda Planning Calendar (Updated 05 28 2026)
Dev Services Food Truck Ordinance Review NB
Finance GAAN Limit Consent
Nov 3, 9:30 a.m. City Clerk Ordinance Increasing City Council Compensation (Second Reading) Consent Finance TID Annual Report NB
Nov 17, 5:30 p.m.

Dec 1, 9 a.m. City Clerk Certification of Election
Outgoing Councilmember Recognition
Oath of Office
City Council Re-Organization Mayor/Mayor Pro Tem
2027 City Council Meeting Schedule
Dec 15, 5:30 p.m. Finance Annual ROPS Approval
Investment Portfolio Report as of September 2026 Consent Quarterly Budget and Financial Status Report as of September 2026 CA/PD Shared Mobility Device Ordinance 2027 review
Crescent V Parking Enforcement Agreement
Unscheduled/Pending
If Election is Certified
by December 1, if not
these items will be
brought forward
December 15
1351
2026 Agenda Planning Calendar (Updated 05 28 2026)
City Clerk
City Manager LTCC Fire Training Center Coverage Agreement City Green Card Assistance Program
Grants/Funding for Undergrounding Utilities
Legislative Agenda
CM/CA Rec Center Re-Use Outreach
Dev Services Performance Bond as a Condition of Demolition Nell's Nursery Housing Redevelopment
Fire MOU Ratification of Auto Aid with TDFD
LVFD MOU update for data sharing
CTC Land Access Agreement for Airport project
Parks & Rec Events and Facitilies Naming Rights Discussion El Dorado Boat Ramp Dock Replacement Purchase
Regan Beach Environmental & Design RFP
Future of Senior Center
Police Barton Community Health Needs and Harm Reduction Update 1352
2026 Agenda Planning Calendar (Updated 05 28 2026)
SANE Presentation with Barton
Heavenly Village Employee Discount Parking Passes
Ratification of Application for CalOES DVRT
Massage Ordinance Update/Amendments
Employee Parking at Heavenly Village
Police/PW Bike Paths/Speed Bumps, Bike Parking, Vehicle Parking SRO Agreement for 2026-2027 School Year
2026 Update to Parking Fees in the Bellamy Parking Garage Public Works Geothermal Use Discussion Item
Paving Policy Prioritization of Total Users
Award of PD Roof Replacement
TTD US 50 Plans Presentation
Award Lakeview and Ski Run Electrical Upgrades
Facilities Condition Assessment
Ski Run Electrification
1353

South Lake Tahoe City CouncilJune 2, 2026

South Lake Tahoe City Council
June 2, 2026