South Pasadena City Council
May 30, 2023

units
5315007055
The following 3 are the mission meridian Condos that you are claiming a 1 for 1 replacement with low income units.

5315021051

5315021008
5315021031
--
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
• How addressed: As addressed in the response to the comment dated November 22, 2022 regarding these same parcels, each of these lots are located in the Downtown Specific Plan area, where an area-wide analysis was conducted. As discussed above for 820 Mission St., the number of existing units was removed from the projected calculation of net new units being claimed in the Housing Element..

Delaine Shane (December 6, 2022)
To the Housing Element Consultant and City Management:

Enclosed are my comments pertaining to the red-lined version of the Draft Housing Element, Version

4. Frankly, I didn’t read your recent document—just skimmed it. No realistic time was given to us to allow for a thoughtful read through. In addition, while I appreciated the City’s turnout at our most 3 - 1646
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-175 recent walk through in the Meridian neighborhood that has several of the vacant Caltrans properties, having the Consultant snap a picture of us and marking that check box as being part of public engagement is a false narrative.

A mindset at City Hall continues to exist, as exhibited in this draft document, that the non-legislative alternative to SB 381 and the Caltrans properties is either non-existent or illegal. It is NOT illegal. I and others have already provided you with information readily available on the internet that it has been done and can be done in California by government entities.

Nothing in Caltrans’ regulations prevents that agency from implementing the non-legislative alternative that the South Pasadena Preservation Foundation has so clearly prepared and presented to the City on numerous occasions. Just because Caltrans says NO? So, why aren’t our City officials meeting with our state legislators to convince Caltrans otherwise? This wouldn’t be the first time that Caltrans is misusing its powers to the detriment of our community. I and my neighbors expect that our City management and Consultant support us and not dictate a choice that they themselves would not appreciate if they lived in our community.

All we want are for the vacant properties to be sold to qualified buyers (be they present/former Caltrans tenants or other qualified buyers) who will fix up their homes, live in them, pay their fair share of property taxes, and contribute to our wonderful and diverse neighborhood. This can still happen if the Housing Element is revised to include the very viable non-legislative alternative to SB 381, i.e., side-byside escrow agreements. These properties were what the Freeway Fighters were fighting to preserve for over 60 years. It would be a harsh and cruel irony if the houses were torn down not by Caltrans but by the City or its designees (HREs).

Sincerely,
Delaine Shane
2003 Meridian Avenue
[Continued on next page]
3 - 1647
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA Page B1-176 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Comment Nos.

Page Nos.

Statements of Concern in Red-lined Version
Public Comments on Draft Housing Element’s Statements (Version 4-Red-lined) City Response
1 2-3 “SB 381 requires that Caltrans
offer unoccupied homes for sale to the City of South Pasadena. If the City does not purchase the properties, Caltrans will offer them for sale to the Los Angeles County Development Authority (LACDA), and if LACDA does not purchase the homes, they will be offered to a Housing Related Entity (HRE).” This statement does not include the non-legislative approach on the disposition of vacant Caltrans housing that the South Pasadena Preservation Plan (SPPP) has been presenting to the City of South Pasadena (City). That is, the more efficient, economic, and expeditious process of side-by-side escrow agreements for unoccupied homes. Yes, this section of the Housing Element is on legislation; however, MANY discussions between the City and the public also concerned a parallel track involving a viable non-legislative track in conjunction with SB 381. The City did agree to consider this non-legislative approach during previous discussions between the City Council and Ad Hoc Committees. This process is legal and is done by other governmental entities. If Caltrans is not interested in such an approach, why isn’t our City Council seeking relief on this matter with our newly elected State Assembly Member Michael Fong or other prominent state legislators? Getting entangled in a large real estate portfolio and process could result in the City Council not meeting its other mandates to its residents. As a reminder, here is a slide from the City Council Agenda, Item No. 14, July 21, 2021 (though I vehemently disagree that this is a “perceived problem”):

SB 381, which the City supported, provides a framework for Caltrans to sell its surplus property in South Pasadena. If the City does not purchase the properties, it is expected that Caltrans will offer them to the Los Angeles County Development Authority and then on to other parties identified in the law. Caltrans must offer these homes for sale in accordance with SB 381, other options do no exist under existing law. 3 - 1648
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 20222021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-177 Comment Nos.

Page Nos.

Statements of Concern in Red-lined Version
Public Comments on Draft Housing Element’s Statements (Version 4-Red-lined) City Response
The City should behave as a pass through to allow current/former tenants and/or qualified home buyers and not get into the real estate developer’s market nor sell to HREs. Our community want the homes to be returned to homeowners that meet the criteria of the Roberti Act so that these properties return to the tax roll. Sixty plus years of these Caltrans homes have yielded NO PROPERTY TAXES! It is time for this situation to be changed by relying on side-by-side escrows. THEY ARE NOT ILLEGAL!!! Specific text should be added to the fourth version of the Housing Element that includes the option of side-by-side escrows. 2 3 “AB 2011, the Affordable
Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022, was signed into law on September 28, 2022. AB 2011 allows for ministerial, by-right approval of affordable housing on commercially-zoned lands, and allows for mixed-income How does the City intend to be a good steward of our precious historic resources in light of AB 2011? What protections will there be for the City’s approved historic landmarks and potentially historic structures have in commercially zoned lands? It is difficult to view specifics in Appendix A as to which structures would fall under AB 2011, but I have been told that the Kaldi’s Coffee building could AB 2011 does not apply to projects where, “the development would require the demolition of a historic structure that was placed on a national, state, or local historic register.” 3 - 1649
Perceived problems 1. South Pasadena Preservation Foundation (SPPF Subcommittee provided a revised proposal on
April 14th and welcomes the opportunity to
discuss priorities.

2. SPPF believes there is a non-legislative solution
and would like to see the City work with the
Senator to transfer managing control of the
program to the local level.

3. Viability of the side-by-side escrow concept
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA Page B1-178 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Comment Nos.

Page Nos.

Statements of Concern in Red-lined Version
Public Comments on Draft Housing Element’s Statements (Version 4-Red-lined) City Response
housing along commercial corridors so long as the project meets certain labor and environmental criteria.” be vulnerable to being torn down. This is the City’s first bank and still retains its integrity, association, and context from a historic perspective. Does that mean that many of our landmarks whether on the City’s list or not, can be destroyed? Also, what is meant specifically by the phrase “…certain labor and environmental criteria?’ This is a legal document and one which will be available to the public. The residents do not necessarily have the time or the opportunity to cross check AB 2011 with other documents to understand what this means or what the ramifications are for them and for the City. 3 5 Program 1.b - Convert
Caltrans Homes to Affordable Housing “The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is obligated by State law to offer unoccupied Caltransowned surplus residential properties located in South Pasadena for sale to the City of South Pasadena. The City has expressed interest to Caltrans in purchasing these twenty (20) unoccupied surplus properties through this State program, which contain twenty-two (22) Please clarify the text -- will this conversion program result in rental property or home ownership? My neighbors and I support affordable home ownership for these vacant homes where the owners will fix the houses up and live in them and contribute to the well being of our neighborhood, which is quite diversified. The homeowners, like us, will then be paying property taxes. Currently, Caltrans pays zero in property taxes. The vast numbers of these vacant houses are in the southwestern portion of the City. If they go to HREs, then the houses will continue to not be on the tax rolls. The neighborhood will continue to be disproportionately impacted due to the legacy of the SR 710 Extension Project.

These decisions regarding whether the homes will be for-sale or rental, or whether an HRE will be involved in the renovation or other aspects of the project, have not been made by the City at this time. 3 - 1650
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 20222021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-179 Comment Nos.

Page Nos.

Statements of Concern in Red-lined Version
Public Comments on Draft Housing Element’s Statements (Version 4-Red-lined) City Response
housing units. If the City does not purchase the properties, Caltrans will offer them for sale to the Los Angeles County Development Authority (LACDA), and if LACDA does not purchase the homes, they will be offered to a Housing Related Entity (HRE). State law requires Caltrans to place a deed restriction on these surplus properties ensuring that they are made available for purchase by moderateincome households or for rent to lower income households to moderate or lower income households. Through this Program, if economically feasible, the City will preserve and rehabilitate these properties, and make them available to moderate and lower income households.” This program is biased and not equitable where affordable housing should be distributed throughout the City. The City Council has already approved several large mixed-use developments with NO affordable units (except for Mr. Odom Stamp’s project at 625 S. Fair Oaks Avenue). Yet, these Caltrans homes that have been allowed to deteriorate over the decades are being considered as affordable rentals rather than as affordable home ownership that will put these properties back on the tax roll. The City should NOT be involved with rehabilitating these homes. Our streets have not been paved for decades, the failing West Side Reservoir is a human disaster waiting to happen, we don’t have decent street lighting, we deal with speeders that don’t even live in our neighborhoods but wear out our pot-holed and ever deepening cracks (which in turn will impact existing substructures embedded below the streets), etc. How can the City consider funding this program through the General Funds or relying on HREs? Why not provide the residents who live here now with the services that we deserve. As mentioned in Comment No. 1, the City should employ the nonlegislative approach, i.e., the side-by-side escrow agreements. The City has had issues with HREs in the past who don’t take responsibility in managing their properties, not to mention the loss in tax revenues to the state and City. There is also nothing 3 - 1651
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA Page B1-180 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Comment Nos.

Page Nos.

Statements of Concern in Red-lined Version
Public Comments on Draft Housing Element’s Statements (Version 4-Red-lined) City Response
mentioned about providing security of the Caltrans houses between the times of the purchases by the City and the properties eventual sales. We have been living in fear with the brazenness of squatters and more importantly the danger that these decrepit houses pose, including faulty electrical wiring, mold, asbestos, sewage spills/leaks, etc. that could be released should the squatters inadvertently initiate a catastrophic event. Our houses are so close together that we fear our homes would suffer whatever happens to the nearby Caltrans homes caused by squatters. There is nothing here in this document that alleviates our concerns about our safety. 4 62 “Development may have also
been hindered by the City’s decades-long struggle to reverse the planned 71 Freeway extension, which was finally cancelled by Caltrans.” The “71 Freeway”? I’ve noticed a lot of spelling errors throughout the document. We are paying the consultants a lot of money to write properly. “Cancelled by” Caltrans? A number of individuals, organizations, and municipalities rose up and fought against this useless project and Caltrans for decades. This statement makes it seem as if Caltrans just changed its mind. Revise this statement to interject reality and accuracy.

The identified typo has been corrected.
5 63 “These incentives include
height increases and waivers from setbacks, floor area ratios, parking, and other requirements for eligible residential projects.” The author was originally correct by stating “concessions” rather than the revision to “incentives.” What are the eligible residential projects? List specifics and how much is the City giving away to the developers? Will there be any yards in the future for new housing? Where will the cars be parked since most residents will still be using their own transportation, whether gas powered or The identified changes to development standards are incentives for projects to include affordable units. These incentives are required by State law. 3 - 1652
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 20222021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-181 Comment Nos.

Page Nos.

Statements of Concern in Red-lined Version
Public Comments on Draft Housing Element’s Statements (Version 4-Red-lined) City Response
electric powered? How tall will the height increases be? Does our Fire Department have the capability to put out fires on high rise buildings? 6 209 “Caltrans has initiated a threephased property sales program for the 710 surplus properties. Staff continues to work with representatives of Caltrans, California Department of Housing and Community Development, and the California State Transportation Agency to discuss potential affordable housing strategies. The City is also working on a plan to take advantages of opportunities provided in SB381 to procure surplus properties in order to enable affordable housing development. A new housing division is being established in the Community Development Department to develop and administer affordable housing including these efforts. “Funding has been secured for a feasibility study on Same comment as in Comment No. 1. No mention about the non-legislative and legitimate approach of relying on side-by-side escrow agreements. And just what will the Housing Division do when “administrating affording housing?” Will the City or its designee, an HRE, manage the affordable units, collect the rent, and maintain the units? How can that be when so much of our neighborhood needs vital services and maintenance activities now? The City is not qualified to handle this major endeavor and to pass it to an HRE will just be a repeat of Caltrans’ past behavior.

SB 381, which the City supported, provides a framework for Caltrans to sell its surplus property in South Pasadena. If the City does not purchase the properties, it is expected that Caltrans will offer them to the Los Angeles County Development Authority and then on to other parties identified in the law. Caltrans must offer these homes for sale in accordance with SB 381, other options do not exist under existing law. 3 - 1653
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA Page B1-182 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Comment Nos.

Page Nos.

Statements of Concern in Red-lined Version
Public Comments on Draft Housing Element’s Statements (Version 4-Red-lined) City Response
surplus Caltrans properties available to be converted to permanent affordable housing ($30,000 – Measure H).” 7 219-
220
Discussion related to Program 1.b - Convert Caltrans Homes to Affordable Housing Same comment as Comment No. 3. Security costs will be excessive with respect to the program and to date those costs have not been estimated. Occupancy by October 2024 is also overly optimistic. Given the bureaucratic processes of both agencies, the costs and distribution of supplies and equipment, labor availability, the unanticipated repairs that are yet to be discovered until rehabilitation occurs, and the requirement that if HREs are involved that they can pay prevailing labor wages is naïve thinking at best when dealing with renovation projects of this magnitude. Selling these properties immediately in side-by-side escrows will substantially alleviate the risks to the City and will enable the City to focus on existing and urgent City matters and services. As yet again a reminder, just look at the snail’s pace of the City in turning two vacant former Caltrans lots into pocket parks. Several years have passed and the City is still working with designers/engineers with no results at this time. Imagine if security was focused on those sites? Such costs would be astronomical.

The City has not made any determinations regarding the eventual dispensation of the Caltrans homes. Currently, the City is doing its due diligence regarding the condition of the homes and the possible financing mechanisms for rehabilitation of the properties. This analysis includes researching possibilities regarding increasing the number of units on Caltrans home sites, where feasible. However, since the due diligence work is ongoing, it is not possible for the City to commit to any course of action regarding these homes at this time. 3 - 1654
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-183 South Pasadena Tenants Union and Care First (December 8, 2022) City of South Pasadena
Community Development Department
[email protected]
[email protected]
CC: California Housing and Community Development
[email protected]
[email protected]
Regarding: South Pasadena Housing Element, Fourth Draft Dear Ms. Frausto-Lupo,
Care First South Pasadena and the South Pasadena Tenants Union write jointly to provide feedback about South Pasadena’s third draft of the Housing Element.

Executive Summary
 South Pasadena should develop affordable housing throughout the City to create income diverse neighborhoods and promote fair housing. We want the City to:
o Use the 20 vacant Caltrans house sites,1 which the City will purchase in the coming months, to develop a blend of duplexes, triplexes, quads, and denser multi unit buildings for affordable ownership and rental opportunities. A number of the vacant houses are

0.25-0.50 acres and could accommodate multi-unit development. o Pilot an affordable ADU program, like the Backyard Homes project in Northeast Los Angeles (https://www.mas.la/affordable-adus).
o Recruit 100% affordable developments through non-profit low-income housing developers, identify at least four (4) viable locations for 100% affordable developments, and identify potential financial and regulatory incentives the city could offer such developers.
 South Pasadena should take more steps to support and protect renters and maintain availability of existing below-market units, including:
o Enact an urgency ordinance before January 1, 2023 to amend South Pasadena’s no-cause eviction ordinance to require landlords to pay tenants increased relocation assistance if they are being evicted.
o Offer financial assistance to low- and moderate-income tenants and prospective tenants, including Section 8 voucher holders, for security deposits and rent. o Enact a rent control ordinance.
o Fund improvements at below-market rental units in exchange for landlords’ covenants not to evict existing tenants or raise rents excessively.

I. Promoting Affordable and Fair Housing Development
The Housing Element determined that the City’s “prior race and ethnicbased socio-economic discrimination had a long-term impact on racial diversity in the City” which is only 3.6% Black or African 1 For a sites inventory of the vacant Caltrans properties, see a map we created at https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1nt13dEdP-7ddQxN85ewo35xhQEKD-kc&ll=34.11207520783854%2C118.1570014&z=15 (last updated Dec. 7, 2012). 3 - 1655
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-184 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE American and only 18.5% Latinx. (Redline of Fourth Draft Housing Element at 39). Limiting multifamily development has made South Pasadena unaffordable, which contributes to the City’s lack of diversity. Zoning data from August 2021 revealed that approximately 75% of all residentially zoned land in South Pasadena is zoned exclusively for one or two dwelling units per parcel that do not allow for higher density housing such as apartments or condominiums (Id. at 104). Jurisdictions with the highest proportion of exclusively single-family zoning have the highest percentage of White residents and lower rates of diversity generally. (Id.).

During the last housing element cycle, only 10 affordable units were permitted out of 93 new units. The City has not tracked whether any affordable units have, in fact, been developed.

Despite these deeply concerning data, the City’s Fourth Draft Housing Element falls far short of what is needed.

Vacant Caltrans Houses. Under SB 381, the City will soon acquire 20 vacant houses currently owned by Caltrans.2 The houses are dilapidated from years of vacancy and lack of maintenance. They are in residentially-zoned areas. Under SB 381, the houses must become deed-restricted affordable housing for low- or moderate-income people for a period of 45 or 55 years, depending upon whether they become owner occupied housing units or rental units, respectively.

The vacant Caltrans houses represent a monumental opportunity for South Pasadena to expand affordable multifamily housing in South Pasadena, yet they are scarcely mentioned in the Housing Element. The City proposes Program 1b to “preserve and rehabilitate” the vacant houses and make them “available to moderate or lower income households.” This program was modified from the Third Draft, but in the wrong direction by committing to “preserve and rehabilitate” the houses.3 Care First and the Tenants Union implore the City to:
 Add the vacant Caltrans houses to the site inventory, including data regarding the lot size, year constructed, and historic designation (or not), and maximum potential number of affordable units that could be made available at each site for rental and/or ownership.4  Upzone residentially zoned areas in South Pasadena, including along the 710 corridor, to accommodate denser housing.
 Implement SB 9 and SB 10 at the vacant Caltrans sites by clearing a path for multifamily housing in the form of duplexes, triplexes, quads, and 10-unit buildings where possible.5 2 Following this first phase of acquisition, the City will likely have future opportunities to purchase more Caltrans homes if they are refused by current occupants. To prepare for this near future, the City should apply a similar framework as we propose here for the conversion of these properties into multi-unit affordable housing, while preventing displacement or meeting the housing needs of current tenants. The City should account for these plans in the Housing Element. 3 The significance of this change, though seemingly minor, is that the South Pasadena Preservation Foundation has been lobbying the City to bypass SB 381 and sell all 20 vacant Caltrans properties at fair market value to private buyers who would restore them as single-family houses. At a City Council meeting on December 7, 2022, the Chair of the City’s Cultural Heritage Commission told the City Council that he has petitioned to add all the Caltrans houses to the national historic registry. The City Council is capitulating to the demand that it “preserve and rehabilitate” the houses. The vacant houses are dilapidated; each will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to restore. In other words, these houses are teardowns but for the primacy of “historic preservation” in our town. We recognize that South Pasadena is home to beautiful architecture. But valuing historic preservation above all else is backward in the midst of a severe housing crisis. 4 Given that the City has included a number of non-vacant sites in its sites inventory, it follows that the City should add the tenant-occupied Caltrans houses to its sites inventory as well as potential sites for affordable housing development. 5 The Housing Element claims that South Pasadena is built out, and that “[i]t is too early to tell how many single-family property owners with parcels that are not within historic districts will opt to build two units or subdivide their lots to build more, but the City will review and approve applications under the new regulations in compliance with both State and local 3 - 1656
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-185  Develop auxiliary dwelling units as affordable rental units at as many of the houses as possible.

We ask the City to explore denser development with the larger houses, such as:
 535 Meridian St. (21,920 sq. ft., ~ 0.5 acres),
 530 Orange Grove Ave. (7500 sq. ft.) and 534 Orange Grove Ave. (10,010 sq. ft.) (adjacent parcels that represent 17,510 sq. ft., ~0.40 acres),
 1131 Columbia St. (16,998 sq. ft., ~ 0.39 acres),
 529 Prospect Ave. (15,419 sq. ft., ~0.35 acres),
 540 Prospect Ave. (11,505 sq. ft., ~0.26 acres),
 217 Fremont St. (13,310 sq. ft., ~0.31 acres)
 216 Fairview Ave. (13,240 sq. ft., ~0.30 acres),
 1110 Glendon Way (11,250 sq. ft,. ~0.26 acres).

Compare these lot sizes to the lot sizes in Table VI-49 (at 182), Representative Projects on Small Sites in Region. In Pasadena and Santa Monica, developments on comparable lots accommodate 15-53 units.

Conservatively assuming 20 units per parcel on the large lots listed above, the City could add 160 affordable rental units on these parcels alone.

The Fourth Draft Housing Element slates virtually all of the housing affordable to very low- and lowincome people in areas zoned as Business Park, Commercial, Community Facilities, Mission Street zoning areas save for one site in the Estate and Very Low Density Residential area (335 Monterey Rd.). (Table VI-50).

The Housing Element’s allocation of all low-income housing to transit corridors, outside of residential single-family neighborhoods, does not comply with principles of fair housing. Concentrating dense lowincome housing in certain limited areas is antithetical to affirmatively furthering fair housing. It undermines meaningful housing integration in this exclusionary town. The City should rezone singlefamily areas within the City, including along the 710 freeway corridor, to allow for more affordable housing. The vacant Caltrans houses could provide housing to low-income people within single-family home residential areas, and further the City’s goal of creating income-diverse neighborhoods.

SB 381 allows the City to sell seven (7) houses designated as historic “as-is” at market rate to private buyers, so long as it uses the funds to develop affordable housing at a 3:1 ratio. The City should not opt for this route. There is no scarcity of large estate houses in South Pasadena. There is an acute shortage of affordable housing. The City should develop multi-unit housing on the historic and nonhistoric Caltrans parcels alike.

If the City does sell the historic houses, the Housing Element should reflect its plans to commence construction of affordable units within three years, as required by statute. As evidenced in this draft of the Housing Element, the City is short on available sites for affordable housing development and has identified no potential affordable housing projects that will start or be completed within this short time frame. The Housing Element should identify where those units will go, how they will be financed, what type of housing it will build, etc.

No matter what, the City should not aim to “preserve and rehabilitate” these homes by pursuing historic designation of new properties. These were strategies used once to prevent the building of the 710 codes.” (143). But South Pasadena is in the driver’s seat regarding these 20 properties. It must start leading on implementing the state laws rather than passively wait to see what homeowners do. 3 - 1657
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-186 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE freeway, which is no longer at issue. Historic designation, starting with the commencement of nomination to historic and endangered listings, is antithetical to affirmatively furthering fair housing in South Pasadena. Historic designation of homes would make them unaffordable and environmentally unsustainable to maintain, cementing the city’s 20th century redlining policies into the future.

South Pasadena must complete another draft Housing Element that fully accounts for the vacant Caltrans houses it will buy in the near future, with concrete proposals about how to use these parcels to expand affordable housing. Since the City intends to purchase the vacant homes in the coming months, thus making these City owned properties, we expect to see these parcels listed on the Inventory Site list in the next draft.
100% Affordable Developments. Care First urges the city to actively recruit 100% affordable developments through non-profit low-income housing developers (i.e. bolster its commitment to Program 2.h).6 We recognize that the City has identified two City-owned sites (9 and 14) as candidates for 100% affordable. (229 & Table VI-50). We propose that the City Council double down on its efforts to identify two more viable locations for a total of four (4) for 100% affordable developments, excluding the Caltrans properties discussed above (which are all slated for affordable housing anyway by statute).

Additional sites should be for very low, low and moderate income households combined and provide housing opportunities for families.

Auxiliary Dwelling Units. The Housing Element relies heavily on ADUs to create affordable housing and to further fair housing. But the evidence is thin that encouraging ADUs will be anywhere close to sufficient.

South Pasadena has no system in place to ensure that the ADUs it permits actually become rental units, much less affordable ones. The code states that ADUs are not to be rented for a period less than 30 days, but the City currently has no enforcement mechanism in place to monitor the use of ADUs.7 It is just as likely that ADUs will become short term rentals listed on apps like airbnb, home offices, and guest houses for visitors. The existing ordinance does not go far enough to ensure homeowners who take advantage of a program designed to increase housing opportunities for those who need housing are using the dwelling as intended by the spirit of State law Even when ADUs are rented, the data emerging so far suggests that these units are not affordable. (176).

Finally, the whole endeavor relies on homeowners investing large sums of money to build these ADUs.

Rising inflation may dampen ADU construction.

We recommend that the City pilot an affordable ADU program, like Backyard Homes in Los Angeles.

Affordable ADU programs offer free or heavily discounted ADUs to homeowners in exchange for covenants to charge below-market rental rates. The Backyard Homes project, run through LA Mas, offers a few model ADU options and charge discounted construction and design fees in exchange for 6 The city’s previous position was that it would simply work within the San Gabriel Valley Housing Trust to build affordable housing in the region. Care First is encouraged to see that the third draft of the housing element takes a more proactive approach.
7 It is common for short term rental operators in our city to rent their units for two months at a time. While that complies with the letter of the code, the owners are benefiting financially via an unlicensed commercial short term rental at market rates.
3 - 1658
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-187 renting to a Section 8 voucher holder.8 Piloting an innovative model like that could spur ADU construction and support affordable housing and income-diverse neighborhoods.

II. Protections for renters
South Pasadena residents are more than 50% renters. Renters account for most of the demographic and economic diversity in South Pasadena. More than two-thirds of renter-households are rent-burdened, with 64% spending more than 30% of their household income for housing.

The Housing Element sets conservation of existing housing stock as a prominent goal, and contains some general provisions aimed at protecting renters. (220). But monitoring affordable units, offering technical assistance to landlords, and vague commitments to vouchers will not be enough to prevent dislocation and erosion of existing below-market rental units. (220-221). The City cannot accomplish a goal of preventing tenant displacement without enacting more tenant protections. Currently, South Pasadena relies almost entirely on Statewide protections set in AB1482. These have proven not to go far enough in protecting tenants from evictions or self evictions due to unbearable rent increases due to current inflation.

The landlords and homeowners have “rent control.” When they buy the apartments, the mortgage payment they pay is set for 30 years. It does not change even if inflation happens. Renters are demanding, not even the same stability, just something where their rent remains close to inflation, and the right to stay in their home if they pay their rent.

Landlords are making massive profits on rent. Most "mom and pop" landlords in South Pasadena purchased their apartments 20 to 30 years ago. Over the past year, 13 apartment buildings have sold in South Pasadena at an average of $1.6 million. Meanwhile, the average original purchase price of these 13 apartments was $256,000. Most “mom and pop” landlords are realizing massive profits off people struggling to stay in South Pasadena.

Renters love South Pasadena and want to make it their home just like homeowners. Tenants have a right to be a part of this long-term community and not have to worry if the housing crisis means someone richer will take their place.

No cause eviction protections. South Pasadena Tenants Union and Care First South Pasadena request an urgency ordinance to stem the tide of no-cause evictions expected in early 2023. Building on the progress advocates made with its just cause eviction ordinance in 2019 and its substantial renovations ordinance in 2021, we ask that the City update the law to require landlords effectuating no-cause evictions to provide relocation assistance that goes beyond AB1482.

The relocation amount should be equal to two (2) times the daily pro-rata portion of the tenant’s current rent. All units removed for owner occupancy must be held off the market for no less than three years.

If an owner evicts a tenant for no-cause because that unit will be taken off the market for owner occupancy, the owner must register the unit with the City as “owner occupied.” If the owner violates the ordinance and puts the unit back on the market within the three year period, a $50,000 fine will be levied. Funds collected from fines would support Housing department staff and enforcement staff. 8 Sam Lubell, Los Angeles Times, March 5, 2021, “Well-designed rentals that L.A. can afford. That’s the mission of the Backyard Homes Project.” https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2021-03-05/backyard-homes-project-adulos-angeles 3 - 1659
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-188 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE For evictions due to justified substantial renovations, the ordinance should include a first right of return for tenants who do not want to relocate out of South Pasadena. The owner should cover the rent or cost of housing during renovation up to what the tenant was paying for rent at the unit undergoing renovation. The tenant should be allowed to return to the unit at the same rate as was being charged prior to renovation. If temporary relocation due to verified substantial renovation exceeds 120 days, the landlord may terminate the tenancy with the additional payment of relocation assistance as follows: (1)

2.5 times the monthly Fair Market Rent (published by HUD) plus (2) a Moving Expense Allowance of $1,338 (if all occupants are adults) or $4033 (if any of the occupants are minors, a senior, or a person with a disability.

These protections would provide much more support to South Pasadena renters than the municipal code currently provides, and prevent displacement.

Rental assistance. The City currently allocates its CDBG funding to meals on wheels for seniors and sidewalk repairs. We demand that the City initiate a rental assistance program with some of the CDBG funding plus allocate yearly amounts from its General Fund to provide low- and moderate-income residents and prospective tenants to pay security deposits and rent. The program should also offer rental assistance to moderate-income rent-burdened residents. Additionally, the City should pay partial rent for Section 8 voucher holders to make up the difference between rent and the voucher. Because many Section 8 voucher holders in Los Angeles County are unable to secure housing in time and lose their vouchers as a result, the City should help ameliorate this problem by incentivizing and assisting landlords within the City to join the Section 8 program. At present, there is an abysmally low number of Section 8 voucher holders residing in the city (10 total according to the Housing Element). Referring residents to the County (224-25) will not help anyone get into affordable housing when there are no voucheraccepting units in South Pasadena.

Rent control. The City should adopt a rent stabilization ordinance. A local rent control ordinance would give low income and moderate income families, seniors, the disabled and students and workers a fighting chance to stay in South Pasadena. The bleeding out of affordable existing rentals is gradually affecting the diversity of our schools, local culture and economics. South Pasadena being almost an exclusively high rent community, means more transient households that are less likely to support our community health through civic participation and investment in our churches, nonprofits, and schools. With a lack of enthusiasm for building new affordable housing, the City needs do more to maintain the little existing affordable housing we have and protect all tenants from further displacement because of ever increasing rents and cost of living that does not mirror increases in incomes.

This would include, but not be limited to, provisions such as limiting rent increases to no more than 2- 6% based on inflation, with the ceiling set at 6%. The ordinance would maintain a floor of 2% allowable regardless of percentage of inflation. If inflation is 1%, rent can be raised 2% The ordinance would apply to all buildings as allowed under Costa Hawkins. If Costa Hawkins is repealed or modified to allow newer buildings, then rent control in South Pasadena automatically applies 20 years after certificate of occupancy.

The ordinance would require a lease term of one year (12 months), and 60-day notices for rent increases.

If a unit become available due to an eviction, rent on the unit can only be raised up to 20% of what the landlord was charging the previous tenant. The ordinance should also include the establishment of a local rent control board to establish yearly rent increases, monitor enforcement, and adjudicate tenant and landlord disputes, among other duties
3 - 1660
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-189 Funding improvements in exchange for affordability covenants. Policies 1.1-1.3 in the Housing Element are focused on improving energy efficiency and bringing older housing units up to code (218). There is a real risk, however, that requiring owners to make financial investments to update older units will result in rent increases, evictions for substantial renovation, and dislocation of low- and moderate income renters in South Pasadena.

We ask that the City provide funding to make needed improvements to make housing units habitable and safe for tenants contingent upon the landlords’ covenants not to evict tenants or raise rents excessively once the units are improved. The City has already identified potential funding sources for such improvements. (220).

Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback. We look forward to participating in the process as it proceeds.

Best regards,
South Pasadena Tenants Union & Care First South Pasadena • How addressed: The City has not made any determinations regarding the eventual dispensation of the Caltrans homes. Currently, the City is doing its due diligence regarding the condition of the homes and the possible financing mechanisms for rehabilitation of the properties. This analysis includes researching possibilities regarding increasing the number of units on Caltrans home sites, where feasible.

However, since the due diligence work is ongoing, it is not possible for the City to commit to any course of action regarding these homes at this time. It is the intention of the City to preserve these homes as affordable housing, not as historic resources. The Housing Element has been updated to more clearly make this point.

The Housing Element focuses on encouraging the development of new housing throughout South Pasadena. It is anticipated that sufficient new housing will improve the housing market for both renters and buyers looking to live in South Pasadena.

As shown in Program 2.l, the City has committed to issuing an RFP to affordable housing developers for one of the city-owned affordable housing sites no later than December 2024, and other RFPs in 2026 for the development of housing on these city-owned site.

Program 3.g commits the city to monitor the numberofnumber of ADUs built, and to survey ADU owners annually to collect data on rental rates to determine how many moderate- and lower-income units have been produced. ProgarmProgram 3.h commits the city to modify its zoning code or identify additional affordable housing sites if it is determined that the affordability of ADUs is less than expected in the Housing Element. This survey is scheduled to begin in 2023.

Comments on the 4th Draft Housing Element
Mark Gallatin (December 5, 2022)
I would respectfully like to suggest the following alternate language for that found on page 216 of the September 2022 Draft Housing Element:

Program 1.b. - Convert Caltrans Homes to Affordable Housing 3 - 1661
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-190 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE The City will leverage the 68 Caltrans surplus properties that have resulted from the State's cancellation of a proposed route to extend the 710 freeway through South Pasadena to generate capital to create new and rehabilitated, deed restricted, affordable housing units throughout the city.

The City has initiated a property sales program for the 710 freeway surplus properties. The City worked with Senator Portantino to pass SB 381 and the emergency rulemaking regulations were released on March 28, 2022. The City will have priority to purchase the surplus properties after the existing tenants. The City has been working with Caltrans to obtain property files and to schedule inspections in order to evaluate the surplus properties. SB 381 also requires that any proceeds from historic properties purchased by the City at Caltrans minimum (acquisition) price and then subsequently sold at Fair Market Value be used to generate affordable housing at a ratio of 3 to 1.

Funding has been secured for a feasibility study on the surplus properties that are available to be converted to permanent affordable housing.

Eight-year Objective: Complete a feasibility study and use the recommendations to support decisionmaking regarding possible strategies, including but not limited to, partnerships with non-profit affordable housing developers, to expand housing mobility opportunities for lower-income households and revitalize underused areas.

Funding Source: Measure H
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department/City Manager’s Office Timeframe: Conduct feasibility study in 2022; technical assistance and work with nonprofits at least annually throughout planning period. More specific timing pending State implementation processes. • How addressed: Program 1.b has been revised to substantially match the proposed language in this comment.

Josh Albrektson (December 19, 2022)
South Pasadena comments:

Downtown Rezoning
They are going to 70 DU/ACre and 60 ft/6 stories which is good. Of note, most buildings need 7 stories to get 70 DU/Acre.

They have a TON of bullshit sites that would never be developed. When Los Angeles did their analysis they got rid of these sites. It is one thing to claim 20% of developable sites will be developed at 100% capacity. It is quite another to claim 100% of a complete downtown would be developed when 30% of the downtown has zero chance of actual redevelopment.

I will be doing a twitter thread on it and there will be EXTENSIVE complaints if these bullshit sites are allowed to be counted. These include multiple official South Pasadena historical monuments, multiple condo complexes that are 15 years old, Historic theaters, Micheal Myers House from halloween, single family homes on 4,000 sq ft lots, 100 year restaurants, 10 foot alleys, historic banks, etc, etc.

Every condo complex built in the last 22 years, every historical monument, all buildings over 70 years old, and all single family homes under 0.2 acres should be removed from the calculations and only the 3 - 1662
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-191 buildings that ACTUALLY has a chance of development should be counted as 20% likely to be developed.

Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Their own study shows that 15% is not viable in South Pasadena. They also believe that they can make the 15% Very Low or 7.5% Very low and 7.5% Low.

I have attached an e-mail from the Mission Bell owner to the planning director on Sept 29th stating that his fully market rate project is not currently financially viable. If their fully market rate project is not viable then a 15% IHO is not viable.

South Pasadena should be required to change their IHO to 10% Low OR 5% Very Low and if housing is actually built using the IHO, then they can increase it if they find housing is actually being built, rather than go the other way around.

Especially since they intentionally killed all projects with their 10% Low and 10% Very low which is currently still in place.

Realistic Development Capacity
They are claiming that almost every non-vacant low income site will be built out at 95% Capacity, even though every one is on a primarily commercial street. You rejected Santa Monicas draft for this reason and you have cited multiple cities for this.

Here is Danville:
https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1602454496822497282?s=20&t=qjjmEng2_VMCWagab4n-dw [twitter.com]In May 2021, before Chris Holden called your director, you had a problem with South Pasadena claiming 80% RDC.

It is completely unacceptable that you guys are allowing South Pasadena to claim a ridiculously high number.

Processing Timelines
South Pasadena has had 4 mid level projects proposed from 2018 on. As of yet, none of them have building permits. It is absolutely unacceptable that you guys say that they can be by right at 20% affordability in order to avoid these processing times.

Santa Monica committed to making all projects that fit the zoning under one acre by right. And they have actually historically produced housing. South Pasadena has not.

I even sent you information about how they required a preliminary application a year before a real application and how they forced 815 fremont to undergo TWO complete redesigns.

In the Housing Element you have a letter from Victor Tran about how he submitted applications in March of this year that South Pasadena hasn’t even acknowledged they have been turned in. 3 - 1663
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-192 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE South Pasadena was one of two cities to receive a grant from SCAG to pay for objective design standards for all it’s multifamily housing. They need to be required that all projects with 10% low be by right.

Something needs to be explicitly written out in the Housing Element with actionable measures to ensure projects are processed. They also need to commit to following the law on the permit streamlining act which they currently regularly violate.

Low Income Sites
You will receive separate more in depth individual e-mails where Gustavo and Megan are CCed with these low income sites and the exact part of the law that are being ignored if these sites are approved.

I want to be sure that they will not be able to claim they didn’t know that the laws are intentionally being ignored when this comes up in the future.

I did a twitter thread, which I will also submit as a different comment:
https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1602435712846290944?s=20&t=wZi8cbwbgVUhWvxqQIHvA [twitter.com]
Site 2
Just to be clear, two of the biggest buildings JUST GOT LEASED:
https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1602449467042430976?s=20&t=wZi8cbwbgVUhWvxqQIHvA [twitter.com]And I just want to say it is fucking bullshit that Paul thinks I have to prove they are not short term leases. South Pasadena gets to lie about what is leased and that is okay, but when I show that buildings that make the site undevelopable are lease, I am required to get teh leases to show they are not short term leases…..

This is a copy of the exact part of AB 1397 talking about leases that you are choosing to ignore the actual legislation passed by the legislator and signed by the governor and not to apply to this site. https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1602450748377370624?s=20&t=wZi8cbwbgVUhWvxqQIHvA [twitter.com]
Site 8
There is no replacement site, if they had a replacement site they would have pay millions for the site, they would have to pay millions to build a new public works yard, then they would have to pay to tear down the building and remove the gas tanks, and then after the multi-millions spent, only then could it be offered for an affordable housing project.
3 - 1664
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-193 Before Chris Holden called your director you actually cared about this site. When I posted it on twitter a developer told me he estimated it would cost “Tens of Millions” just to replace the site and make it available for house.
https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1602444291711844353?s=20&t=wZi8cbwbgVUhWvxqQIHvA [twitter.com]Site 12:

The City doesn’t own most of the site. They own 0.19 and do not have plans to buy he rest. Also see Site 15 comment for sites under 0.5 Acre.

Site 13:

The City has a lease going through 2024 for this site. They actually turned down someone who wanted to build affordable housing on this site. They added a single family home that they do not own to get over 0.5 acre.

Site 14:

You ignored almost all the actual laws passed by considering this site.

Link to video:
https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1602446669571727360?s=20&t=wZi8cbwbgVUhWvxqQIHvA [twitter.com]Just to be clear, both homes are getting brand new foundations. They have hired an architect to renovate the homes (Harvest Architecture). This site is under 0.5 Acres. I sent you an email from the owner stating his plans were to renovated the home s(which is actually happening right now.)
This is a link to the part of AB 1397 which was passed by the legislature and signed by the governor that you are choosing to ignore by saying South Pasadena has substantial evidence the current use will be discontinued in the planning period.
https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1602438163506794498?s=20&t=wZi8cbwbgVUhWvxqQIHvA [twitter.com] This is a link to the part of AB 1397 which was passed by the legislature and signed by the governor that you are choosing to ignore by allowing a under 0.5 Acre site to be considered a low income housing site:
https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1602447693690720256?s=20&t=wZi8cbwbgVUhWvxqQIHvA [twitter.com]
Site 16:

Newly renovated grocery store with grand Re-Opening August 3rd. You can read my tweets on it here:
3 - 1665
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-194 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1602439866897211393?s=20&t=wZi8cbwbgVUhWvxqQIHvA [twitter.com]They first claimed it was the whole grocery store, then it was just the parking lot, then you guys told them how to lie to you so that the parking lot would be acceptable. Here is a link to the mayor spitballing ideas of how they could lie to you about the parking lot:
https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1602443223150256129?s=20&t=wZi8cbwbgVUhWvxqQIHvA [twitter.com]They got a letter from the owner in the Housing Element which I am sure they wrote what SoPas asked them to write.

Site 17:

I recently received all e-mails from South Pasadena and the site owner. In the e-mails the owner is asked if they are considering housing on the site and he says “I think we are good.” When asked if they want to still be on the Housing Element site list, he replies “I guess” Along with the brand new lease signed this year this is pretty damn good evidence that the owner has no interest in developing housing in the planning period.

Please refer to the above link to the law talking about how leases should be considered.

Programs:

South Pasadena needs specific objective circuit breakers in their Housing Element programs. As mentioned in the call, you can pay a consultant to produce a study proving the highest inclusionary housing ordinance in the state is viable even when it is blatantly not, and that is exactly what South Pasadena did. They cannot be trusted to evaluate their sites in 2024, update the inclusionary housing ordinance, look into reducing parking and open space requirements, or do a realistic rezone if the ballot measure fails. These things need to be spelled out in this housing element so they are enforceable.
--
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
• How addressed: The Housing Element has been substantially revised to address these comments, including increasing the height limit, removing identified sites, and revising the analysis of the DTSP sites to account for additional constraints such as historic designations.

Josh Albrektson (January 2, 2023)
This e-mail is about a South Pasadena low income site on their housing element, and the exact laws that Paul McDougall and Megan Kirkeby are ignoring in allowing South Pasadena to claim this site as 3 - 1666
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-195 a possible low income site on their Housing Element. I am sending this to you so you cannot claim you did not know this was happening at HCD in the future.

Site 14 is two single family homes. Paul McDougall has an e-mail that the owner sent to the city in 2020 stating he was planning on flipping the homes and selling them.

That renovation is happening right now and Paul McDougall KNOWS that the homes are being renovated. They are currently getting brand new foundations by Foundation Repair LA (https://foundationrepairla.com/ [foundationrepairla.com]). These are the same people who repaired my foundation.

They also have an architect, Harvest Architecture based in South Pasadena that are designing the interiors. https://www.harvestarchitecture.com/
[harvestarchitecture.com]Here is a video where you can see the signs for both of these companies and one of the single family homes getting the foundation as it is being filmed. https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1602446669571727360?s=20&t=wZi8cbwbgVUhWvxqQIHvA [twitter.com] Here is the part of AB 1397 that Paul McDougall is choosing to not enforce:
(g) (1) For sites described in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), the city or county shall specify the additional development potential for each site within the planning period and shall provide an explanation of the methodology used to determine the development potential. The methodology shall consider factors including the extent to which existing uses may constitute an impediment to additional residential development, the city’s or county’s past experience with converting existing uses to higher density residential development, the current market demand for the existing use, an analysis of any existing leases or other contracts that would perpetuate the existing use or prevent redevelopment of the site for additional residential development, development trends, market conditions, and regulatory or other incentives or standards to encourage additional residential development on these sites.

These single family homes are literally being renovated to be BETTER single family homes and Paul McDougall knows this and doesn’t care.

But not only that, these sites are below 0.5 Acre. THIS IS SPECIFICALLY OUTLAWED BY AB 1397.

Again, citing the law passed by the legislators and sign by the governor:
(A) A site smaller than half an acre shall not be deemed adequate to accommodate lower income housing need unless the locality can demonstrate that sites of equivalent size were successfully developed during the prior planning period for an equivalent number of lower income housing units as projected for the site or unless the locality provides other evidence to the department that the site is adequate to accommodate lower income housing.

Sites 12 (0.19 acre owned by city) and Site 13 (0.42 owned by the city) Both fall under this category. --
3 - 1667
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-196 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
• How addressed: Site 14 has been removed from the Housing Element. Site 12 is 0.56 acres.

Josh Albrektson (January 2, 2023)
This is one of a few e-mails you will be getting where I am going to cite a “low income site” that South Pasadena is claiming could be turned into low income housing this cycle and the exact law that specifically outlaws these sites.

Every one of these sites Paul McDougall said was okay in our November 15th meeting.

I just want to be sure that Jason and Gustavo cannot say in the future that they did not know that Paul McDougal and Megan Kirkeby are intentionally not following the laws passed by the legislator and signed by the governor.

I will be sharing these e-mails with every legislator if South Pasadena is allowed to claim these sites, along with the hundred other examples of illegal low income sites that I personally e-mail Paul McDougall about and he approved.

I get that Chris Holden had a personal and urgent phone call with Gustavo to discuss the South Pasadena Housing Element, but that does not mean that HCD should decide not to enforce the laws that are the actual laws.

Site two is a businesspark in South Pasadena. They literally just leases two new businesses this year and these two businesses occupy the entire buildings for two of the 6 buildings.

Check out the leasing brochure. This is high quality offices:
https://images1.loopnet.com/d2/NjuUcEIzCBdbskuj3g5Mj_3zqct3H2jyorx1Mu5ckGw/149161Pasa denaSouthPasadenaBrochure.pdf [images1.loopnet.com]
3 - 1668
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-197 This is from the summary of AB 1397:

This bill would require the methodology to consider, among other things, the city’s or county’s past experience with converting existing uses to higher density residential development, the current demand for the existing use, and an analysis of existing leases or other contracts that would perpetuate the existing use or prevent redevelopment, as specified.

And here is the actual text from the law:
(g) (1) For sites described in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), the city or county shall specify the additional development potential for each site within the planning period and shall provide an explanation of the methodology used to determine the development potential. The methodology shall consider factors including the extent to which existing uses may constitute an impediment to additional residential development, the city’s or county’s past experience with converting existing uses to higher density residential development, the current market demand for the existing use, an analysis of any existing leases or other contracts that would perpetuate the existing use or prevent redevelopment of the site for additional residential development, development trends, market conditions, and regulatory or other incentives or standards to encourage additional residential development on these sites.

Paul McDougall knows these buildings were JUST leased, and he doesn’t care. When I told him again that they were leased this year, he asked me to prove they were not month to month leases. 3 - 1669
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-198 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE The job of HCD is to enforce Housing Laws, and Paul McDougall should not be allowed to just ignore the laws at his will, and that is currently what is happening under Gustavo's leadership. --
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
 How addressed: The Housing Element has been revised to increase the allowable density for Site 2 to further encourage the redevelopment of the site. Furthermore, development standards for this site, as well as all mixed-use parcels, will be revised to encourage redevelopment.

Josh Albrektson (January 2, 2023)
This e-mail is about a South Pasadena low income site on their housing element, and the exact laws that Paul McDougall and Megan Kirkeby are ignoring in allowing South Pasadena to claim this site as a possible low income site on their Housing Element. I am sending this to you so you cannot claim you did not know this was happening at HCD in the future. Site 8 is the Public Works yard for South Pasadena. You can see a video of the yard in this tweet:
https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1602444291711844353?s=20&t=U_d2X2e5GgNUrylao7D03w [twitter.com]Let me be clear about what South Pasadena is claiming for this site. Sometime in the next 7 years, they will find a replacement site. They do not have any open land right now for this replacement site, but they will find one somewhere. They will then build a brand new public works yard on this replacement site. They will then tear down the old public works yard. They will then remove the gas tank that has been there for decades. They will then remediate any toxins in the soil from this being a public works yard for 40 years.

We are talking about tens of millions of dollars spent before this site could even be considered for low income housing. This site is the kind of bullshit sites that will NEVER be housing but cities like to claim it so they don’t have to zone for housing somewhere else.

In the last letter from Paul McDougall, HCD actually explains how the city should lie to HCD in a manner they would be willing to accept.
“For Site 8 (Public Works Yard), the element should discuss the impacts of the underground gasoline tank and filing station and soil contamination on the timing and cost of development in the planning period.”
Here is the part of AB 1397 that Paul McDougall is choosing to not enforce:
(g) (1) For sites described in paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), the city or county shall specify the additional development potential for each site within the planning period and shall provide an explanation of the methodology used to determine the development potential. The methodology shall consider factors including the extent to which existing uses may constitute an impediment to additional residential development, the city’s or county’s past experience with converting existing uses to higher density residential development, the current market demand for the existing use, an analysis 3 - 1670
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-199 of any existing leases or other contracts that would perpetuate the existing use or prevent redevelopment of the site for additional residential development, development trends, market conditions, and regulatory or other incentives or standards to encourage additional residential development on these sites.
--
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
 How addressed: The Housing Element has been revised to further describe where the existing uses of Site 8 will be relocated and to address the potential environmental constraints on the site.

Josh Albrektson (January 9, 2023)
I have come across this information from a respected individual. They believe that the density that can be built at 45 feet is about 40 to 44 DU/Acre. The is under 1 DU/Acre per ft of height.

If a City such as South Pasadena wants to claim 70 DU/Acre, they need to have a height limit of at least 75 ft.
--
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
 How addressed: The Housing Element has been revised to increase the height limit of the mixed-use zones.

Josh Albrektson (January 12, 2023)
Please consider this thread on the downtown rezoning and the extensive number of buildings that could NEVER be developed included in their calculations. https://twitter.com/JalbyMD/status/1613662763473342465?s=20&t=YWu-t552VhhJiPuR8JBnXA [twitter.com]
--
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
3 - 1671
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-200 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE  How addressed: The analysis of the DTSP area has been extensively revised to address this comment. Revisions include removal of many of the identified parcels from the analysis, and additional considerations regarding the probability of redevelopment of parcels within the DTSP area.

Josh Albrektson (January 31, 2023)
Please consider the following separate comments:

1. Glendon and Meridian from Monterey to the 110 freeway should be included in the Downtown Specific plan and significantly upzoned, especially since they are touching the train station.

2. Monterey Road from Pasadena Ave Southwest should be significantly upzoned. This abuts a mountain, and has very close access to parks and an elementary school and has a lot of run down single family homes that can be upzoned.

3. I like the idea of SB 10 around Fair Oaks and Huntington

4. Consider upzoning Fremont Ave from Monterey to the 110 freeway.

You are actually further away from compliance than you think. HCD has not certified a Housing Element that doesn't have a significant buffer (They recommend 15%) and I doubt you will be the first.
--
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
 How addressed: The Housing Element has been revised to increase the zoning capacity in all of the areas identified in this comment.

Josh Albrektson (February 1, 2023)
I just read through the staff report for tonight's meeting. After reading through it, I expect that your next draft will also be rejected.

There are two major issues.

In the 4th draft for low income units you were required to have 1155 and you showed 1178 for 23 total excess. That is a 2% buffer. Some of the sites you have will not be allowed, so once you remove those sites you will actually be under the required amount.

To date HCD has not allowed a Housing Element to be accepted without a significant buffer. Most accepted Housing Elements have a minimum buffer of 10% or greater. In their memo on the bottom of page 22 they state you should have a 15 to 30% buffer. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/housing-elementmemos/docs/sites_inventory_memo_final06102020.pdf I sent a separate e-mail noting the 4 places I would upzone. If you guys do choose to try to submit another Housing Element without a buffer it will be the first issue I raise with them. 3 - 1672
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-201 The second problem is that you actually need to create programs to affirmatively further fair housing (part 3 in the letter). South Pasadena has yet to actually propose an AFFH program and what is described in the staff report definitely would not be good enough.

San Marino and Santa Monica both legalized 2 to 4 plexes for their AFFH program. If you guys don't want to do that, you can probably get by implementing rent control and stating that allows people to stay in their homes.

And I hope after having been told many many many times that they need to put firm data and specific information in the Housing Element, your staff will realize they need to:

1. Spell out exactly what development standards will be relaxed in what manner

2. Specify what fee reductions and streamlining will be implemented

3. The exact IHO percentage

4. The number of units the IHO applies to

5. The hard trigger that would show if the IHO is effective or not with the change that will be made if the trigger is not met

6. If the city will remove the height limit completely or change the height limit to 84 ft and 7 stories One thing to note about the height limit. As it stands SB 828 will give South Pasadena another 2,067 units in 2030. If you do a limited height restriction removal, you will have significant problems at that time. And I doubt HCD would give you 2 years to put it on the ballot since you will end up with plenty of warning in the years leading up to it.

Also note that because you are including a lot of historic properties in your Housing Element (Specifically downtown), and your ability to stop a development on these properties is going to be very limited. Anybody who wants to buy the Fair Oaks pharmacy or Rialto Theater and tear it down for apartments can.

I strongly suggest you guys consider what buildings you want off limits, remove them, and upzone a different part of the city you do not care as much about. This could probably even be done after you have a compliant Housing Element.
--
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
 How addressed: The Housing Element has been revised to increase the zoning capacity to account for a 15% buffer for lower income units and more than a 30% buffer across all income categories.

Josh Albrektson (February 6, 2023)
I cannot make the meeting do that previous commitments. I want to put this comment in the public record. I support all of the zoning changes and programs mentioned on the February 1 city Council meeting by city Council and staff with one exception. I think great progress is being made.

I do believe the historic downtown properties should be completely removed from the zoning so that they cannot be re-developed. I will have a much more extensive letter in support of the housing element once I get back.
3 - 1673
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-202 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE It would be great if this meeting was recorded and published.

Also, the staff does not need to respond to my comments on the previous draft due to the fact, I think there will be significant changes on the draft. Please refer to this paragraph and not waste any time responding to previous comments.
 How addressed: The zoning changes and programs mentioned during the February 1st City Council meeting have largely been implemented in the Housing Element, as refined during the City Council meetings held on February 9th and 15th.

Josh Albrektson (February 6, 2023)
Just to be specific.

Please withdraw all comments from me that were received after the last housing element was published. If they need to be included in the record please do not feel to respond and refer to this comment saying SoPas does not need to respond.
 How addressed: The previous comments are included in this Appendix with brief responses.

Josh Albrektson (February 13, 2023)
I got back from my cruise and listened to the Thursday meeting. I think you guys are doing a great job and I'll do whatever I can to help you get compliance with the zoning.

So this is what I have for my letter that would give you substantial evidence. Once you guys finish your plans, I will add onto it.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WJf1YEmjngsUVDaCq3lcy9SIMGxE3q80K6tCtWeBPU/edit?usp=sharing I fully believe that with either citywide 4 plexes with right of return OR Transit 4 Plexes with right of return and rent control, you will pass AFFH. I have talked to Anne and you heard from John. If you guys include a program for rent control, you will have a strong letter from the SPTU asking HCD to find you in compliance.

With my letter and SPTU's, I think you should get compliance. --
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
 How addressed: The Housing Element has been revised to allow for four-plexes citywide, expect in high fire hazard areas, and to include a right to return policy (Program 6.b.).

Josh Albrektson (February 13, 2023)
So I talked to Matt Gelfand (CCed on email) and told him about my idea for a grocery overlay zone.

It would be to give Ralphs and Vons the same zoning that Pavilions requested, but since they are much less likely than Pavilions to develop in the planning period, only counting 25% realistic development capacity of the maximal density.

So for Vons it would be 3.96 Acre x 140 DU/Acre x 0.25 chance of development for 139 units 3 - 1674
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-203 Ralphs would be 3.09 acre x 140 DU/acre x 0.25 chance of development for 108 units.

Matt is okay with removing those sites from the banned sites for this kind of zoning and calculation.

It is part of your agreement, not stipulation, so it would just require you guys signing a piece of paper.

I also don't think HCD would have a problem with it since the calculation is just like what they have on the top of Page 22 and I will be including it in my letter providing you with substantial compliance. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/housing-elementmemos/docs/sites_inventory_memo_final06102020.pdf --
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
 How addressed: The Housing Element has been revised to increase the allowable density for these parcels, along with all of the parcels adjacent to Fair Oaks Ave., to 110 du/ac.

Alan Ehrlich (February 14, 2023)
Hi Angelica, Armine,
Like you and many others, I would like to see the city submit a HE that can be accepted by HCD with this next go. My general sense from the questions and comments of the special council meeting last week is that members of the council finally seem to 'get it" and are (mostly) ready to accept the additional changes which will be necessary in So Pas's 5th draft submittal.

With that it mind, and in spite of pushback I expect you would receive from certain members of the community, please accept these suggestions for inclusion in this next draft. Like you, I believe we would all like to see this phase of the HE to be done so we can get on to the next part of our lives. 1) Remove the 45 year CHC review from the planning code. According to Mark Gallatin, state law permits the same review and in the 6 instances where a property was reviewed during Mark's term on CHC, all have been approved. This is a gimme.' Effectively, the city is giving up nothing, but to HCD it will appear the city is removing a constraint. CHC will squawk, but by Mark''s own statements, there is no there there.
2) Mark Gallatin corrected a public comment I made about SB 381 requiring 3 housing units for each CT property sold. Mark clarified that this only applies to the 7 historic properties of the 67 lots within our city. In my comment I had said that if the city committed to 3 AFFH for all properties, that would provide a minimum of 60 units, giving the HE the cushion needed for this section. HCD is obviously very aware of the CalTrans properties and the potential they represent to meeting the city's AFFH and RHNA targets. Instead of continuing to battle HCD on this point, allow me to suggest that the 5th draft commits to adding a minimum 3 AFFH for every CT property, regardless of whether the city redevelops the site, partners with an HRE, or sells the site to a private buyer. If the requirement exists for the 7 historic properties, it is not a stretch to apply the same condition to the 20 non-historic properties as well. It does not prevent the city from acquiring and selling the 20 properties, it just provides HCD an assurance that the sale of public land will be used for public housing purposes. Standardizing the rule, respectfully, this is also a gimme, a no-brainer. 3) As a practical matter for the elected members of the city council (and feel free to share this with them), this is perhaps the optimal time to go for broke and submit the plan that HCD will approve. 2022 elections are over, so anything submitted/approved now would not affect Michael or Janet in 3 - 1675
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-204 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE 2026 and we are stilll far enough from the 2024 elections for it to concern Jon, Evelyn or Jack. On the other hand, if the city continues to fight HCD by submitting bad HEs, there will no doubt be several builder remedy projects filed before 20024 and the voters will remember that when they had the chance, Jon, Evelyn and Jack did nothing and will be held to blame. 4) One final recommendaion, please add a slide to the presentation showing the number, names and $$$ of grants available to provide, restore and rehabilitate AFFH. HCD, SCANPH and SCAG send NOFA's out regularly announcing new programs, many of which I have forwarded to you Given the estimated costs of what it will take to rehabilitate the CT homes, it is only appropriate that the council and members of the community know how many hundreds of millions of dollars the city is leaving on the table by not having an approved HE and not being eligible to apply. It would be the understatement of the year to say the city has neither the funds, staffing or expertise to manage any of the CT properties.

As I've suggested to both of you before, I don't know what the perfect plan is, or even if one exists, but I do know, and you know, that there are a variety of options out there that could work. Its time to get off the crazy train. If the city needs to be engaged with lawsuits over the HE, I'd rather it against the neanderthals holding the city back than CA Homeowners and Chris Suttons of the world. Let the Urquharts, Shanes, Takedas, Carlsons, Gallatins, Nuckols and thier ilk put their money at risk fighting state mandates, rather than making the rest of the city's taxpayers assume the cost of their NIMBYism.

I'm looking forward to seeing you both at tomorrows council meetings. I do not have Grant's email address, otherwise I would have included him as well.
best, Alan
"Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants."
- Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis
-
"Openness in government is essential to the functioning of a democracy." International Federation of Professional & Technical Engineers, Local 21 v. Superior Court California Supreme Court, 42 Cal.4th 319 (2007)
 How addressed: The Housing Element has been revised to further address the Caltrans homes and to greatly increase the zoning capacity throughout the city.

Care First (February 15, 2023)
Re: Special Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission, February 15, 2023
Comment, Agenda Item No. 2, Receive Housing Element Presentation and Provide Direction on 5th Draft
Dear Mayor, City Councilmembers, Planning Commissioners:

Care First South Pasadena is pleased to submit the following comments on the fifth draft of the City of South Pasadena’s Housing Element. At this critical juncture where the city stands to lose local control over the development of the city, we strongly recommend the city to adopt the following policies to affirmatively further fair housing, encourage the development of more affordable housing in an equitable manner, and preserve existing affordable housing. 3 - 1676
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-205 Care First continues to demand:
 A commitment to use the 20 vacant Caltrans house sites, which the City will purchase in the coming months, to develop on site a blend of duplexes, triplexes, quads, and denser multi-unit buildings for affordable ownership and rental opportunities (A number of the vacant houses are 0.25-0.50 acres and could accommodate redevelopment with even more housing units.);  A pilot affordable ADU program, like the Backyard Homes project in Northeast Los Angeles (https://www.mas.la/affordable-adus); and
 Recruitment of 100% affordable developments through non-profit low-income housing, developers for at least four (4) clearly identified and viable locations for 100% affordable developments, plus spelling out specific financial and regulatory incentives the city could offer such developers.

The City should also adopt the following policies as ordinances with accompanying budget allocations as needed to implement the programs, within six (6) months from the date the Housing Element is adopted:
 Rent stabilization with an 8 percent annual cap for all apartment complexes that have ten or more units;
 Provide tenants the right of return in the event they must vacate their rental units to accommodate substantial renovation or redevelopment; and  Increase relocation assistance for tenants subject to no-cause evictions. o Landlords would be required to pay households at or below 140% of median income for Los Angeles County a relocation allowance equal to two (2) months fair market rent as established by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
o In addition to the relocation allowance, a landlord must also pay the tenant a moving expense allowance in the amount of $1,120 for adult households or $3,364 for households with dependents, disabled or senior members.  Offer financial assistance to low- and moderate-income tenants and prospective tenants, including Section 8 voucher holders, for security deposits and rent, by committing to evaluate the city’s available funds during each budget cycle and to dedicate a reasonable amount to achieve this goal; Fund improvements at below-market rental units in exchange for landlords’ covenants not to evict existing tenants or raise rents excessively.

We incorporate the details of these tenant protections from the South Pasadena Tenants Union comment, dated February 14, 2023.

Additionally, to further the goals of fair housing, the City should”  Eliminate historic preservation policies and practices—including in ordinances, the Historic Preservation Element, and duties entrusted to the Cultural Heritage Commission—that impede development of affordable housing in the city, especially those impacting the city’s transit corridors and Caltrans property sites;
 Review all properties that have been nominated for or placed on the city’s Inventory of Historic Resources and/or designated as historic under the city’s historic preservation policies;  Codify the city’s Sundown Town Resolution by adopting an ordinance that prohibits the use of historic preservation policies and practices that would cause discrimination or disproportionate economic harm on the basis of race, ancestry, national origin, color, religion, sex, or sexual orientation;
3 - 1677
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-206 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE  Upzone currently zoned R-1 (single-family only) to R-4 (allowing for fourplexes) in the city’s transit corridors, as identified in previous presentations delivered by the city this month;  Implement Senate Bill 9 to encourage lot subdivisions and higher density in single-family neighborhoods rather than impede its use.

Best regards,
Care First South Pasadena
 How addressed: The Housing Element has been revised to address this comment by: 1) revising the program related to the surplus Caltrans homes and committing the City to add additional units to these properties as ADUs or Missing Middle housing where feasible; 2) adding a new goal and programs related to tenant protections, including a rental registry, right to return, relocation assistance, and rent stabilization; and, 3) committing the City to allow for Missing Middle housing citywide, except for in high fire hazard areas.

Comments on the 5th Public Review Draft Housing Element South Pasadena Preservation Foundation (March 3, 2023)
Let it be stipulated and acknowledged at the outset that the process for the acquisition and disposition of Caltrans surplus properties in the City of South Pasadena created as a result of that agency’s decision not to build a northerly extension of State Route 710 through the city is governed by myriad state laws and regulations, including but not limited to, SB 381 (2021). The purpose of providing the following alternative language for Program 1.b. of the Housing Element is not to circumvent or ignore the requirements of SB 381, an amendment to the Roberti Law, but rather to seek to prevent some very real externalities that perhaps were not contemplated when the legislation was drafted and signed into law, but which nevertheless will cause implementation of the letter of that law to undermine whatever well-intentioned spirit brought it into existence in the first place. These externalities include the inflation of rehabilitation costs created by requirements placed on the City or other Housing Related Entities that private individuals and families are not subject to, making acquisition and rehabilitation by those entities financially unfeasible. Another example of an unintended consequence of the existing law would be the concentration of affordable housing in one or two neighborhoods of the city where the surplus properties are located, rather than a more equitable and dispersed concentration throughout all parts of the city. The South Pasadena Preservation Foundation wishes to see the City promote creation of new affordable housing with as few constraints as possible, so that it has the flexibility to respond creatively and nimbly to a dynamic housing market and evolving community needs.

Program 1.b - Maximize the proceeds from the sale of the Caltrans surplus properties to create new affordable housing throughout the city
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) currently owns 68 surplus properties that have resulted from the State's cancellation of a proposed route to extend the 710 freeway through South Pasadena. The City will leverage the 20 unoccupied Caltrans surplus properties, two vacant lots and those of the remaining 46 occupied Caltrans surplus properties that are not purchased by former or existing tenants and use the proceeds from the sales of such properties to generate capital to create new, deed restricted affordable housing units throughout the city, whether on city-owned land, or on privately owned property. These proceeds can serve as a "force multiplier", by unlocking the combined equity of those properties and leveraging it to maximize funding for affordable housing creation and housing element implementation. Several alternatives exist within State law and Caltrans regulations for the City to partner with Caltrans to maximize the proceeds from the sales of the 3 - 1678
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-207 Caltrans properties and place them directly into a restricted account (i.e. the SR 710 Rehabilitation Account) dedicated solely for the use of the City of South Pasadena to create affordable housing.

Some other alternatives, after further study, may be financially infeasible so in order to promote affordable housing in South Pasadena all alternatives, including that proposed here, must be considered.

Eight-year Objective: To facilitate the acquisition and disposition of the maximum number of Caltrans surplus properties to individuals and families and to leverage the proceeds from the sale of these properties to generate capital for the creation of deed-restricted affordable housing units throughout the city to expand housing mobility opportunities for lower-income households and revitalize underutilized areas.

Funding Source: SR 710 Rehabilitation Account
Responsible Agency: Community Development Department/City Manager’s Office Timeframe: Begin implementation of sales program in 2023 and at least annually throughout the planning period until disposition of all surplus properties is complete.  How addressed: The City Council has made no determination regarding the purchase of any of the surplus Caltrans properties or the specific use of any of the properties. The City is still analyzing the financial feasibility of purchasing the properties and the various options for converting them to affordable housing. The City cannot commit to a specific course of action for the surplus Caltrans properties until that analysis is complete. Furthermore, selling all of the surplus Caltrans homes at market rates to generate capital for the creation of deed-restricted affordable housing elsewhere in the city is not an allowable action under SB 381. Staff will explore possible solutions.

Josh Albrektson (March 3, 2023)
Love the Housing Element and I am pretty sure it will be accepted.

I think you guys accidentally didn't include that the IHO would not apply to buildings under 10 units.

I would add that.

On the South side of Monterey Road you have Victor Trans Site 3. He has mentioned before that he would like to put about 50 units on the site. I would consider making that half of the road Residential High Density zoning instead of Residential Medium Density. You could also then count Site 3 as 1.26 acres*45 units/acre rather than the 8 above mod units you are counting now. I'm not gonna complain about this but he is going to reach out to you.

The right of return program is also not quite right but that is something that could be worked on later.

Here is a LA Times article on it.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/livable-city/la-ol-gaisford-right-to-remain-gentrification20180212-story.html I've read the rest of it and I could not find anything else missing. --
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
3 - 1679
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-208 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE  How addressed: The Housing Element has been revised to include an exemption to the IHO for developments under 10 units. Site 3 is included in the Ostrich Farm mixed-use area as shown in Figure A-3.b (Page A1-15). This area will allow for densities of up to 70 du/ac. While this site could yield significantly more units once rezoned, the City currently has an application in for this site which indicates that the property owner intends to construction eight (8) above-moderate income units on the site. Therefore, the Housing Element reflects the current development application submitted by the property owner. The property owner will have the option to submit a new development application for a greater number of units once the site has been rezoned. If the property owner chooses to do that in the future, it will increase the City’s housing buffer beyond what is included in the Housing Element. Proposed tenant protection programs will be further researched and refined.

Victor Tang (March 5, 2023)
Hi Angelica,
This is Victor Tang, the developer for 181, 185, 187 Monterey Road with 1.25ac land and site #3 in city’s site inventory. Our site is vacant and ready for development.

In the special joint meeting on 2/15/2023, Housing Element consultant Mr. Grant Henninger had proposed an Extended Ostrich Farm Zone with 70u/ac density that included Monterey Road. It had the support of planning commission members as Monterey road was wide with all the utilities available. However this zone was not implemented in the latest Housing Element Draft.

Although we have submitted a development plan for 8 market rate units, we are interested in a new development for 50-80 units including low income housing. Current Housing Element’s density for our site is 30u/ac. We need a higher density (probably 50u/ac) for a new development to be financially feasible. If the city can give our site a higher density, we can withdraw existing 8-unit plan and the city can count additional RHNA from our site.

Best regards,
Victor Tang,
 How addressed: Site 3 is included in the Ostrich Farm mixed-use area as shown in Figure A3.b (Page A1-15). This area will allow for densities of up to 70 du/ac. While this site could yield significantly more units once rezoned, the City currently has an application in for this site which indicates that the property owner intends to construction eight (8) above-moderate income units on the site. Therefore, the Housing Element reflects the current development application submitted by the property owner. The property owner will have the option to submit a new development application for a greater number of units once the site has been rezoned. If the property owner chooses to do that in the future, it will increase the City’s housing buffer beyond what is included in the Housing Element.

John Lawrence (March 6, 2023)
The proposal to allow mult-unit housing anywhere in South Pasadena is a terrible proposal that would ultimately destroy the character, uniqueness and quality of life in South Pasadena. I understand there are concessions that are going to have to be made to the state housing plan but to simply say, “well OK, we will abdicate all control, all ability to self-manage our own destiny is irresponsible and destructive.
3 - 1680
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-209 Who supports it his dystopian vision of South Pasadena? I’d really like to know. I suspect it is a purely political position being pushed by people who have no history, no investment, emotional or otherwise, and life connection at all to the city. Must be nice to look in from outside and advocate destruction when it doesn’t affect you.
 How addressed: The comment misstates what is being proposed as there is not a proposal to allow “multi-unit housing anywhere” in the city. The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the high-quality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023.

Samuel Lin (March 6, 2023)
Dear whomever it may concern:

My wife has grown up in South Pasadena since she was a young little girl and I have since just moved been a resident for about 5 years. South Pasadena has always been known to be as a quaint small town everyone knows each other.

Until recently, there's been a lot of traffic, kids have been stuffed in schools. Even our own small elementary school in Marengo has a waiting list for the very same people who would live on the same street.

This proposal is not only going to bring in more congestion and traffic, it is going to change the very nature of our small city. We don't have the capacity to fit medium density because we eliminated the 710 freeway, we have a lot of traffic on Fremont. Also, you're going to turn our small beautiful city in a dense packed traffic, terrible place. I strongly urge you to reconsider the elimination of single family zoning, we do not need dense housing in this city, we cannot handle the traffic and we don't have the resources.
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies and programs in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements. The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the high-quality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023.

Ed Donnelly (March 6, 2023)
City Planning staff,
It has come to my attention that the latest draft of the Housing Element includes the elimination of zoning for single family homes citywide as well as a proposed building height limit increase to seven stories.

This will significantly impact the very things that define living in South Pasadena. Over the past several years I have worked side by side with fellow residents to secure city revenue through the UUT and the increased local sales tax. We have worked diligently to secure and sustain funding for our schools and our public library. Those campaigns, while a tremendous amount of work, were ultimately personally rewarding for our volunteers because what we were truly campaigning for was sustaining our way of life here in South Pas. And voters here in 91030 overwhelmingly agreed with us 3 - 1681
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-210 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE in every case. This is much the same as the generation before us fought tooth and nail to prevent the 710 freeway from tearing the town asunder. And despite all of this an existential threat now looms unnecessarily.

I fully support responsible development and the building of affordable housing here in South Pasadena. There are sensible options. In addition, I completely understand the demands of the HCD and the consequences of not complying with them as we are already seeing with the project on the Shaker’s property. Embracing strategies that will immensely impact our police and fire departments, infrastructure and schools while drastically reducing tax revenue due to diminished property values isn’t just simply foolish, it’s irresponsible governance.

I urge you to find another way to realistically meet the RHNA numbers without destroying the fabric of our way of life here and dooming the city to be just another banal concrete wasteland on the edge of Los Angeles.

Ed Donnelly
1935 Edgewood Dr.

SOUTH PASADENA
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies and programs in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements. The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the high-quality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023.

Delaine W. Shane (March 7, 2023)
Dear Community Development Department Staff and Management:

The fifth version of the Housing Element is insufficient. Furthermore, it does not adequately address legitimate questions and concerns that I brought up in my earlier comments on the previous versions.

As a professional environmental planner with decades of experience, I know when I’ve been “blown off.” So, my original comments stand and are part of today’s comments to you. My intent is for you to reconsider some of the policies and make them more nuance or simply more limited in your approach and understand the underlying ramifications of them including financial burdens that will be placed on our city.

This whole process has been messed up. The housing element should have been part of the general/specific plan update. Now, it is not. When the CEQA process (environmental review) is finally undertaken for the plans, it’s very essence has been destroyed. Since the housing element will be approved, it can not be modified during the general/specific plan environmental analysis. Even if the housing element causes significant environmental impacts as determined in the general/specific plans EIR, there is little recourse of modifying the housing element to lessen such impacts unless the council modifies the housing element itself. And that of course will not happen. The council won’t do it and who will be paying for potential mitigations? It won’t be the developer that’s for sure. “Little things” like upgrading the Fire Department’s capabilities to reach high rise fires, new and/or more expensive water supply sources to meet the needs of new housing units not to mention how water pressure can be created for such high rises, etc. It will be on the residents and businesses of this small city.
3 - 1682
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-211 You can say that the issues of infrastructure, traffic, water supply, etc. is not a requirement of the housing element. That it will be part of the plan updates. But, really, they are all interrelated. So, maybe HCD doesn’t care about our aging and inadequate infrastructure and public services, but the City governance needs to address these issues and plan on how to fix them NOW. And, that includes the financing of such improvements! “Kicking the can” down the road is irresponsible. What happened to the wishes of over 1,000 residents who initially participated in the general/specific planning process when David Watkins was the Planning Director? Residents had participated in that process for months and brought up reasonable growth scenarios of somewhere between 700 and 1,000 new housing units that could be accommodated in the next 20 years. The delays and the petty politics created what we now face. Credit of this latest fiasco is given to the planning consultants (all including the current one) that have failed to please HCD several times before. This version will probably be the one that HCD approves of because the consultant has given everything that the agency demands. The consultant should be responsive to our community and not have hidden YIMBY agendas. He doesn’t even live in this region.

He indicated that we must accept SB 381 (Program 1.b-page 254). That is misinformation.

Documented evidence has already been supplied to you that the side-by-side escrow can work and has been done before without implementing SB381. Many of my neighbors and I continue to support the return of the Caltrans housing to current/former Caltrans tenants or qualified buyers who will purchase these properties, fix them up, and live in them, and thereby add to the property tax base and contribute to the neighborhood’s charm. Our neighborhood already has dense housing and our existing infrastructure is in terrible condition. Affordable housing as described in the housing element needs to be distributed in various areas throughout the City. It is also states that the City WILL construct ADUs on these parcels. First, it should be the homeowners’ decisions as well as the practicality of building anything on some of these small parcels. Second, the “City WILL build” presumes the City owns the properties outright, and that would be a terrible mistake. Where is the funding for this? There are many problems with our existing infrastructure that equally need to be addressed but have been ignored due to a lack of funding. Or, at least that is what we have been told over the years.

For the special needs program (Program 2.h-page 263): The housing element states: “Eight-year Objective: Encourage construction of at least 50 accessible units, 50 units with three or more bedrooms, and 50 units affordable to lower-income households to reduce displacement risk and expand mobility opportunities in areas in close proximity to transit systems, commercial uses, services and amenities on appropriately designated sites within the Downtown Plan area, the Fremont Avenue/Huntington Avenue/Meridian Avenue neighborhoods, within properties identified for mixed-use potential, vacant higher density residential sites, City-owned sites, and underutilized nonresidential properties.” Are these related to the Caltrans housing? Or is this separate? There is no Huntington Avenue, it’s Huntington Drive (it figures for a consultant that doesn’t live here). Why isn’t Fair Oaks/Mission/El Centro considered as well?
He indicated that we must comply with SB 10. Page 268 has a policy that states: “Policy 3.5: Provide objective standards and ministerial application processes to implement 2021 State housing legislation (SB 9 and SB 10) that requires the City to permit construction of two dwelling units on single-family lots and allows density increases for multi-family properties up to 10 units with a CEQA exemption.” SB 10 is strictly voluntary and it is my understanding that the council had publicly backed away from supporting this previously. Why, therefore, is it in this housing element version? 3 - 1683
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-212 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE For the height limitations policy (Program 2.n-page 267), why is the City so inclined to place so many limits on itself at this time? By having so many YIMBY restrictions and conditions, the will of the people that live in this City is being curtailed. This is clearly undemocratic and thwarts local control.

Clever architects and innovative developers can create smaller housing units within our currently defined building height limit. But, apparently that isn’t even considered in this version of the housing element.

For rezoning (Program 3.a-page 268), do the residents really know that you are proposing to rezone their properties in this fashion? The way this housing element has been advertised, you must know that most residents are unaware. As a cautionary aside, I remember traveling to Sedona, Arizona to view the red rocks over the years. Just before the pandemic, my husband and I took our then teenage daughter to Sedona. It was a disaster! Where once it was a sweet town with some tourists, it was now a complete zoo and utter chaos. Turned out that the State of Arizona had permitted opportunities for the Airbnb-type businesses and there would be no local control. In time, developers had bought up many, many houses and used each bedroom to rent short term to tourists. Local schools were impacted and at least one had closed because the population had shifted from residents to tourists.

And the sites themselves had been compromised by such heavy influx. We can’t correct a national crisis in housing by destroying our community. It’s just a 3 ½ square mile city. The rezoning needs to be more nuanced than what is now being proposed. It is too much.

For mixed use (Program 3.b, page 268) developments and adaptive re-use, such tall buildings and limited to no parking, we might as well become either Glendale or Pasadena Annex. The height of the buildings alone question the ability of the Fire Department to respond to high rise fires, as well as the necessary water pressure to support fighting fires or having operational fire water sprinklers. Parking availability? Most people do not rely on the Gold (L) Line to get anywhere except perhaps to go to special events. The Mission/Meridian garage was noted years ago in a L.A. Times article that people were parking there from elsewhere to do shopping. Few to none were actually parking to use the Gold Line for work outside of South Pasadena. Families with kids or elderly relatives will still need cars whether gas- or electric-operated. Parking is going to be worse (not a CEQA issue but a real life experience nonetheless).

For demolition of vacant properties (Program 3.c, page 270), how does this program relate to the Caltrans housing? Does the program mean that automatically if a vacant Caltrans housing is “viewed” as not fixable, it will be torn down and replaced with three units at that site? Many of the Caltrans vacant properties are small and located on hills where soil stability may be an issue.

I do not support Program 3.d, page 271 (Enable Parcel Assemblage) as currently written. It emphasizes a strong and lopsided City-developer partnership when maybe the homeowner doesn’t want to sell their property. There has to be support for the property owner as well. Forcing the property owner to sell their property would in turn create hardship for that resident. Home prices and mortgage rates are too high now and in the foreseeable future and so that property owner would not be able to resettle elsewhere in South Pasadena. That is outrageous. And your consultant never answered my question as to whether eminent domain would be invoked if the property owner was unwilling to sell.

Program 3.h, page 274, states that if the ADU numbers fail to materialize that MORE rezoning will take place! There are many reasons why people don’t want to or are unable to build an ADU. But, regardless, if this magical number doesn’t happen, we will be further rezone? Just how many people are we going to have here in a 3½ square mile area? Has that been calculated? Again, the financing for this unlimited rezoning journey? The schools? The streets? The water? This is ridiculous. Why 3 - 1684
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-213 not just obliterate the zoning and put out the welcome mat for hordes of people? Watch the tax base shrink further because there will actually be fewer property owners. Floating bonds? Reducing municipal services? But, yes, make the YIMBYs happy. Whatever happened to responsible planning and considering possible future scenarios and costs?
I could go on, but I end with a plea. Look at the policies, each one very carefully. Are they really helpful to the residents and can they be financed and monitored in a productive and positive way by the City? Or, are they just offerings to appease YIMBYS? The financing must also be considered seriously.

Most of us agree to responsible and sustainable growth in the next eight years. I personally witnessed that with the individuals I met at the planning charettes years ago. Before you rush off this version to HCD, please review the policies individually and responsibly. Edits are needed to ensure sustainable growth.

Thank you,
Delaine W. Shane
2003 Meridian Avenue
 How addressed: The lawsuit brought against the City for failure to comply with State Housing Law caused environmental evaluation to be completed pursuant to Government Code Section 65759. The Housing Element is not subject to environmental review at this time. The City is preparing an Environmental Assessment that will be considered at the time of Housing Element adoption in accordance with applicable laws.
 How addressed: The City must follow SB 381 regarding the purchase and dispensation of the surplus Caltrans properties. The other options suggested in the comment are not legally valid. Per the March 7th draft, Staff will explore possible solutions.  How addressed: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) is a requirement of the Housing Element under state Planning Law. The City is not opting into SB 10 citywide, but instead is using the framework of the law to create the Missing Middle Housing program to achieve the AFFH goals. The program will have specific objective design standards to allow certain housing types that are consistent with existing residential character.
 How addressed: The current height limit is a constraint on development. The City must eliminate identified constraints on development. HCD has questioned whether a building could be designed at 70 du/ac or more with a 45 foot height limit. The action taken through the Housing Element adoption does not eliminate the existing height limit or create a new height limit. The Housing Element establishes a program for the voters to decide whether to establish a new height limit to achieve the densities required to meeting the RHNA housing goals. If the voters do not increase the height limit in certain areas, other zoning-based measures (such as conversion of current low density areas into higher density areas) will need to be analyzed and submitted to HCD for review.  How addressed: The City held three public meetings, on February 1st, February 9th, and February 15th to discuss the proposed zone changes to allow for missing middle housing.

Kristine Kwong (March 7, 2023)
I am requesting the City change the section of the housing element to limit the area that allows fourflex parcels on major traffic corridors only or near the Metro station. Since the City has a voter imposed height limit, I suggest removing the mention of 7-10 story building that are above the current limit until the time the voters have had a chance to consider this issue. 3 - 1685
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-214 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE  How addressed: The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the high-quality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023. A revised height limit must be stated for certain parcels that allow for 50 du/ac or more must be included in the Housing Element to state what the minimum new height limit will be if the voters elect to remove the existing height limit. The recommended height limit change only applies to those specific areas. The action taken through the Housing Element adoption does not eliminate the existing height limit or create a new height limit. The Housing Element establishes a program for the voters to decide whether to establish a new height limit to achieve the densities required to meeting the RHNA housing goals. If the voters do not increase the height limit in certain areas, other zoning-based measures (such as conversion of current low density areas into higher density areas) will need to be analyzed and submitted to HCD for review.

Peter Giulioni (March 7, 2023)
Dear Armine,
Hopefully this finds you and your family continuing to be safe and healthy.

This is an out-reach from a SoPas community member, rather than a commissioner, so, please consider it through that lens.

Recently, it has come to my attention that the latest draft of the Housing Element includes the elimination of zoning for single family homes citywide as well as a proposed building height limit increase to seven stories. Is my understanding correct? While I'm a relative new-comer to SoPas (I moved here with my family in 1996) I believe this will significantly impact the very things which define living in our community.

Over the past several years I have worked side by side with fellow residents to ensure passage of the UUT and the increased local sales tax. We worked to secure and sustain funding for our schools through SPEF initiatives, and even our public library. While a tremendous amount of work, it was/is personally rewarding for us as volunteers because we were truly campaigning for sustaining our way of life here in SoPas. And please note, I used the word "sustaining" not "protecting" - I am a proponent of thoughtful and conscious growth and expanded thinking. The advocacy of many of my SoPas neighbors can be seen as a continuation of the spirit shown by the generation before us who fought to prevent the 710 freeway from bisecting our town.

While not completely conversant around the demands of the HCD and the consequences of not complying with them; embracing potential solutions that will impact our police and fire departments, infrastructure and schools while potentially reducing tax revenue due to diminished property values seems counterproductive at best and irresponsible at worst.

Please consider this a "formal" request that you direct the city staff to find another way to "meet the numbers" without negatively impacting the very nature of our way of life here in SoPas. I believe we are special in so many ways, and don't want to see us become yet another "characterless" wasteland on the edge of Los Angeles.

As always, please feel free to reach out for more information or clarification.

Stay safe and healthy, warm regards, Pete
3 - 1686
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-215  How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies and programs in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements. The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the high-quality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023.

Leonard Mlodinow (March 7, 2023)
To whom it may concern: I just heard that the latest draft of the Housing Element includes the elimination of zoning for single family homes citywide as well as a proposed building height limit increase to seven stories. I feel strongly that this would have an enormous negative impact on our community and that it is not in character with what I and my neighbors understand and appreciate as South Pasadena. I hope you can illuminate those changes from the plan.

Leonard Mlodinow
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies and programs in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements. The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the high-quality transit areas within the City. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023. The recommended height limit change applies only to specific areas. The action taken through the Housing Element adoption does not eliminate the existing height limit or create a new height limit.

The Housing Element establishes a program for the voters to decide whether to establish a new height limit to achieve the densities required to meeting the RHNA housing goals. If the voters do not increase the height limit in certain areas, other zoning-based measures (such as conversion of current low density areas into higher density areas) will need to be analyzed and submitted to HCD for review.

Brian Bright (March 7, 2023)
Hi Council,
Living in South Pas has been a great experience. This city has a long history of preserving its identity, history, and way of life. South Pasadena was bisected in the 40's by the 110 and the people said "never again" to be pushed around by Sacramento, so they fought when the 710 expansion was going to decimate the city by splitting it into fourths with the 110. South Pasadena prevailed, thankfully, or this city would have been split up.

Now the overlords in Sacramento want to control our town again, adding an unreasonable amount of new construction due to a blanket law that pays no attention to the amount of apartments vs single family homes in each community. South Pas is almost evenly split with rentals vs single family homes, unlike many of our neighboring cities (looking at you San Marino). To make things worse, we have paid shills for the development industrial complex who have infiltrated our town and are on social media complaining about a lack of housing ad nauseum, all the while living in their affluent single family homes. How this expansion of units effects our schools, infrastructure, and way of life is never discussed in a logical debate.
3 - 1687
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-216 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Unfortunately, city council did not fight hard enough against the state punching down a few years ago, and here we are. 10 story buildings in South Pas, our of historic homes being able to be 4 plex apartment buildings...seriously? Lets fight now to preserve our town, we owe it to those who fought the good fight in years past and to every homeowner in this city! Sincerely,
Brian Bright
 How addressed: The City has a requirement to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing and to accommodate the number of homes allocated to it through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation process. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements.

Donna Scott (March 7, 2023)
To whom it may concern:

The new zoning proposal for South Pasadena is unacceptable.

Eliminating zoning for SFRs, as well as increasing building heights to 7-10 stores will completely change the character of our town.

Also, there seems to be a movement to push through this HUGE change without much discussion, or publicity.

I would request slowing the process down, making details known through local papers etc.,in order to get more input and allow for the proposal of different options.

Thank you.

Donna Scott
1970 La France Avenue
South Pasadena
626 840 7189
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies and programs in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements. Since May 2020, the City has held several community input sessions and recently held three: City Council meetings, on February 1st, February 9th, and February 15th (Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission) to discuss these changes. The City has a court-imposed timeline for responding to HCD’s comments, which necessitates the speed with which the City is acting on these policies. Additionally, the City has a page dedicated to the Housing Element where all updates have been posted.

Bruce A. Finstead (March 7, 2023)
We are writing you because we fear that South Pasadena’s approach to the state mandated Housing Element requirements may destroy the small-town atmosphere of the city where our family has lived since 1971. We are well aware of the NIMBY potential of our comments and the difficulties you have in balancing the desires of our small community with the societal need to provide additional affordable housing for California residents. We further realize the frustrations of dealing with regulations that may well not take into account the divergent needs and desires of small vs large communities.
3 - 1688
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-217 Of paramount concern to us is the proposal to eliminate single family residential zoning throughout the city. Among the many characteristics of our city that make it special are its neighborhoods of people living next to one another in single family homes. Neighborhoods have people with bonds developing over years; this cannot occur if multifamily dwellings with relatively short-term residencies are intermingled with homes of families living there for years, or even generations. Expanding the areas or corridors where multifamily residences are allowed is not the ideal situation, and may be necessary, but to eliminate single family residential zoning for the entire city should not even be under consideration.

South Pasadena does not have much undeveloped land; it may well be necessary to go up rather than out to obtain more developable space; raising the building height limits may be aesthetically undesirable, but it may be a necessary concession to the state. It might be more tolerable if mixed use buildings were required with businesses on the ground floor and residences above. Is it possible to provide financial incentives to current “tall” building owners to convert their buildings to mixed business/residential use?
Thank you for your consideration. If you wish additional input from us, we would be pleased to provide it.

Bruce A. Finstead, M.D.

Melissa Finstead
1947 La France Avenue, South Pasadena
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements. The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the highquality transit areas within the City. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023.

Michael Girvigian (March 7, 2023)
Hello,
As a longtime resident of South Pasadena, I urge the city staff to significantly re-think the latest draft of the city's housing element.

I understand there is a statewide mandate to increase housing, which is several years old now.

This statewide mandate, however, was made at a time when the projected state population by 2040 was 50 million people.

The population growth has stopped, and the state population is shrinking.

The state's population could remain stagnant for the foreseeable future.

There are a number of reasons for this, which include: increased out-migration, reduced immigration, low birth rates.

Future mass transit ridership adjustments are already underway based on new projections of shrinking population growth.
3 - 1689
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-218 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE High speed rail update gets closer to reality, but major risks remain https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/news/53027098/ca-how-many-people-will-use-californiasbullet-train-planners-lower-ridership-estimates High speed rail update gets closer to reality, but major risks remain Thus, destroying the quality of life of the people in small towns, in the name of an outdated mandate, is not fair or equitable.

I urge the city staff to re-think this latest draft of the housing element.

Sincerely,
Michael Girvigian
310 Meridian Ave.

South Pasadena
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements.

Cathleen Hoadley (March 7, 2023)
I've been made aware that the latest draft of the Housing Element includes the elimination of zoning for single family homes citywide as well as a proposed building height limit increase to seven stories.

I can't even imagine South Pasadena suddenly having a skyline with buildings higher than four stories; it will completely change our little town. The other issue is that we have neighborhoods with single family homes, and also certain parts of town with high density apartment buildings, and then there are some areas with a healthy mix of both, but none are higher than four stories.

My neighborhood of Buena Vista/Foothill/Prospect/Meridian/Highland/Fairview, nestled between Fremont on the east, Orange Grove on the West, and just north of the 110 freeway (Foothill) and bordered by Columbia on the north, has no apartment buildings at all; if someone were to purchase a home, and raze it, and put up a multi-unit apartment building, that would completely change the nature of the neighborhood I have been fortunate to live in for the past nearly 23 years. I have neighbors on all sides who have lived on Buena Vista for coming up on 50 years. These are the people who fought the 710 extension which would have ruined South Pasadena forever. I know many people are creating ADRs, which are welcomed, but perhaps not enough.

Please be mindful of how being able to construct a new apartment building with four units in the middle of a solely single family neighborhood will drastically impact the nature of these traditionally single family home neighborhoods.

Thank you,
Cathleen Hoadley
1109 Buena Vista St.

South Pasadena, CA 91030
3 - 1690
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-219  How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements.

Sandy Kitto (March 7, 2023)
To: The City of South Pasadena
As long-time residents of the city, we reviewed the current draft of the City of South Pasadena (City) 2021-2029 General Plan Housing Element with concern. The elimination of single-family zoning, and the height limitations for multi-family residential units reaching 7-10 stories would negatively impact the appearance and personality of the city that attracted so many residents like us.

These concerns are as follows:
 The universal elimination of single-family zoning is short-sighted in allowing up to four units being built on a single parcel anywhere in the city. Many parcels in the city, such as our house on Bonita Drive, would be challenging if not impossible to accommodate four units, yet that would be permitted. The construction would create unimaginable chaos for the neighborhood, and a parking nightmare afterwards.

We suggest that a parcel size requirement be included that would limit this expansion to parcels that could reasonably accommodate the units and parking for the residents.  The current plan eliminates the requirement for parking for any construction within a half-mile of mass transit, most likely the Gold Line at Mission Street and Meridian Avenue. Imagining multiple seven story buildings in that neighborhood, would create mammoth parking issues. Just because people live near the Gold Line does not mean they work in an area serviced by the Metro. And even if that were the case, it does not eliminate the necessity of having a car in the Los Angeles metro area for errands and weekend travel. Even the grocery stores on Fair Oaks Avenue may exceed the resident’s willingness to remain pedestrians while carrying groceries.

So many of these residents will still have vehicles clogging the limited parking available. This potentially would impact the merchants along Mission Street by blocking customers from accessing the area.

We suggest reducing the height restriction (and thereby the number of units), AND requiring parking accommodation be part of the project.
 From an aesthetic point of view, allowing new construction of 7-10 stories is a dramatic change from the current situation in the city. A sudden influx of 7-10 story buildings would forever alter the landscape of South Pasadena; blocking mountain views, casting huge shadows on adjacent parcels, and reducing the charm of the neighborhood. The Eclectic Music Festival, and semi-annual Arts Crawl would be a completely different “vibe,” as would daily living.

We suggest limiting the height maximum to a more reasonable 4 stories to maintain the City’s appeal.

For these reasons, we urge the City leaders to reconsider the plan as currently proposed. 3 - 1691
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-220 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Sandy Kitto and Joe Walters
911 Bonita Drive
South Pasadena, CA
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements, as well as incorporate other state requirements such as elimination of parking requirements in close proximity to transit. The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the high-quality transit areas within the City. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023.

Sally Kilby (March 7, 2023)
To Whom it May Concern:

One change I would request is that buildings of up to a fourplex be limited to parcels on such major traffic streets as Fair Oaks, Huntington, and Fremont, and to those near the Metro South Pasadena station. I would also recommend excluding mention of 7-10 story buildings since South Pasadena has a voter-imposed building height limit. Citizens can be asked to vote on this at an upcoming local election.

Sally Kilby
City Clerk, Retired
1000 El Centro Street
South Pasadena
 How addressed: The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the high-quality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023. A revised height limit for parcels that allow for 50 du/ac or more must be included in the Housing Element to state what the minimum new height limit will be if the voters elect to remove the existing height limit. As to the actions regarding the height limit, indeed the action taken through the Housing Element adoption does not eliminate the existing height limit or create a new height limit. The Housing Element establishes a program for the voters to decide whether to establish a new height limit to achieve the densities required to meeting the RHNA housing goals. If the voters do not increase the height limit in certain areas, other zoning-based measures (such as conversion of current low density areas into higher density areas) will need to be analyzed and submitted to HCD for review.

Linda Poore & John Poore (March 7, 2023)
I have lived in South Pasadena for 47 years and taught many years at all 3 elementary schools. This community is filled with many creative innovative people who have solved many problems over the years including The 710 freeway corridor , library funding, numerous tax raises to improve services, etc. It's time to find solutions that involve input from many residents, including reviewing how other small communities are complying to the new requirements. Please feel free to contact me at any time.

Linda Poore & John Poore
1964 La France Avenue
South Pasadena, CA 91030-4608
3 - 1692
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-221 1-626-390-0059
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements.

Mike Mitchell (March 7, 2023)
As a new owner of a single family home in South Pasadena I have serious concerns about the changes being suggested by local and state government. I am understanding of the need for more units and lower income housing to create more access to housing for a wider range of individuals, but the changes are too extreme and will have deleterious effects on the community.

As someone who has spent over a year waiting to get planning permission, I understand that the city takes very seriously the cohesiveness of neighborhoods and how that cohesiveness affects home ownership for us all. Suggesting that it is acceptable to go from areas entirely comprised of single family homes to suddenly giving large investors the right to build complexes over 7 stories high is incredibly extreme. Even tempering this suggestion to complexes of 3-4 stories would have an impact, but would be understandable given the state mandate for increased housing. People have invested huge sums of money in their home here to live in what feels like a special community. We want more people to have access to it, but not at the expense of damaging those people's investments.

It may seem callous to talk about investment in a community in financial terms, but those investments are people's future stability, and in Southern California represent a huge portion of a person's material wealth. It is even more callous to wantonly disregard how difficult home ownership is in this state by diminishing people's values and subsequently their future stability.

Change is needed in order to bring new, lower income families into this city, and more of them.

Change should however, be brought about in ways that do not damage the existing balance in the community but rather improve it. I would like to think that the very intelligent members of our local government can find a way to bring about the changes we need while preserving what drew people to this community to begin with.
thank you,
-Michael Mitchell
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements.

Keith Tsang (March 7, 2023)
Hello,
I would request the city change the following section of the housing element to limit the area that would allow up to a four-plex to parcels on major traffic corridors only, like Huntington, Fremont and Fair Oaks or near the Metro station. Also, since the city currently has a voter imposed height limit, I 3 - 1693
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-222 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE would recommend removing the mention of 7-10 story buildings that are above the current limit until such a time when the voters have had a chance to weigh in on this.

Keith Tsang
1440 Indiana Ave
 How addressed: The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the high-quality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023.

Nicholas Greco (March 7, 2023)
The city’s infrastructure cannot handle the additional volume of residents should the four Plex allowance be authorized. Homeowners pay the majority of taxes and this will lead to an undue burden on the homeowners of South Pasadena and a decline in the quality of schools and city services that we all cherish. State mandated ADU add ons that are rentable will bring in additional residents while also allowing for increases in property tax revenue by the homeowner. Please don’t disrupt our way of life and diminish the quality of our quaint town. We hope that the City Council considers this as they were elected to protect the way of life that South Pasadena homeowners and residents have come to appreciate.

Sincerely,
Nicholas W Greco MD, FACEP
Operations Director
Emergency Department
Huntington Hospital
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements.

South Pasadena Tenants Union (March 8, 2023)
Dear Ms. Becker and Ms Fausto:

South Pasadena Tenants Union leadership are pleased to have reviewed the March 2nd, 5th Draft of the Housing Element. It was/is a bold and expansive housing element, one which might even be the best in the Southland. We applaud staff for the inclusions of the tenant protections and the acknowledgment that preserving affordable housing is a priority in this process. We look forward to working with the City, the residents of South Pasadena and the Council to ensure that these policies are the best that they can be and are enacted effectively and within a timeframe that is beneficial to those whom they are intended to protect: the 53.5%.

We are however surprised to learn that as of last night, the original draft of March 2nd has already been substantially revised and without any published responses/comments indicating public input. In reviewing the March 7 redline version, we are disappointed to see that the proposed program addressing the fate of the CalTrans homes and the implementation of SB381 has changed drastically from the March 2 version. It is our understanding that there are no legal alternatives to SB381 and therefore we are stymied by this latest change.
3 - 1694
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-223 With regard to the revision indicated by the March 7 version for citywide fourplexes, also significantly different from the March 2nd draft, we find that we can remain wholly supportive of the current proposed change with a modification. We can support triplexes and fourplexes being limited to the high transit areas but we will need the City to commit in the Housing Element to a rent stabilization ordinance that is fully enacted no later than June 2024. Therefore, our one public comment regarding the most recent March 7 version of the 5th Draft Housing element is below:

For program 6.d, SPTU asks that you include within the 5th draft a deadline of no later than June 2024 for implementation of a rent stabilization ordinance.

South Pasadena Tenants Union looks forward to seeing our input included with the expediency that other revisions have been made in the last few days so that we can comfortably and wholeheartedly commit our support of the 5th Draft to HCD. We appreciate and trust that staff will do as proposed, but will need to see good faith that the City weighs our input equally to that of other influencers in the community by including our abovementioned request.

If you have any questions or would like to discuss, I look forward to hearing from you. I can be reached Anne Bagasao at [email protected] or by phone at 626-660-8837.

Sincerely,
Anne Bagasao, Co-Founder
 How addressed: The timeframe for Program 6.d requires that City Council consider a rent stabilization ordinance no later than December 2023.

Jenny Bright (March 8, 2023)
Very well said!! I am in agreement that we need more affordable units. It is the heavy hand of Sacramento overriding local control with threats that is not in the spirit of South Pasadena. Rezoning is the wrong direction. There are still locations in town to add affordable housing that we can support financially without having to erode the entire character of the City. We already have >50% rentals here so it is not as if we are out of balance.

On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 8:15 AM richard schneider <[email protected]> wrote:

I am certainly in favor of the city having a mixture of housing for different income levels. We need more units for low and moderate income levels. When I and my wife moved here years ago we were low income renters. But I think the provisions suggested for the new Housing Element, however well intentioned, are going in the wrong direction. What is needed is state subsidies for affordable units distributed throughout the city. Some of that subsidy money could be obtained by market rate sale of Caltrans properties. There are thousands of Caltrans properties around the state which could be utilized.

The current housing crisis was not caused by the City of South Pasadena nor its residents. And responsibility for crisis solution should not be transferred from the state to local communities.

Yours very truly,
Richard D.Schneider, MD
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable 3 - 1695
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-224 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements.

Dan Evans (March 8, 2023)
Ladies and Gentlemen:

I believe it may be a mistake to treat this issue as normal, administrative “compliance” with properlyenacted state law. In reality, we do not face normal legislation in SB 9, SB 10, etc. What we face is an attack on the way of life we choose to live in South Pasadena. Big-government social activists have seized the single-party government in Sacramento for a social revolution – to eliminate the middle class by removing our choices on how we live. We choose to live in single-family homes with gardens, not in massive housing projects as the social revolutionaries in Sacramento insist.

Confronted with a social revolution, “compliance” is a weak, conciliatory approach which will further empower the social revolutionaries. South Pasadena led the way against big-government plans to build a freeway through town, we should also lead resistance to these Big Brother housing efforts. Our resistance will lead to litigation; eventually cooler heads in court will see that SB 9, SB 10, etc. constitute a “taking” of property without due process. (fyi – I have taught Constitutional law.) We must stand up for the way of life we choose to live, not cave to big-government activists! Dan Evans
[email protected]
(626) 403-0575
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements.

Felix Gutierrez (March 8, 2023)
Dear South Pasadena City Leaders:

I understand that an elimination of Single Family zoning in South Pasadena has been proposed and is being considered by the city government.

Please register my strong support for continuing Single-Family Housing Zoning in the range of zoning options available to the city and residents. Other options should also be included and new ones added without eliminating one that has served the city well over the years and is needed for the future.

Single-family homes are a defining characteristic of some of our neighborhoods. Eliminating that zoning option could lead to overcrowded lots, schools, streets and parking spaces, not to mention additional demands on police, fire and other first responder services. We have already seen these overcrowding impacts on nearby cities.

I strongly urge you to keep South Pasadena's best long-ranges interests in mind as you contemplate possible changes.

Sincerely,
3 - 1696
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-225 Félix Gutiérrez
632 Milan Avenue
South Pasadena, CA 91030
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The Housing Element includes policies that commit the City to allow for missing middle housing types along high-quality transit corridors, if property owners so choose.

Laurie Chatham (March 8, 2023)
Dear All Concerned,
The DRAFT Housing Element has come to my attention via my concerned neighbors. I wanted to give my input as a concerned community member, having lived in South Pasadena for 26 years, and having visited my Great Aunt in this city since 1958.

Is it true that the DRAFT includes elimination of zoning for single family homes throughout the entire city? Is it true that there is a proposed height limit for buildings being increased to seven story structures? These proposals will have a negative impact on South Pasadena and are extreme. We have seen how other neighboring communities have allowed higher density development on lots that previously contained a single family home. There is significantly more traffic and the community atmosphere is negatively impacted. Please consider limiting the change in zoning to the high transit corridors (not city-wide) and elimination of references to seven or more story buildings in South Pasadena.

Thank you for your consideration,
Laurie Chatham
1915 La France Ave.

South Pasadena, Ca. 91030
How addressed: No, it is not true that zoning for single-family homes throughout the City is being proposed. The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the high-quality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023. It is also not true that the height limit is being increased. The action taken through the Housing Element adoption does not eliminate the existing height limit or create a new height limit. The Housing Element establishes a program for the voters to decide whether to establish a new height limit to achieve the densities required to meeting the RHNA housing goals. If the voters do not increase the height limit in certain areas, other zoning-based measures (such as conversion of current low density areas into higher density areas) will need to be analyzed and submitted to HCD for review.

Deni Sinnott (March 8, 2023)
I am writing to comment before today's deadline on South Pasadena's plan to build affordable housing.

I am confused by the fact that the city wants to march forward on the plan to supply affordable housing but has decided the Golf Course is off limits.

From Appendix B:
3 - 1697
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-226 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Has the City looked at the Arroyo Seco Golf Course as a suitable housing site for affordable housing? - City staff responded that converting the golf course into homes is an option, but one that is not politically popular and therefore not proposed as part of the Housing Element at this time.

Who is the council affiliated with that they need to back off from using this piece of land for the plan? It would seem to be ideal and could be used to create housing in the Arroyo which is idyllic compared to some of the sites proposed, in particular, JAMMING housing on smaller parcels or even in between current houses that exist on residential streets.

I am in favor of lifting height restrictions on buildings but those newer, taller buildings would need to be built on major thoroughfares.

We do need to build more housing and there are some buildings/parcels that I just know could be purchased to accomplish this tasks are:
 Crash Champions Body Shop on 300 Fair Oaks- two large lots could accommodate 1 building each.
 1499 Huntington Drive office building at Fair Oaks (old and needing rehab) Occupancy is not 100%. I believe this is taller than 4 stories already!
 Bargain Market and adjacent retail could also be used for new homes/apartments/condos.

I am sure there are many more places in the city that could be repurposed without disturbing the streets where we have mostly single family homes. If ADU is a desired route, the city should subsidize the building of those to homeowners who would like to participate and STREAMLINE the permitting process to be less onerous.
--
Deni Sinnott
Homeowner, 2066 Fletcher Avenue, South Pasadena

CLPF, NCG, MBA
626-233-4128
 How addressed: The golf course was considered as a housing site during the February 1st City Council meeting. The City Council directed staff to find alternative to accommodate the city’s housing needs that did not remove recreational open space from the City. The Housing Element does consider these other parcels as potential candidates for redevelopment, but the City does not have substantial evidence that they will be redeveloped during the planning period. As the Housing Element is part of the General Plan, it must be consistent with other General Plan elements, including the Open Space Element which requires sufficient recreational space for the residents of the City.

However, the City is committed to continue to analyze additional sites, including potential sites in the Arroyo in the future.

Mary Urquhart (March 8, 2023)
The recommendation to repeal the current 45-foot height limit on any residential or mixed-use project is in opposition to the vast majority of residents. The minimum requirements of 84 feet and 7 stories or 110 feet and ten stories, depending on whether the project is in an area with a density of 50 or 100 units per acre, respectively, is unacceptable.
3 - 1698
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-227 However, the approach of layered zoning in major corridors has the potential to be a bonus to our City. Mixing affordable housing with middle and higher-income housing options along with retail in major corridors that have a much higher traffic flow, such as Huntington Drive, should be listed as an option. Once the HE is approved, we can explore ways to work with our community to do this where this may be a bonus to our community. Areas that may apply to this concept are located on Huntington Drive and Arroyo, which are currently not offered in the current HE.

The second area that is of deep concern in the 5th draft is the implementation of SB9 and SB10, the Missing Middle Housing (MMH). SB10 is NOT a mandate and our City and our City were not considering this. Why was this included? Can you imagine this being allowed in our historic Bungalow Heaven? This language should not appear in our HE.

I do applaud the hard work that our City Planning Department has done in the past few months to pass an acceptable HE.
 How addressed: The action taken through the Housing Element adoption does not eliminate the existing height limit or create a new height limit. The Housing Element establishes a program for the voters to decide whether to establish a new height limit to achieve the densities required to meeting the RHNA housing goals. If the voters do not increase the height limit in certain areas, other zoning-based measures (such as conversion of current low density areas into higher density areas) will need to be analyzed and submitted to HCD for review. The City has a requirement to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) and to accommodate the number of homes allocated to it through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation process. Removing or increasing the current height limit is the only way to accommodate the RHNA requirements without upzoning the existing low-density residential zones. The City is not opting into SB 10 but instead is using the framework of the law to create the Missing Middle Housing program. The program will have specific objective design standards to allow certain housing types that are consistent with existing residential character. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill the requirements of AFFH.

Mary Farley (March 8, 2023)
There was given no time for working people in South Pasadena to respond to this proposal. We are being railroaded and this needs to be litigated. The impact on our tiny town is wildly disproportionate compared to contingent communities.

When my family moved to South Pasadena from Boston forty three years ago, we asked my husband’s employer, USC, what would be a good place for a mixed race family to relocate near the medical school, and the suggestion was South Pasadena.

The introduction of racial elements into this battle over development is bogus and there should have been adequate time in which to challenge it.
 How addressed: Since May 2020, the City has held several community input sessions and recently held three: City Council meetings, on February 1st, February 9th, and February 15th (Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission) to discuss the Housing Element revisions. State law requires that all housing elements address racial wealth and homeownership gaps as part of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) analysis.

Eric Hausner (March 8, 2023)
Dear City of South Pasadena,
3 - 1699
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-228 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE As a home owner and resident of South Pasadena, I wanted to provide feedback on the proposed General Plan Housing Element. In particular, I am concerned with allowing duplexes, triplexes or fourplexes throughout the city.

This change will fundamentally harm the fabric of South Pasadena that makes it so unique and special.

Instead, I would suggest limiting these changes to major traffic corridors only, such as Huntington, Fremont, Fair Oaks, Mission (near downtown) or near the Metro station.

I also think it's a good idea to wait on revising the height limit until voters have had a chance to cast their votes on the matter.

I understand the enormous pressure the city is under to make these changes. However, hopefully we can find a way to be compliant while also preserving the character and history of this amazing city.

Respectfully,
Eric and Emily Hausner
1722 Milan
 How addressed: The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the high-quality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023. The Housing Element does not change the height limit, it commits the City Council to bring forth a voter initiative to consider repealing or replacing the height limit and provides a new height limit if it is replaced.

Helen Mendoza / Pamela Privett (March 8, 2023)
To the City Council:

While we are in favor of increasing and diversifying housing within the city of South Pasadena, we believe the new draft of the Housing Element is at best, extreme and out-of-line, and at worst, thoughtless and irresponsible. As we understand it, the new draft 1) eliminates zoning for Single Family Homes 2) allows for development of up to 4 units on any property city-wide and 3) raises building height limits to 7-10 stories.

These are outrageous rules and will 1) negatively impact the property values for all residents in the city 2) severely encumber a school district already stretched to the limits on space and resources and 3) destroy the very character and quality of life that has made South Pasadena the kind of community people want to live and raise their families. In addition, we feel you have failed to consider that the city’s infrastructure is neither designed nor capable of dealing with the increased need for resources should these new rules go into effect.

Yes, we need to find a solution for affordable housing for the city’s residents and those who want to move here. However, doing so by creating rules that will make it possible to fundamentally change the fabric of our town and destroy the value of historic neighborhoods like Buena Vista in the northside or Edgewood/Milan/Stratford to the south side or those in Monterey Hills would be irresponsible and negligent.

South Pasadena’s “calm” within the “chaos” of Los Angeles is what brought us here. We wanted to raise our children in good schools and live in a diverse and welcoming community. It was the history of the old house we got to restore, and the small town neighborliness we love that have kept us here. 3 - 1700
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-229 There is a saying about buying real estate — don’t purchase a single family home that has a multiple family unit on the block. The city’s new plans will make it possible to put multi-unit apartments on ANY property… and that would devalue all the property for all residents.

These new Housing Elements would fundamentally destroy the face and skyline of the city, and it would in turn dismantle South Pasadena’s character and heart.

Every city is having difficult conversations about how to deal with their fluctuating population densities. The draft presented, however, is short-sighted and misguided. Surely the city can find more creative solutions to these issues than what has been put forward.

Helen Mendoza / Pamela Privett
Buena Vista Neighborhood
201 Beacon Avenue
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals.The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements. The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the highquality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023.

Jenny Bright (March 8, 2023)
South Pasadena is a wonderfully unique City with a balanced housing stock of owners and renters and also a balanced and diverse population of residents. Eliminating single family zoning would erode the entire character of the City that attracted its diverse population in the first place. It would make the City indistinguishable from every other community just outside of LA. Raising the height limit of buildings would be an irreversible step and make this City that has been so thoughtfully preserved for the last 135 years unrecognizable. We can and should add affordable housing units but we can do this without destroying the City.
-Jenny Bright
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements. The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the highquality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023. As to the actions regarding the height limit, the action taken through the Housing Element adoption does not eliminate the existing height limit or create a new height limit. The Housing Element establishes a program for the voters to decide whether to establish a new height limit to achieve the densities required to meeting the RHNA housing goals. If the voters do not increase the height limit in certain areas, other zoning-based measures (such as conversion of current low density areas into higher density areas) will need to be analyzed and submitted to HCD for review.

Jim Tavares (March 8, 2023)
I believe there is general consensus that it is the right thing to create more housing within South Pasadena; the concerns are how that housing is created, what it looks like, and ensuring it does not 3 - 1701
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-230 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE create unintended consequences of congestion and loss of South Pasadena's community feel. If South Pasadena simply becomes a place, and no longer a community, the process will have failed.

I don't think that has to happen.

I think roundly rejecting SB 10 is a must, as is rejecting the idea of a ballot measure for unlimited building heights at 50 du/acre. It will create endless disharmony between opportunistic developers and residents and break the character of our community. An 8,000 sf lot with ten units on it will accomplish the density needed to exceed 85 feet in height and shadow a residence next door.

Market rate sale of Caltrans properties can go a long way for Los Angeles as well as South Pasadena to fund more affordable housing projects vs. repurposing of these homes and the costs to do so--private owners can purchase and rehabilitate the homes with the sale profits going to other projects throughout the city, retaining the character of existing neighborhoods.

I think it is folly to have any properties that do not supply parking at a rate below one per unit, and higher form 2+ bedroom units, despite proximity to public transportation. While I hope public transportation will be used and ease congestion, ridership has trended down over the past 5 years, and while it has recently been on the upswing among certain demographics, safety concerns and reliability/destination proximity will likely force many into their cars, no matter where they live, straining surface streets for parking access.

Lastly, massing at the street and a provision for length of unbroken wall in a given plane and raking of massing from the street, with some green space around structures can go a long way to preserving the community feel so many have come to South Pas to experience. these details need to be ironed out in the Housing Element to ensure development that people want to stay within and around.

Very truly yours,
Jim Tavares
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals.The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements. The City is not opting into SB 10 but instead is using the framework of the law to create the Missing Middle Housing program. The program will have specific objective design standards to allow certain housing types that are consistent with existing residential character. Per a Court Judgement, the City must place a measure on the ballot to repeal or amend the current height limit.

How addressed: SB381 has state-mandated requirements on how to acquire, utilize, and transfer homes currently owned by Caltrans. The City Council has made no determination regarding the purchase of any of the surplus Caltrans properties or the specific use of any of the properties. The City is still analyzing the financial feasibility of purchasing the properties and the various options for converting them to affordable housing. The City cannot commit to a specific course of action for the surplus Caltrans properties until that analysis is complete. Furthermore, selling all of the surplus Caltrans homes at market rates to generate capital for the creation of deed-restricted affordable housing elsewhere in the city is not an allowable action under SB 381. Staff will explore possible solutions.

Mark Gallatin (March 8, 2023)
3 - 1702
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-231 The City of South Pasadena has made tremendous progress under unprecedented circumstances toward the development of a housing element that can satisfy the rigorous requirements of state law.

Now however, with a court-appointed deadline for completion looming, this progress could be endangered by two proposed programs in the 5th draft of the element that, as presently constituted, do not yet reflect the most creative approaches to the issues they seek to address and will quite likely provoke opposition from many residents.

The first of these is Program 2.n, the Citywide Height Limit Ballot Initiative. This program calls for a referendum on repeal of the current 45-foot height limit on any residential or mixed-use project on which the housing element anticipates a base density in excess of 50 units/acre. It proposes to replace the current height limit with either no height limit or a minimum requirement of 84 feet.

The reason for essentially doubling the current maximum height to a new minimum height is ostensibly to accommodate the greater densities planned in localized areas to stated density goals in order to help the City meet its RHNA target and to achieve the densities identified in the Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP). Despite being revised to reflect a lower minimum height limit, the current language of Program 2.n still tracks with that from the State of California’s Department of Housing and Community Development. As such, it does not yet reflect a locally developed solution created with input from community members, appointed and elected officials seeking to maximize compliance and minimize harm, a thoughtful, more nuanced approach that better aligns with the tradition and character of the city’s built environment.

What might such an approach look like? For starters, it would restate the modest proposal made by the City’s original general/specific plan consultant to consider raising the height limit along Fair Oaks Avenue frontage properties within the DTSP from 45 feet to 50 feet to facilitate well designed and proportioned four-story buildings on Fair Oaks Avenue.

Second, it would draw on the incredible depth of talent, expertise and experience of design and architectural professionals that call South Pasadena home, as well as interested laypeople, to fashion a strategy that de-emphasizes governing metrics such as minimum height in feet or number of stories and instead focuses on standards such as floor area ratio (FAR) and unit size to create a “building envelope” capable of accommodating the desired densities within the confines of the existing height limit or a modesty increased one. That such an approach can yield the densities contemplated in the DTSP or in overlay zones on arterial corridors has already been demonstrated by projects completed in cities across the region, in locations as diverse and different as Santa Monica and San Gabriel. The inclusion of some of these standards in the latest draft of Program 3.b is a good beginning but it is hoped they are just the starting points for further discussions rather than faits accomplis, as the real work will begin when drafting new zoning provisions to implement the adopted element. Creative approaches to density, such as the “layered zoning” approach on major corridors, as recently presented at a WISPPA forum on the housing element, should be given serious consideration and embraced, lest we become consigned to monolithic housing blocks with minimal setbacks and amenities. Density simply doesn’t have to be done that way, as history both here and abroad should have taught us.

The second program of concern in the 5th draft is Program 3.m, Implement SB 9 and SB 10. Missing Middle Housing (MMH) is a key strategy in helping the City meet its housing goals but it should in no way be conflated with SB 10. MMH was being successfully implemented in California and other states long before SB 10 was even dreamed of. SB 10 is not a mandate to be blindly followed by cities under threat of penalty but is in fact legislation that requires that cities opt into it voluntarily. Our City Council wisely voted not to opt into SB 10 when presented with the opportunity to do so. MMH can 3 - 1703
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-232 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE be implemented with greater flexibility without choosing to opt into SB 10. By placing the very valuable strategy of MMH under the aegis of SB 10, Program 3.m unnecessarily stokes fear in residents to the detriment of acceptance of the housing element as a whole.

The key policy question for the city as regards the implementation of MMH is whether to apply it only in selected areas of the city or allow it citywide as what planners refer to as a “floating” zone. Such a zone is not tied to a specific area, but rather would make MMH a possibility on any residential property that meets certain objective design and development standards. The latest draft of Program

3.m favors the former approach by establishing a nexus between the location of MMH housing types and proximity to high-quality transit corridors and/or transit stops. Such a nexus is logical, given the importance high-quality transit corridors and/or transit stops played in determining the City’s RHNA allocation. Suffice it to say that perhaps preliminary criteria, such as minimum lot size, can be established to screen out areas where MMH might be infeasible, being mindful of the fact that some neighborhoods have a preponderance of lots less than 5,000 square feet in size.

In conclusion, the shortcomings of Programs 2.n and 3.m not withstanding, the latest update of the 5th draft of the Housing Element is appreciated and raises hopes that the conversation around implementation changes from one about terms like density, multi family and upzoning and instead begins to focus on form, scale and housing types. The first version of the 5th draft was representative of a philosophical approach which has dogged the preparation of the housing element from the beginning. That is, whether to craft a creative comprehensive and inclusive grassroots approach to housing policy that reflects and respects the will of the people or to place trust in the community’s future with an all-knowing, all-powerful state government dictating and mandating from on high. With the element so close to completion now, it is sincerely hoped that the choice will be the former, rather than a community vision of the state, by the state and for the state.  How addressed: The new height limit in Program 2.n is not a minimum height, it a revised maximum height limit to allow for the densities identified in the Housing Element. If the height limit is replaced, the new height limit shall be no less than 84 feet. Nothing in this would prevent a land owner or developer from proposing and constructing a building that is less than 84 feet. The Housing Element establishes a program for the voters to decide whether to establish a new height limit to achieve the densities required to meeting the RHNA housing goals. If the voters do not increase the height limit in certain areas, other zoning-based measures (such as conversion of current low density areas into higher density areas) will need to be analyzed and submitted to HCD for review.  How addressed: The City is not opting into SB 10 but instead is using the framework of the law to create the Missing Middle Housing program. The program will have specific objective design standards to allow certain housing types that are consistent with existing residential character. The Housing Element is specific about which housing types the city is going to consider as part of its missing middle housing implementation, as well as the areas of the city where missing middle housing will be allowed.

Delaine W. Shane (March 8, 2023)
Dear Community Development Department Staff and Management:

Thank you so much to be willing to making last minute text edits on the proposed housing element. I will limit my response in this email to Program 1.b concerning the fate of the Caltrans housing. Some of your yellow highlighted text I get are meant to be a compromise, but they are so wishy washy that 3 - 1704
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-233 “explore” means nothing. There is no real commitment. Here are my suggested revisions, based on the latest version online
If
financially feasible and demonstrated as such in writing by a qualified financial expert, the City will leverage the Caltrans surplus properties that have resulted from the State's cancellation of a proposed route to extend the 710 freeway through South Pasadena to generate capital for the rehabilitation and creation of deed restricted, affordable housing units throughout the city by an experienced, qualified development partner in the affordable housing construction industry. The Caltrans and the City have initiated a property sales program for the 710 freeway surplus properties. The City worked with Senator Portantino to pass SB 381 and the emergency rulemaking regulations were released on March 28, 2022. The City will have priority to purchase unoccupied Caltrans surplus properties, as well as occupied Caltrans surplus properties if the existing tenants do not purchase the properties. The City has been working with Caltrans to obtain property files and to inspect the properties in order to evaluate the surplus properties. It is anticipated that the City may purchase some of the Caltrans surplus properties once Caltrans provides purchase and sale agreements to the City. To ensure the financial feasibility of acquiring the unoccupied properties and in turn leveraging them to expand housing opportunities in South Pasadena, staff will prioritize and pursue alternative solutions, including the side-by-side escrows or double escrows, outside of SB381 that respond to the cost constraints of particular properties.

Acquire, if financially feasible, and as a last measure, convert unoccupied, Caltrans-owned properties, that are not sold at fair market value to deed-restricted affordable housing units to expand housing mobility opportunities for lower-income households and revitalize underused areas, so long as the neighborhoods of the remaining Caltrans properties are not overly represented. Expanding housing mobility opportunities shall be shared equally and distributed throughout the City.

The statement in the right column at the bottom states: “Units will be available to occupants by October 2024.” Seems to be overly optimistic. Recommend deleting it or saying X months after work has been completed that the units will be fit for occupation. You have no control over construction/rehab contractors, supply distribution systems, and actual materials. Delays are unfortunately part of our new normal post pandemic. Why box yourself in a corner with HCD by setting an unrealistic and really naïve date?
Thanks again for allowing input by the public in this manner. 3 - 1705
"rhc Ciry wLI] lever.age the Ca.lmms !'!urplLLi; pmpatics d12t have rcsulrcd from the Stare"!. ca.ncclhtion o f :1 proposed mur.c m cxrend the 710 frccu·a.r dun h South Pa~dCfl:.1 IQ ga,cr,nc capit:il f,w 1h1..! rdta.hil1u1irn1 :11 crc.11tnn 11f deed rcstricrcd, affordable hou.5i.ng uni.c, rhffHlgOOut 1hc ci.ry h1_ :a 1..k •W. c :mnl..!rl. The Cal1:r.m5 ~ 1hc C.i()· h!ive ~niriaro:1 :.1 proper!)' sall:'..'i pr<:>gf'2fll for the i IO frtt\1/'3}' smplu.,i; pmpcrud. "Ille Ciry worked \l;'i:th Senarnr Poreincino m pass SB 3-81 at1d the cmcrgcoq· rufcmaking rcgub.tion!i were rdca.<:cd on i\larch 28, 2022. The. C..it)' wi.ll h:.ivc priori()· ro purcha_i;c. unoccupied C.alrr.ms surplus pmpcnics, a.i; wcU :is qc:cup icd Ctlrnins sw-pfu5 properties if the cxist.ing tcruints Jc, no, purch::1...i;e the properties. "Inc Cit)· h:i:; heai wmking with C'..altran.i; ro o bCUn fl11)(lC11)' files and JO impea the propemc:s in o rder lo cva.lwtc rhe i;urplu.s prnpcn.ieo.. If is antici.p:arcd 1h::11. the C'.i()- will pur-ch:t.'iC :all or some of the. .;al l tan!'.i surplu.,i; pmrCf"t.ies once Ca.hr.tn.'i prm1 ides pui-c:h2~ :and sak cement,;; ro the Ci:ry. rt •l cii.;;urc ihe ltm.nci:11 fe::i-.ih1li1~ o f ~c4u1ri 1he \lfloccup,t.:d rr11pen~r. and 1n mm k-,, 1..-rn~tng tht.:m 10 1.:~p-.and hfllL'itfl\l. oppnnuruLiC"i in :-.nu,h P-ai.:-iJcn:i, ~12 ff wJJ explore whe r.hc-r. ,her<: maµh1 be :Jny ~K"m!lli \ c ~oh.J 11n n~ 10 rJ1n!.c: pnwidOO b\ .Slf ~ l 1h:u rc-;r, 1111.I h } the- co~, co nstrJims ot p-.1 nicub1 pmp<.--rt tCS.

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
. \ct.tu ire :.111J con,·cn: unoccupied,
C:al1:r:.1ns-owncd propcnics., th;u
re nol ~.nld :a l f.i.i.r m.i.rkct valucm dc.c.d•restrlct:ro 2fforcbblc. homi.n_g unit~ m cxp:and hou~ng
mobility opportunitic:!t for lower·
inoomc households -a.nJ re,.•icli:1.c
undcru$cd :i.re:t..'>.

M.a.,;i.mL,; the surplu!i C.:lltrnnti
p ropcny pon folio in sen"1cc of
the Ci.ry\ commitment m
cit."Vd.op and cxp:utd hou!iing
mnbtlicy.
')(l')l _'}O')OPI TAI 1roi:;- v n:-wn11 &J:'T f"":J:'MP Q .d l 1>1 A l-lf"\I J~ ll• .. lr:J:' t S: 11. .tS:1'.IT I TP n ATJ:

C::tlu:uis;
Communiry
Dcvdopmcn1
D<,p:u-tmcnt/ Cit}'
~wugcr•s Office
Cooducr feasihilirr stud)'
in 2022 wd =lr 202:I;
technical :.i!ui.sLwcc: and
\\'od: with nonprofirs. ac
lc:tsr mm.1:tllf throughout
planning period. T niti.:atc
a six.--month tc.n:uu b:nd
,;;ales inf()f'ITUri.on
dissemi:n:11;inn and
pu:rch2sc- option pmc~s
wichin ?I > d.!i)" foU()wing
completion of
imrJcmC11c:1.ti.nn o f
nc-ccs..i;:uy component~ of
1:1.nd tnU1Sfcr by . t:atc;
tal}!t:I" clctcaniaaUnn frw
Ci.ry pwchasc of
rCf112ini.ng surplus
pmpcnic.c; with.in (1
months of completion c,[
tcn:mr priority pw-cha.--e
peaod. L1fll15 wat be
:.:wa.d:1.bk: m OCCU():JfltS ~ r
()ct. ,ha 21114.

MARCH 2023 p .. , • ..- t;;
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-234 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Sincerely,
Delaine W. Shane
2003 Meridian Avenue
 How addressed: The City Council has made no determination regarding the purchase of the surplus Caltrans property or the specific use of the properties. The City is still analyzing the financial feasibility of purchasing the properties and the various options for converting them to affordable housing. The City cannot commit to a specific course of action for the surplus Caltrans properties until that analysis is complete. Furthermore, selling all of the surplus Caltrans homes at market rates to generate capital for the creation of deed-restricted affordable housing elsewhere in the city is not an allowable action under SB 381. Staff will explore possible solutions.

Ed Elsner (March 9, 2023)
Dear Director Frausto-Lupo,
Avoiding displacement of existing residential tenants should be a higher priority in the City's housing element.

The 5th draft housing element proposes to include Huntington Drive as part of the Downtown Specific Plan, change the zoning of medium and high density residential parcels to mixed-use, and increase density to 70 du/ac -- a higher increase than the 30 du/ac and 45 du/ac proposed for medium and high density residential zones elsewhere in the City.

This proposed rezoning of Huntington Drive would promote displacement of existing tenants residing in multi-unit apartment buildings along Huntington Drive, and while the housing element's proposed tenant protections may help mitigate the displacement, as a practical matter the displacement will be permanent.

Displacement most acutely affects families with children (who may have to be pulled out of school mid-year), the elderly, and the disabled, and the impacts can be devastating.

In my experience representing residential tenants in eviction cases off and on for 30 years, the "right of return" is illusory in most cases.

This is primarily because two moves are required. While the landlord would be required to pay relocation assistance to the tenant on the way out, the right of return typically does not include a requirement for the owner to pay moving expenses for the return move. The right of return depends on the landlord giving the displaced tenant a written offer, and the tenant typically has a limited period of time (typically, 30 days) to accept the offer. The mailed notice may or may not be received, whether because of problems with mail delivery, a property owner who is a bad actor who does not follow the notification rules, a tenant who has moved and neglected to provide a forwarding address, etc.

If the notice is received, it may come years after the tenant was evicted. The tenant may have moved out of the area and established roots in another community, the tenant may not be able to afford the return move, the tenant may be in the middle of a fixed term lease that the tenant cannot break, etc.

A successful tenant must be vigilant in monitoring the construction process and may have to hire an attorney to enforce their rights. But most importantly, the tenant's personal situation must be flexible enough that the tenant can make a quick decision at some uncertain time in the future to make the return move, and the tenant must have the financial resources to do so. 3 - 1706
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-235 A 2018 Los Angeles Times article illustrates the practical reality of the right of return in a City with a well-funded, fully staffed housing department.

The 5th draft housing element also appears to understate the number of existing units on Huntington Drive that would be affected by redevelopment.

To take a random example, parcel 5319037001 (1170 Huntington Drive) is identified in the draft housing element as high density residential parcel with 0 existing units. However, this is actually a 20- unit apartment building. There are many other examples of parcels identified in the draft as medium or high density residential parcels having 0 or 1 existing units when the parcels actually have multi-unit apartment buildings.

Rezoning of medium and high density residential parcels on Huntington Drive should be the same as for medium and high density residential parcels elsewhere in the City.

The "missing middle housing" program in the pre-March 7th draft had good potential to increase housing production while minimizing displacement of existing residential tenants. This is because eligible properties would be single-family parcels occupied in most cases by the property owner, who would be making a voluntary decision to participate or to sell the property to a developer and relocate.

However, the March 7th update may have effectively gutted the program. Before the March 7th update, the missing middle housing program would have applied citywide in all residential zones except high fire hazard areas, and there was a commitment to implement the provisions of SB 10. In the latest update, only parcels in "low-density residential zones along high quality transit corridors and/or transit stops" (and not in a high fire hazard area) would be eligible, and the scope of the program is yet to be determined "by the community, Planning Commission, and City Council." It is unclear which low-density residential zones would be considered to be "along" the City's high quality transit corridors, identified in SCAG's Data/Map Book as Fair Oaks Avenue and Huntington Drive east of Fair Oaks, as there is no low-density residential zoning actually on either street, and the March 7th update does not identify parcels or zones that would potentially be eligible (subject to a future scope determination).

The housing element should include a more robust missing middle housing program.

Thank you for your consideration,
Ed Elsner
[email protected]
 How addressed: Goal 6 and the policies within that goal will be developed after further research to mitigate the potential for and impacts of displacement. The number of existing units was pulled from building permit data. The data was spot checked, but may be incomplete for some parcels.

Ed Elsner (March 9, 2023)
Dear Director Frausto-Lupo,
I’m writing to describe a possible alternative to program 2.n. in the 5th draft housing element (as updated on March 7, 2023), the Citywide Height Limit Ballot Initiative. The alternative would be a general plan amendment modifying the forty-five foot height limit established by local initiative in 1983.
3 - 1707
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-236 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE This general plan amendment could be implemented on the same 120-day timeline as the housing element’s other rezoning programs (which include other amendments to the land use element of the general plan), and with more certainty than the proposed 2024 ballot measure.

Recognizing that this alternative program may not be viable politically, I’m hoping this comment at least provides additional perspective that may be useful as the City works towards achieving its housing element goals.

The General Plan and the Land Use Hierarchy
The state Planning and Zoning Law establishes the authority of local governments to regulate the use of land. Gov’t Code § 65000 et seq.; Neighborhood Action Group v. County of Calaveras (1984) 156 Cal.App.3d 1176, 1182. Each city must adopt a general plan for the physical development of the city.

Gov’t Code § 65300. The general plan takes precedence over other local zoning laws:

The general plan is atop the hierarchy of local government law regulating land use. It has been aptly analogized to “a constitution for all future developments.” [Citation omitted.]...Subordinate to the general plan are zoning laws, which regulate the geographic allocation and allowed uses of land. Zoning laws must conform to the adopted general plan. [Citations omitted.] These enactments provide the authority and the criteria for the regulation of land uses.

Neighborhood Action Group, 156 Cal.App.3d at 1183; Gov’t Code § 65850 (authorizing cities to adopt zoning ordinances).

Local Initiatives and General Plans
Although a city’s general plan may be amended by local initiative (DeVita v. County of Napa (1995) 9 Cal.4th 763), the electorate must have adequate notice of the purpose of the initiative:

We cannot at once accept the function of a general plan as a “constitution,” or perhaps more accurately a charter for future development, and the proposition that it can be amended without notice to the electorate that such amendment is the purpose of an initiative. Implied amendments or repeals are disfavored in any case [citation omitted], and the doctrine may not be applied here.

Lesher Communications, Inc. v. City of Walnut Creek (1990) 52 Cal.3d 531, 540-541. “Since we cannot presume the existence of such intent [to amend the general plan], it must be found, if it exists, in the ballot measure itself or the explanatory material in the ballot pamphlet.” Id. at 542. Stated another way, in order to amend the general plan, the text of the local initiative or the explanatory ballot materials must provide notice that the measure is something “other than an ordinance in the nature of a zoning ordinance.” Id. at 544.

The 1983 Height Limit Initiative
In a 1983 special election, South Pasadena residents voted to approve a local initiative establishing a citywide height limit of forty-five feet (Reso. 5642):

The initiative did not identify a provision of the general plan that it would amend, nor did it state that it was adding to the general plan; therefore, absent some other basis in the ballot materials to conclude that its purpose was to amend the general plan, the 1983 initiative has the status of a zoning law subordinate to the general plan in the land use hierarchy. Lesher Communications, 52 Cal.3d at 541. 3 - 1708
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-237 Amending the General Plan to Modify the Height Limit
Section 9217 of the Election Code generally provides that local initiatives may not be amended or repealed except by a vote of the people, and program 2.n. assumes that the City's forty-five foot height limit cannot be modified without voter approval.

However, if the 1983 initiative is subordinate to the general plan, section 9217 would not restrict the City Council’s authority to amend the general plan to modify the height limit, and once amended, the general plan would prevail over the inconsistent subordinate law:

The Planning and Zoning Law itself precludes consideration of a zoning ordinance which conflicts with a general plan as a pro tanto repeal or implied amendment of the general plan.

The general plan stands....The Planning and Zoning Law does not contemplate that general plans will be amended to conform to zoning ordinances. The tail does not wag the dog. The general plan is the charter to which the ordinance must conform.

Lesher Communications, 52 Cal.3d at 541.

For similar reasons, the 1983 initiative cannot be interpreted as superordinate to the general plan. The local electorate’s right to initiative is co-extensive with the legislative power of the local governing body (DeVita, 9 Cal.4th at 775), so if the City Council cannot enact a land use law above the general plan in the land use hierarchy -- which it has no authority to do under the Planning and Zoning Law -- neither can the electorate via local initiative. Legislature v. Deukmejian (1983) 34 Cal.3d 658, 674-675 (initiative power is subject to the same limitations as legislative action).

The Housing Accountability Act provides additional support for the suggested general plan amendment. If a proposed housing development project is consistent with objective general plan standards and criteria, but the zoning for the project site is inconsistent with the general plan (for example, because a zoning ordinance includes a lower height limit), the project will be deemed “not inconsistent” with applicable zoning standards and criteria for purposes of approval of the project's land use application. Gov’t Code § 65589.5(j)(4).

The 1983 initiative could have included clear language that it was amending the general plan, but as written, it left the door open for the City Council to modify the height limit through a superseding general plan amendment.

Noncompliance with the Housing Element Law
The City has been out of compliance with the housing element law since October 2021, and because it missed the October 2022 deadline to adopt a housing element and to obtain certification from HCD, the City will remain out of compliance until the City adopts a compliant housing element and completes the related rezoning programs.

Given recent media attention, there is more widespread awareness of the consequences of noncompliance with the housing element law, including the loss of authority to disapprove land use applications for housing projects that are inconsistent with the City’s zoning laws, also known as the “builder’s remedy.” Gov’t Code § 65589.5(d)(5). As a result, the electorate has a better understanding why South Pasadena needs to obtain housing element compliance sooner than later, and anyone following the progress of the City’s housing element should understand how a modified height limit in designated higher-density zones is critical to achieving that goal while avoiding a radical upzoning of the the entire city.

Thank you for your consideration,
Ed Elsner
3 - 1709
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-238 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE [email protected]
 How addressed: The Housing Element proposes a program to amend the zoning code height limit which was adopted by the voters. Any ordinance enacted by the voters may only be amended by the voters. The Housing Element establishes a program to put this question to the voters to decide whether to establish a new height limit to achieve the densities required to meeting the RHNA housing goals. If the voters do not increase the height limit in certain areas, other zoningbased measures (such as conversion of current low density areas into higher density areas) will need to be analyzed and submitted to HCD for review. Per a Court Judgement, the City must place a measure on the ballot to repeal or amend the current height limit.

Julie Pearson (March 9, 2023)
To our city staff,
As a resident of the city for 25 years, married to a resident of over 50 years, who is the child of a resident of nearly 60 years, we oppose the city’s intention to remove all single-family zoning requirements, city wide. We also oppose the city’s intention to allow structures in the city to rise more than 6 stories.

These proposed changes in our opinion would change the feel of our town as well as the neighborhoods, and be detrimental to the family friendly environment that is central to our city.

Thank you for considering my comments.

Sincerely,
Julie Pearson, Keith Pearson and Margie Pearson
1749 Via del Rey
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals.The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements. The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the highquality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023.

Bill Kelly (March 9, 2023)
Public Comment on Second Draft of Draft 5 (March 7, 2023) of South Pasadena’s Housing Element
(Submitted March 9, 2023)
Greetings:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the second draft (March 7, 2023) of the fifth draft (March 2, 2023) of South Pasadena’s proposed Housing Element in my hopes that it will result in a third draft of the fifth draft.

The comments below first cover general concerns with the latest draft. The second part covers various concerns reflected in previously published and verbalized community comments regarding state housing requirements, as well as an email sent by a resident to unspecified individuals aimed at 3 - 1710
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-239 prompting comments and complaints to City management and Councilmembers, which you have no doubt received.

Specifically, I urge you to:
 End R-1 zoning throughout the city (except in areas with wildfire and geologic hazards); and  Get started with affordable housing by committing in the City’s housing element to seeing that denser affordable housing is built on as many of the unoccupied Caltrans properties as possible. (The well documented need for affordable housing amid the widely discussed housing crisis need not be amplified here. It is a well-established feature of the landscape.) In submitting the next draft of the Housing Element to the state, foremost please remember that zoning does not build housing, only investment does, and the vacant Caltrans properties at this point represent the only palpable prospect the City can increase its stock of desperately needed affordable housing in the next few years. Moreover, change will not come overnight with rezoning. Change will come only over a decade or more. Indeed, many of us who are debating housing will be dead and gone before any appreciable change.

General Concerns
First of all, South Pasadena is not alone among cities that to date have failed to see their housing elements approved. It is clear that cities are dealing with relatively recently passed laws and emotional divisiveness among their residents as change rarely is easily accepted. Nowhere, perhaps, is that more true than in South Pasadena, one of the few communities across the nation that stopped the extension of a freeway. That said, much of the traffic the freeway would have conveyed now travels on city streets, including Fair Oaks and Fremont that are regularly gridlocked. Meanwhile, polluting diesel trucks hauling containers from the region’s ports don’t pass through South Pasadena to reach logistical centers on the periphery of the region, but instead travel along the 60 and I-10 freeways through less affluent communities, many of which are predominantly of color. At the same time, the City has been essentially unable to agree and carry out any significant effort to use available funds for traffic calming, active transportation facilities, and surface street projects, as other cities move forward.

When it comes to housing, some City residents have fought any efforts or plans to allow for increased density, instead seeking to shoehorn density into narrowly prescribed strips along commercial streets and major arterials. In addition, the city’s planning and permitting process is lengthy and tedious. As a result, there has been relatively little change in the landscape in the more than thirty years I’ve lived here. Indeed, residents—including freeway fighters, historical preservationists, and many prosperous owners of large single family homes on large parcels, aided by others prone to fear of change—have managed to keep South Pasadena more or less the way it has been since the post-World War II era, a quaint bedroom community that celebrates the days of Route 66, classic cars, good schools, and beautiful gardens, a community that many residents view as charitable and charming. And no doubt all these things contribute to South Pasadena’s much locally celebrated and revered “neighborhood character.”
Personally, I must admit that I was drawn to the community upon returning to Southern California in 1988 due to its neighborhood character. However, a lot has happened since then and as I’ve witnessed the changes—hollowing out of the middle class, offshoring of manufacturing, stagnation of wages, growing inequity, increasing social and racial tension, rampant drug addiction and social 3 - 1711
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-240 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE dysfunction, growing homelessness, overcrowding, housing insecurity, a wave of mental illness, and the astronomical cost of housing, and rapidly accelerating climate instability—my view of what it means to live here in South Pasadena, in the region, and in the world has changed dramatically.

Today, it’s become increasingly apparent that the magnitude of change needed to address this complex of interrelated problems has become so great that over the next ten to 20 years just about everything around us must change, including here in South Pasadena. However, this view is assuredly not shared by apparently influential residents who say they support “thoughtful and conscious growth and expanded thinking” as long as it’s not next door. They complain about any proposal to add much needed housing, grasping at any potential plausible objection, such as lack of water, lack of power, traffic, burdens on schools and services, lack of open space, and mostly the perception that growth will diminish their property values. They dispose of anything that’s seemingly proposed, yet never articulate on their own what a housing element, or general plan should include. And history has shown their tendency is to get the city to legally contest many state requirements aimed at solving these problems, and then slow roll any local actions developed to meet the requirements once legal actions play out. This pattern clearly is based on the view that South Pasadena is exceptional and should be left to manage its own affairs without regional and state oversight. Yet, this is despite that the source of the wealth here stems from proximity to the second largest metro area in the nation situated on the rim of trans-Pacific trade and in the heart of a state with one of the world’s biggest economies. Indeed, the message seems to be: I’ll enjoy the personal wealth the region offers, but don’t ask me to contribute much toward solving the region’s problems. Moreover, don’t call us irresponsible, because we supported local tax measures and contribute to local charities that are “truly . . . sustaining our way of life here in SoPas.” In this case sustaining is a substitute for “not changing.”
However, as city officials and Councilmembers it is incumbent on you to lead, rather than to cater to such provincialism. Just imagine that the story is much the same in small cities across the region and the state when it comes to the state’s housing requirements. Note too that such attitudes have prevailed for decades, while problems have mounted and festered. Indeed, it’s the lack of any local effort to address the housing crisis that led lawmakers in Sacramento to enact new state requirements.

So now, it’s reckoning time. Unless we look in the mirror as a community and make the change, the problems that everyone seems to acknowledge and agree must be solved, won’t be solved by doing the same as we have done in the past.

Addressing Specific Contentions Voiced in the Community City-wide R-4 zoning will diminish property values
Don’t tread on me and my property value by continuing to maintain R-1 zoning. Numerous studies cited below show that increasing density, particularly everywhere, will result in rising property values and likely check rising rents and housing costs. In addition, the city’s inclusionary housing ordinance will require more affordable units.
https://masslandlords.net/gentle-density-increases-nearby-property-values-evidence-shows-contrary-to-popular-belief/ https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2022/1/18/what-would-mass-upzoning-actually-do-to-property-values https://voiceofoc.org/2021/08/jamieson-increasing-densities-in-single-family-neighborhoods-would-increase-landvalues-make-housing-more-expensive/ 3 - 1712
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-241 https://voiceofoc.org/2021/08/jamieson-increasing-densities-in-single-family-neighborhoods-would-increase-landvalues-make-housing-more-expensive/ Also, increasing allowable density city-wide will open better housing opportunities to all and destigmatize affordable housing residents. It will address the baked in ongoing classism in the City and its racist legacy during the Sundown Town era.

We don’t have the water or power to add additional housing units Housing not lawns is the rejoinder. Indeed, half or more of the water is used outside to water lawns. If the lawns had housing on them, water use would not increase. Indeed, more than half the people dwelling in multi-unit housing in South Pasadena use only half the water used by the less than half that live in single family homes. That’s because half the water use at the average-sized single family residence is used to water lawns.

From: https://www.southpasadenaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/27639/637738897658270000 In fact, one study shows that on R-1 lots in the area, as much as 70 percent of water use is for lawn irrigation.
https://deeply.thenewhumanitarian.org/water/community/2017/08/09/city-wide-study-shows-how-much-water-urbanlandscaping-really-uses Lack of Power
3 - 1713
Table 4-1 Demands for Potable and Non-Potable Water - Actual Submittal Table 4-1 Retail: Demands for Potable and Non-Potable1 Water - Actual I - - • ► - • - - -
·, use Type . 2020Actual . - - ..t _ _._ - -
Dfop down list
Maystltctochuumol pleDmes Level of Treatment Additional Description UleH are the only use l\'pes ltWIII be When Delivered Volume2 rtc08f11Hd by the WU[dlla onl1ne (as needed) Drop down list submlttal tool lldd 1ddlt1on1I rows IS ftded
Single Family Drinking Water 1,962
Multi-Family Drinking Water 992
Commercial Drinking Water 450
Institutional/Governmenta l Drinking Water 85
Landscape Drinking Water 4
Losses Drinking Water 46
Other Fire Protection Drinking Water 7
TOTAL 3,546
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-242 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE California utilities are in the midst of major distribution circuit upgrades to increase capacity to deliver power. The California Public Utilities Commission and California Independent System Operator require utilities to show they have enough power for each coming year by performing a “resource adequacy study.” To pass the test, the utilities must show they have adequate power purchase contracts for a one-in-ten-year weather event. Utilities also are subject to long-term transmission planning requirements, as well as power procurement requirements.

Overwhelming Transportation Infrastructure
Look Ma, no traffic. A Montreal residential neighborhood at rush hour in fall of 2022.

Contrary and seemingly counterintuitively, density does not necessarily result in increased traffic.

Instead, low density single-family development increases traffic. Montreal is a case in point. The four million who live within the city limits there get around by walking, biking, and riding the clean, well maintained, and extensive subway system. Retail, including supermarkets, drug stores, etc. are scattered throughout the city. This has enabled Montreal to minimize the space it allocates for the auto compared to the typical U.S. city, particularly in suburban areas. That has opened up public spaces, which are distributed throughout the city.

Indeed, a new study conducted at U.C. Davis recently showed that increased density will help meet greenhouse gas and other air pollution reduction goals by minimizing the need to drive, even in electric cars. This will help reduce dependence on foreign metal mining for batteries, magnets, etc. used in electric vehicles.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/jan/24/us-electric-vehicles-lithium-consequences-research https://www.climateandcommunity.org/_files/ugd/d6378b_3b79520a747948618034a2b19b9481a0.pdf Impact on Schools & Open Space
Schools have the ability to expand by building up. Schools also can cooperate with the City to close streets to expand playgrounds and athletic fields. In fact, SPUSD did this when South Pasadena Middle School was rebuilt more than 15 years ago. Moreover, even South Pasadena freeway fighters who support maintaining R-1 zoning have touted closing the 1-710 stubs in Los Angeles and Pasadena, respectively, to expand the Cal State Los Angeles campus and to create new park space in Pasadena. Why not expand elementary school campuses by closing or narrowing adjacent streets where possible.
3 - 1714
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-243 In addition, areas in Garfield Park under the SCE lines and also areas around the periphery of the fields in the Arroyo could be used to site local basketball courts, etc., or additional community gardens. They are not well maintained and are under-utilized. At one point the updated general plan, which still is pending years later, contemplated placing a walking trail under the SCE lines paralleling Fair Oaks in the Marengo District. It hasn’t been done or pursued as the general plan remains in limbo after years of discussion.

Conclusion
To conclude, we are only limited due to our limited way of viewing the world, despite that those voicing opposition to density claim they back expansive thinking. By increasing allowable density citywide and by beginning with seeing that quads, triplexes, etc. are built on the vacant Caltrans lots where feasible, South Pasadena can begin to address the complex of interrelated problems that we all want to solve. However, if South Pasadena and hundreds of other cities continue to do what they have in the past, the problems will continue to grow and make life—with its traffic, pollution and climate change, homelessness, and social inequity—worse and worse. We can either be part of the solution or part of the problem. That’s why we must look ourselves in the mirror and decide to truly bring about the change that is so clearly is needed and so long forestalled.

Bill Kelly
South Pasadena Resident
 How addressed: The City Council has made no determination regarding the purchase of the surplus Caltrans property or the specific use of the properties. The City is still analyzing the financial feasibility of purchasing the properties and the various options for converting them to affordable housing. The City cannot commit to a specific course of action for the surplus Caltrans properties until that analysis is complete. Staff will explore possible solutions. The remainder of the comment does not include any proposed changes to the Housing Element, but supports many of the policies already contained in the Element.

Jeremy D (March 6, 2023)
I would request the city change the following section of the housing element to limit the area that would allow up to a four-plex to parcels on major traffic corridors only, like Huntington, Fremont and Fair Oaks or near the Metro station. Also, since the city currently has a height limit, I would recommend removing the mention of buildings that are above the current limit until the time when the voters have had a chance to weigh in on this.

Additionally, the City will permit “Missing Middle” housing types in all residential zones citywide, except for in high fire hazard areas. Missing Middle housing types shall include duplexes, triplexes, four-plexes, courtyard buildings, and cottage courts. The City will adopt objective design standards for each housing type.
 How addressed: The Housing Element was revised to reduce the area where missing middle housing will be allowed from citywide to the high-quality transit areas within the city. This revision was released for public review on March 7, 2023. Program 2.n does not change the height limit, it commits the City Council to bring forth a voter initiative to consider repealing or replacing the height limit and provides a new height limit if it is replaced. The Housing Element establishes a program for the voters to decide whether to establish a new height limit to achieve the densities required to meeting 3 - 1715
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-244 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE the RHNA housing goals. Pursuant to the Court order in the existing litigation regarding failure to adopt a compliant Housing Element by the statutory deadline, the City is required to place a measure on the ballot to revise the height limit for residential uses. If the voters do not increase the height limit in certain areas, other zoning-based measures (such as conversion of current low density areas into higher density areas) will need to be analyzed and submitted to HCD for review.

Josh Albrektson (March 11, 2023)
This e-mail is CCed to City Council. SoPas planning Staff, and HCD. This is meant mostly for HCD.

There are two major problems with the 4th draft South Pasadena Housing Element. At first I thought they were mistakes but after my conversation with SoPas staff on Wednesday I realized they were intentionally done.

South Pasadena's housing element should not be accepted without these being changed, and it is my hope that South Pasadena changes them before the Housing Element is submitted on Monday. I told them they needed to fix it at our Wednesday meeting and in a subsequent e-mail.

1. The city is using intentionally low FAR to ghost zone the 70 DU/Acre and 110 DU/Acre and make them not feasible.

The March 2nd draft had FARs of 7.0 and 10.0 respectively. They released a new draft on March 7th that changed it to 2.5 FAR. That 2.5 FAR makes 70 and 110 impossible to build and staff knows this. 815 Fremont Ave is a 50 unit density bonus project approved by South Pasadena in April 2022. It has a FAR of 3.3, a density of 61.7 DU/Acre, and a height of 56 feet.

This is a real world example of the FAR needed to build in South Pasadena. Based on this approved project, the FAR for 70 DU/acre should be at least 3.75 and for 6.0 FAR for 110 DU/Acre.

The 2.5 FAR makes both of these densities impossible and the Housing Element needs to be changed to at least the numbers I listed above.

I raised this issue with SoPas staff at my 3/9 meeting, and I found out this was intentionally done.

When I told Allison Becker (AB) that the 2.5 FAR made 70 and 110 infeasible, she told me that General plans, specific plans, and housing elements need to be internally consistent and they changed it to 2.5 FAR because that is what was in the 2020 proposed Downtown Specific Plan (DSP).

I told her that was BS, because the Housing Element was going to have densities of 70 and 110, and if you actually wanted the documents to be internally consistent than the FARS needed to be changed because the 70 and 110 are going to be in the Housing Element and the FAR should be changed to be consistent with the required density.

She then changed her response to say that the community didn't support over 2.5. AB stated 2.5 FAR is what the community agreed to in the DSP in 2020.

AB and Grant Henninger (GH) then stated that the 2.5 FAR is there because of the 45 foot height limit and when the community votes to raise the height limit there will then be a discussion at that time with the community as to what the appropriate FAR should be. 3 - 1716
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-245 Of note, I have an e-mail from Woody Tescher of Placeworks who wrote our 2020 DSP. The reason he said 2.5 FAR was picked was because that is the biggest building that could be built with 50 DU/Acre and 45 ft height limit. If that is the biggest that can be built under those conditions, then

2.5 FAR is absolutely inadequate for 70 Du/acre and 110 DU/acre at 84 feet.

This kind of ghost zoning is just as bad as their repeated claims that 70 DU/Acre was feasible under the 45 foot height limit and the Housing Element should be changed so that the FAR allows the density stated in the Housing Element to be built. It should be 4.0 for 70 DU/Acre and 6.0 for 110 DU/Acre.

2. SoPas is intentionally setting the zoning for site 3, Pavilions, significantly under what the owner's representative stated was needed for financial viability.

At the Feb first City Council meeting SoPas asked the owner of Pavilions to give a public comment stating that they wanted to redevelop the property and was not concerned about parking during construction. Mr Anderson, the owners lawyer, went much further than that.

Here is the link to the video. Starting at 2:07:30 he gave a 3 minute public comment and then at 2:12:08 he was called back to answer a question from Council Member Braun until 2:14:00. I really encourage you to listen to everything he said.
http://www.spectrumstream.com/streaming/south_pasadena/2023_02_01.cfm He said he was asked to sign a letter stating intent to redevelop and he did. He also said that he REPEATEDLY told SoPas staff that the zoning proposed in previous housing elements were not financially viable.

He said that the only way they would redevelop the property with housing is if they could replace the grocery store with a bigger grocery store and they were very interested in that.

He also stated that they needed 150-160 DU/acre for the zoning and 140 DU/acre was the absolute minimum needed for financial viability. He also said they could do it at 84 ft.

South Pasadena is zoning this lot for 110 DU/Acre and this is intentionally below what Mr. Anderson said was needed to be viable.

In the March 2nd draft the zoning was 10.0 FAR, 110 feet. and 110 DU/Acre. In the March 7th draft they changed it to 2.5 FAR, 84 feet, and 110 DU/acre.

In my meeting with SoPas Staff I told them that with the changes they were now zoned for less than the very specific requirements Mr. Anderson stated.

AB told me that they had removed Pavilions, like I asked them to. I said no you didn't. It is still there. AB said well they planned to. GH interrupted her and said that they should have this conversation offline.

It appears that there had been discussions in SoPas staff to remove site 3 with the zoning proposed. 3 - 1717
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-246 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE AB then asked me "Well, don't you think that this was just an ambitious proposal from the owner used as a negotiating tactic??"
The goal of a Housing Element and SoPas staff should be to actually have the housing be built. It should not be a negotiation with the owner to make the feasibility of a project so low with the least amount of apartments so that the project may or may not be built. This site is one of the best sites to build housing in all of SoPas and SoPas should be doing whatever is possible to put the most possible units on this site.

Instead they are intentionally making sure the zoning would not allow redevelopment.

This Housing Element should be rejected unless South Pasadena zones this site for 160 DU/acre as Mr. Anderson specifically stated was required.
--
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
 How addressed: There is no intent by the City to make sure zoning standards do not achieve stated Housing Element goals. The City is committed to taking such actions within the required 120 days post-adoption to amend zoning and other codes to address the goals of the Housing Element.  How addressed: The stated FAR and other development standards outlined in Program 3.b of the Housing Element are consistent with the current height limit. When adopted, within 120 days after adoption of the Housing Element, the General Plan, Downtown Specific Plan, and other zoning amendments will need to be consistent with the current height limit. If the height limit is repealed or increased through voter initiative, development standards for affected zones with residential uses will be updated to be consistent with the new height limit within 120 days thereafter.  How addressed: This draft of the Housing Element represents a significant increase in the density allowed on Site 15, from 70 to 110 du/ac. At the February 1st City Council meeting, the representative of this site indicated that they analyzed the site’s feasibility using the existing inclusionary requirement of 20%, as well as a higher requirement of 30%, and under those requirements would need at least 140 du/ac to make redevelopment of the site be feasible. The City is reducing the inclusionary requirement to 15% and providing significantly more incentives and reduced development standard requirements to ensure that redevelopment of sites like this one are feasible.

Furthermore, this site is not necessary for the City to meet its RHNA numbers, and instead the site only adds to the City’s RHNA buffer.

Mike Thurman (March 12, 2023)
Hi Michael!
I wanted to reach out and share my thoughts on a win-win approach to meeting the State’s housing element requirements. I looked over the City’s draft proposal and was surprised at the low estimate for ADU conversions (50 over the next eight years) in meeting the 2,067 additional unit requirement.

I believe that our city has hundreds of unpermitted ADU units that are currently fully occupied by low-income residents that are not being counted because of their status. Issuing permits for these fully-occupied units would immediately:
3 - 1718
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-247

1. Lift the City’s count of the number of low-income residents that currently live in these units.

2. Increase homeowner property values by increasing the habitable square footage of their properties.

3. Allow homeowners to fully insure their properties for the full replacement value of their properties, including the ADU units.

4. Avoid any new construction and associated impacts for these additional units.

5. Avoid any new parking impacts for these existing units where residents are already housed.

City leadership may be under the impression that the City’s previous efforts to encourage ADU conversions generated only limited results, and therefore this might not a viable option for generating significant additional low income units. However, that impression is incorrect.

Based on my own experience, although City staff prepared a brochure and encouraged residents to apply for ADU conversions, suggesting these would involve low-cost and low-documentation reviews, in fact once the Building Department became involved it immediately become apparent that the costs associated with the conversion, including completion of a complicated application and architectural and structural engineering plan requirements, would be prohibitive, and my hunch is that the City received very few applications from that effort.

However, it is important to appreciate the fact that all of these unpermitted units in South Pasadena are already occupied, meaning that this prohibitive ADU conversion process has simply prevented existing units from being permitted and has guaranteed that they remain uncounted.

Another unfortunate reality is it appears from the Report that the City has no accurate count of the number of these units in the City. I firmly believe there are at least a dozen of these units located in just my neighborhood, one street within the City. My sense is this could, and should, be a much more significant element in the City’s plans for complying with the State requirements.

I believe our City could make a significant dent in meeting the State’s additional housing requirements, and at the same time support many of our homeowners, by carefully examining the ADU conversion process, simplifying it and providing additional resident support in the process. I can foresee (and will volunteer to lead or be part of) a citizen-led promotion of such a program to encourage and maximize ADU conversion application submissions by South Pasadena residents who own these units.

Thank you for considering these thoughts and for your continued service to our City. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or feedback on this issue.

Best wishes to you and your family,
Mike Thurman
(626) 399-6205 (cell)
[email protected]
 How addressed: The Housing Element includes a significant discussion of the City’s existing ADUs, as well as projected ADUs accounting for a portion of the City’s RHNA requirements.

Additionally, the Housing Element includes programs to encourage and monitor the construction of ADUs to ensure that ADU production meets the projections throughout the planning cycle.
3 - 1719
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-248 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Care First South Pasadena (March 12, 2023)
City of South Pasadena
Community Development Department
[email protected]
[email protected]
CC: California Housing and Community Development
[email protected]
[email protected]
Re: South Pasadena Housing Element, Fifth Draft (March 7) Dear Ms. Frausto-Lupo:

We are dismayed by the City of South Pasadena’s unilateral revisions of the Fifth Housing Element draft between March 2 and March 7. These changes set back progress on the development of the 20 vacant Caltrans properties. The City is no longer committing to converting these properties to affordable housing on site and, instead, is returning to entertaining “alternative solutions” to Senate Bill 381.

The Caltrans properties are the only certain parcels of land for the development of 100% affordable housing in the foreseeable future in South Pasadena. Other programs and sites identified in the Housing Element are only ideas for potential developments. Similarly, zoning, building, and other code changes will not guarantee affordable housing development, functioning only to support and incentivize prospective projects.

The City’s March 7 revisions to the Caltrans properties continue the City’s decades-long history of racial and economic exclusion and do not affirmatively further fair housing.

It comes as no surprise that both the March 2 and March 7 drafts also fail to address our comments about the City’s use of historic preservation policies. The City will continue to use these policies to impede affordable housing development and maintain much of its racial and economic exclusion in higher resource neighborhoods. And, the City has no plans to stop doing so.

Worse, not only is the City attempting to skirt existing laws on fair housing and Caltrans properties, but the City has also eluded the public participation process required for the Housing Element.

Nothing in the March 7 version explains why the City made significant revisions from the March 2 version. Prior to March 2, the City held three public meetings on February 1, 9, and 15 to receive public comment and to direct City staff on how to revise the Housing Element. The March 2 version reflected these discussions. We can reasonably surmise that between March 2 and March 7, the City received comments from residents and Councilmembers and changed the draft accordingly, outside of the public process. The City must disclose in this draft, with opportunity for public comment, all communications it received pertaining to the fifth Housing Element draft.

Program 1.b. – Convert Caltrans Homes to Affordable Housing Constructing affordable units on the Caltrans sites is critical to bringing in any new affordable units in the City because there are no other sites in the City that are already obligated to hold 100% affordable housing. While the City committed to converting Caltrans homes to affordable housing on site in the 3 - 1720
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-249 March 2 version of the Housing Element draft, it completely changed course on March 7. The City should adopt the March 2 version of this program.

In the March 2 version, the City wrote:
[T]he City will construct additional units, either as ADUs or Missing Middle housing, on the parcels to provide additional lower income units if feasible. These additional units are not accounted for in the City’s RHNA calculation, and will provide an additional buffer if constructed.

Redline Version, p. 266 (emphasis added).

In the March 7 version, the City added a new provision about alternatives to Senate Bill 381, and walked back its commitment to construct additional units on the sites of the Caltrans properties:

To ensure the financial feasibility of acquiring the unoccupied properties and in turn leveraging them to expand housing opportunities in South Pasadena, staff will explore whether there might be any alternative solutions to those provided by SB 381 that respond to the cost constraints of particular properties.
. . .
[T]he City may consider the construction of additional units, either as ADUs or Missing Middle housing, on certain parcels to provide additional lower income units if feasible. These additional units are not accounted for in the City’s RHNA calculation, and will provide an additional buffer if constructed.

Redline Version, p. 267 (emphases added).

Senate Bill 381 is not just one option for the disposition of the Caltrans homes. It is the only option because it is the law that governs what the City must do upon acquiring the homes from Caltrans.

In a March 8 meeting with Care First, City staff shared it is the City’s intention to comply with the spirit of Senate Bill 381—to convert the properties into affordable housing—but also it would like to explore “alternative solutions” for certain properties. These are contradictory goals. The City identified exempt properties to include ones that have the main subject of community debate: those located in the City’s higher resource neighborhoods. When we asked for the City’s inspection reports and other documents they are relying on to determine the feasibility of development, the City declined to share this information.9 The City fails to provide any evidence in this Housing Element to support its conclusions that some properties are not financially feasible for development.

As explained in our December 8, 2022, comment, the City has not disclosed legally viable “alternative solutions” to the public. Mayor Jon Primuth, alongside Cultural Heritage Commission Chair Mark Gallatin (who simultaneously sits on the board of the private non-profit organization, the South Pasadena Preservation Foundation), has publicly advocated for these solutions, despite the City Attorney’s opinion that these alternatives are unlawful.10 One such alternative is selling the Caltrans 9 The City has approved contracts for inspection services. See Agenda Items 22 and 23, City Council Meeting, July 20, 2022, https://www.southpasadenaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/30038/637934174414530000. 10 On November 2, 2022, then-Mayor Pro Tem Jon Primuth, as one of the two members of the SB 381 implementation committee, stated at a city council meeting: “There’s a proposal that we look at an alternative to SB 381. We are exploring 3 - 1721
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-250 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE properties through a double escrow process and selecting preferred homebuyers vetted by the Cultural Heritage Commission. Again, Senate Bill 381 does not allow for this or other alternatives. Moreover, the Cultural Heritage Commission, which has a mandate to enforce the City’s historic preservation laws rooted in racial and economic exclusion, must not be allowed to participate in any homebuyer selection process.

If the City insists on continuing to explore “alternative solutions” to Senate Bill 381 in the Housing Element, it must explain what these alternatives are and why they are legally viable. Otherwise, the Department of Housing and Community Development should not approve this Housing Element which contains policy decisions that violate the law.

Program 3.m. – Implement SB 9 and SB 10
In the March 2 version, the City proposed to permit Missing Middle housing types “in all residential zones citywide, except in high fire hazard areas.” The City did not specify the types of Missing Middle housing types for each category of residential costs, only that they could include duplexes, triplexes, four-plexes, courtyard buildings, and cottage courts.

In the March 7 version, the City narrowed the Missing Middle zones to “low density residential zones along high-quality transit corridors and/or transit stops, except for in high fire hazard areas.” At this time, our position is neutral on these changes. However, we note several areas for improvement and change:
 Specify Missing Middle housing types to include triplexes and fourplexes. Without concrete commitments on density, the City risks falling short of its promises to allow for greater density that as one of our options as well.” See http://www.spectrumstream.com/streaming/south_pasadena/2022_11_02.cfm# (starting at approximately 02:44:00).

Yet about two months prior, Primuth conceded in an email to local residents that these alternatives to SB 381 are not legally viable:

The dilemma of what to do now under the requirements of SB381 is real. But there is a persistent talk that SB381 is optional. That's not my interpretation of the law. It's not our city attorney's interpretation of the law. It's the interpretation of the attorney designated by the SPPF [South Pasadena Preservation Foundation] proponents for the city to retain to obtain independent advise [sic]. All the public comment we will receive tonight is based on a false assumption, repeated against the overwhelming legal counsel they have received. I've spent hours exploring the option presented by SPPF in many public comments. I pointed out the problems and dead ends with their legal strategy. I've obtained a concession from a prominent SPPF member that their route requires bending the rules. There has been no concessions from the SPPF proponents. I am sorry to go on the record to criticize them, as they are fine, trustworthy friends and neighbors.

See Attachment 1 (November 2, 2022 email).

On December 7, 2022, Mark Gallatin made public comment at a city council meeting (starting at 1:04:00) sharing that the South Pasadena Preservation Foundation had "nominated the Caltrans homes in the historic 710 corridor . . . for inclusion on the 2023 list of America's 11 Most Endangered Places [maintained by the National Trust for Historic Preservation]." During the 710 freeway fight, designating South Pasadena as an endangered city was of "invaluable assistance" to keeping the freeway away. Gallatin continued in his comments: "We need nationwide attention again to return our historic neighborhoods to pre-Caltrans conditions and get the houses sold." Returning historic neighborhoods to pre-Caltrans conditions is code for maintaining their high income levels at the exclusion of lower income households and, as a result, disproportionately excluding Black and Latinx people. See http://www.spectrumstream.com/streaming/south_pasadena/2022_12_07.cfm. 3 - 1722
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-251 in these targeted areas. For example, if the City only allows for duplexes, that will not be financially feasible for developers and will not result in greater density.  Designate upzoning as the default policy (not an opt-in program). Staging this as an opt-in program creates another administrative hurdle in the development process rather than streamlining it; thus, this component of the program should be removed.  Define “high fire hazard areas.” The City leaves “high fire hazard areas” undefined in this draft. Based on the City Council and staff ’s public outreach discussions (e.g., Special Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission, February 15, 2023), the intent of this provision is to account for areas that have a high risk of fire. This provision should be narrowly interpreted and should not be used broadly to designate as many neighborhoods as possible as high fire hazard areas.

The City currently defines the High Risk Fire Area as those properties located south of Monterey Road, extending to the city border, and west of Meridian Avenue, extending to the city border. This is broad and vague, with little empirical data to back these findings. The City lacks the specificity found in the surrounding municipalities (see https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/) and should not use this means of determination. It would be more appropriate to examine these based on street width and availability of fire hydrants.

Further, any measurable risk determination should shape the design methods used not prevent development. This blanket designation fails to acknowledge the many existing construction methods that can mitigate these risks.
 While the City is separated into zoned parcels (RE, AM, RS, RM, RH, MSSP), the City is not utilizing data that correlates household demographic information to these parcels. The City is using census tract data boundaries to define that demographic data. That is entirely inadequate, given that the city only intends to increase density along transit corridors.

The parcels that currently contain the most demographic diversity will have their densities increased while the more homogenous regions will remain significantly lower – despite their proximity to available resources and their relatively flat topography. The largest, flattest, lots in the City are currently zoned RE – and the current draft of the Housing Element largely omits those lots from any future density development. Given the small area of the City, restricting density to transit corridors largely serves the purpose of keeping density contained where it currently exists.
 Allow lot subdivisions. Another inadequate method being proposed is the use of SB 9 lot splits to achieve greater density. To date there has not been a single SB 9 lot split approved in the City. Studies have shown that the legal requirements of SB9 splits make them prohibitive (see https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and-policy/sb-9-turns-one-applications/).

South Pasadena relies on this inadequate method because there is not true intention to allow for more diverse development. The underlying principle in the city's programming is that current property owners can increase density via ADUs. But this does not provide equitable pathways to ownership and upwards mobility, it reinforces existing socioeconomic boundaries.

A much more equitable means would be allowing lot subdivisions. The city’s Housing Element has only allowed for lot consolidations along existing corridors.

Goal 6.0 – Expand and strengthen tenant protections for South Pasadena’s existing renters Program 6.a – Rent Registry
3 - 1723
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-252 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Program 6.b – Right to Return Policy
Program 6.c – Relocation Assistance
Program 6.d – Rent Stabilization
We are thrilled the City has included a comprehensive package of tenant protections in this draft of the Housing Element. The City’s commitment to establish a rent registry sets itself up to monitor the rental market in South Pasadena and to effectively enforce these tenant protections. By establishing several new tenant rights—right to return, relocation assistance, and rent stabilization—the City will be actively preserving affordable housing and ensuring housing stability for thousands of South Pasadenans. While we applaud the City staff’s efforts thus far to research, develop, and propose to City Council these policies, the draft should contain a firm date on implementation for each policy to ensure Councilmembers follow through with their commitments. The implementation date for all policies should be no later than the end of December 2023.

Thank you for considering our comments.

Sincerely,
Care First South Pasadena
 How addressed: The City Council has made no determination regarding the purchase of any of the surplus Caltrans properties or the specific use of the properties. The City is still analyzing the financial feasibility of purchasing the properties and the various options for converting them to affordable housing. The City cannot commit to a specific course of action for the surplus Caltrans properties until that analysis is complete. Staff will explore additional possible solutions.  How addressed: The Housing Element does specify which types of missing middle housing will be allowed, including tri-plexes and four-plexes. As noted in the letter, the City does have a current definition of “high fire hazard areas.”
 How addressed: The Housing Element includes significant areas of Very Low and Low Density Residential uses where missing middle housing will be allowed, all within ½ mile of high quality transit corridors along Fair Oaks Avenue and Huntington Drive.

Gail Maltun, et al (March 12, 2023)
Dear City Manager Chaparyan , Council Members and City Planning Staff, We are writing to express our profound dissatisfaction with the 5th Draft of the Housing Element.

While we understand that South Pasadena has been mandated by the State to provide more than 2,000 units of housing, we strongly believe that this can be achieved without the ill-conceived and draconian solutions proposed in this draft.

We are further distressed by the City’s failure to present this Draft to the citizens of South Pasadena.

The housing policies proposed in this document will drastically alter the architectural character of our City. Despite this, the Draft was released only to people who had previously signed up for updates on the Housing Element. That email went out on March 2, notifying us that comments on the more than 500-page document would be due in less than a week. The Neighborhood Pulse, distributed to the community by the City, included a cheery note about South Pasadena’s 135th Birthday, but not a word about the Housing Element.

A few of our major objections are detailed below:
3 - 1724
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-253  The new height limit is dictated to be a minimum of 84 feet. We support a modest increase in height to allow for well-designed four and five story buildings, but 84-foot buildings—with 110 feet mentioned elsewhere--would drastically change the character of our town.  In Program 3M, titled “Implement SB9 and SB10”, you commit the City to participating in SB

10. This is a voluntary program that the City had previously vowed to opt-out of. SB 10, as you know, will allow massive upzoning (with CEQA exemptions) of much of the City— anything within ½ mile of the Gold Line Station and possibly within ½ mile of major bus stops as well.
 An “Affordable Housing Overlay”—otherwise known as rezoning—has been proposed in Program 2J/k. This overlay would allow “up to 30 units per acre” in “selected sites outside of the Downtown and Mixed-Use districts”. Where this upzoning might land is completely unspecified: it might be on any street in town.
 The City commits to building “100% Low Income” units on several City-owned properties in the Downtown district. This is just terrible, outdated planning. Low-income units need to be incorporated into buildings that also include moderate and market rate units. To do otherwise is to stigmatize the residents of the low-income buildings and to create contemporary versions of the blighted “projects” of decades past.
 The “missing middle” units may sound great in concept, but what that means is eliminating single family zoning in a very large portion of the City. We believe most residents will find this objectionable.
 Perhaps our largest objection is the complete and intentional elimination of the more than 30 acres of City-owned land in the Arroyo from any consideration for development. The Arroyo Seco Golf Course and the Stables constitute, by far, the largest undeveloped land in the City.

They could accommodate the development of many hundreds of housing units – and produce a huge financial windfall for the City in a potential joint venture with a developer.

These properties are used by relatively few South Pasadena residents. Golf courses are waterguzzling facilities that are being redeveloped for housing throughout the State. The Stables are used primarily by upper-income horse owners, with stable prices ranging from $685-$785 per month, per horse. And the stables and golf course generate very little income for the city.

Despite these properties being characterized in the report as open, natural space, neither are “natural space,” and both are fenced off from the general public. Unlike the playing fields and park in the Arroyo, neither the Stables nor the Golf Course should be considered sacrosanct.

The Arroyo, both in South Pasadena and in the City of Los Angeles, already contains both single-family and multifamily housing. In the course of public meetings, both the stables and the golf course were proposed for housing sites. If we have to choose between putting housing on these two sites and eliminating single-family residential zoning in most of our city and allowing -10 story buildings, we believe the wiser choice is clearly to develop the stables and golf course properties. That the City excluded these two properties from our planning for housing at a time when the State is demanding more than 2,000 new units in our community demonstrates a level of ineptness and lack of imagination that borders on malpractice.  We also object to the general tone of self-flagellation that permeates the document. The inclusion of the excerpt from “When South Pasadena was a Sundown Town”, by Jerry Friedman (P. 104), and the heavy emphasis on our 70-year-old “Sundowner” past, in Section

6.4.6, “South Pasadena History,” is a biased, one-dimensional view of our City. It ignores the fact that we long ago evolved into one of the most racially, ethnically and economically diverse 3 - 1725
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-254 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE cities in the area. Moreover, it is irrelevant to the task that the State has asked us to execute:
namely, locate sites for 2,000 housing units: nothing more, nothing less.

It will be difficult to incorporate more than 2,000 new housing units in South Pasadena in the next few years. No one thinks this task will be easy. But we believe that it is possible to do this without destroying the architectural character of South Pasadena. By adding the Golf Course and the Stables to the sites available for development; by concentrating larger multifamily complexes that combine lower/moderate/market units on major streets such as Huntington and Fair Oaks, the Ostrich Farm area, and the Gold Line Station area; and by a modest increase in height limits to allow well designed four and five story buildings in selected sites—we think that we can achieve a successful Housing Element that will spark a more vibrant downtown while preserving our peaceful streets and small town character.

Sincerely,
Gail Maltun
Alan Maltun
Niles A. Pierce
Gillian Pierce
Diemha Hoang
Kathy Eastwood
Michael Eastwood
Shelley Stephens
Valerie Greco
Nicolas Greco
Nichole Dunville
Mary Farley
Christina Schwarz
Benjamin Schwarz
Eileen Lee
David Lee
Mark Haines
Julie Winkle Giulioni
Peter Giulioni
Terry Halberg
Lilian Lu
Henry R. Jones
Margie Ferree Jones
Joe Jacob
Bonnie Tsang
Corey Miller
Charlene Miller
Katherine Adamson
Tina LaMonica
Clarice Knapp
Harry Knapp
Michael Messner
Pierrette Hondagner-Sotelo
Valerie Huber
Jenny Teal
3 - 1726
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-255 David Ho
Vicki Ho
Deni Sinnott
Mako Koiwai
Donna Bartlett
Kevin Lutz
Deborah Lutz
Stephen Lawes
Gina Lawes
Joanne Nuckols
Tom Nuckols
Peter Lam
Wendy Lam
 How addressed: The City held three public meetings to discuss the changes made in this draft of the Housing Element, and ensured the community had ten days to provide public comments.

The City has a requirement to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing and to accommodate the number of homes allocated to it through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation process. The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements.

Julian Petrillo (March 13, 2023)
Hello there. Julian Petrillo here, going on 25-year resident of South Pasadena. Recently it came to my attention that there’s a draft of a new SP housing element which would consider allowing multi-unit dwellings just about anywhere, and also that height limits of 7-10 stories are under consideration.

These policies will change the way of life that all residents of 91030 prioritize and strive for when they pay their significant property taxes. I urge the city and staff to find another way to meet occupancy and density requirements, rather than taking on new regulations such as those.

Thank you for your consideration.

Julian Petrillo
800 Adelaine Avenue
 How addressed: The City is required by the State of California to address issues related to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and in addition to accommodate the number of affordable homes and total number of homes allocated through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The City must then demonstrate plans which can accommodate these three housing goals.The policies in the Housing Element fulfill those requirements.

Mary Urquhart (March 13, 2023)
The 5th Draft on Housing Element is nearing its completion. However, I did want to make an additional comment before the final deadline.

We have City properties that should be considered when developing additional housing in order to provide affordable housing for City staff and the community at large. These properties could be considered alternatives to other options already identified by the City. We currently have an 18-hole golf course, which could be turned into a 9-hole golf course to allow for a girls’ softball field and possibly another playground and outside tennis courts. That would allow the city to build additional housing and affordable housing on the City-owned site located at 1102 Oxley Street, which actually "fronts" the intersection of Mission Street and Orange Grove Avenue, adjacent to a softball field and playground. The mechanical repair and storage building at that location should be moved to a 3 - 1727
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-256 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE location outside of the area so critical to transportation. The community building at that location needs significant repairs and has limited historical relevance. A conversion to housing, moving the recreation facilities to the golf course area, would be a great solution. Using a 'layering approach' we can be creative to redesign this area to respect the adjacent homes and helps solve our housing crisis.

The proximity to the train station is key, and there is close access to the 110 Freeway.

Changing single-family residential neighborhoods to densify our city should change only after we have exhausted all available corridors on Fair Oaks, Huntington Drive, Mission Drive (west of The Gold Line), and the Arroyo.

Thank you for your consideration,
Mary Urquhart
 How addressed: The golf course was considered as a housing site during the February 1st City Council meeting. The City Council directed staff to find alternative to accommodate the city’s housing needs that did not remove recreational open space from the city. However, the City is committed to continue to analyze additional sites, including potential sites in the Arroyo. As the Housing Element is part of the General Plan, it must be consistent with other General Plan elements, including the Open Space Element which requires sufficient recreational space for the residents of the City. However, the City is committed to continue to analyze additional sites, including potential sites in the Arroyo in the future.

South Pasadena Tenants Union (March 13, 2023)
City of South Pasadena
1414 Mission Street
South Pasadena, CA 91030
Attn: Allison Becker and Angelica Fausto
Re: AMMENDED 5th Draft Housing Element – Public Comment Dear Ms. Becker and Ms Frausto-Lupo:

After further contemplation, South Pasadena Tenants Union leadership is submitting this amended public comment on the March 7, 5th Draft Housing Element.

We are pleased to have reviewed the March 2nd, 5th Draft of the Housing Element. It was/is a bold and expansive housing element, one which might even be the best in the Southland. We applaud staff for the inclusions of the tenant protections and the acknowledgment that preserving affordable housing is a priority in this process. We look forward to working with the City, the residents of South Pasadena and the Council to ensure that these policies are the best that they can be and are enacted effectively and within a timeframe that is beneficial to those whom they are intended to protect: the

53.5%.

We are not happy to learn that the original draft of March 2nd was substantially revised and without any published responses/comments indicating public input. In reviewing the March 7th redline version, we oppose the proposed program addressing the fate of the CalTrans homes. In this draft, the proposed implementation of SB381 has changed drastically from the March 2nd version. It is our understanding that there are no legal alternatives to SB381 and therefore we are stymied by this latest 3 - 1728
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-257 change and urge the City to revise the draft submitted to HCD to include the original text from March

2. With regard to the revision indicated by the March 7 version for citywide fourplexes, also significantly different from the March 2nd draft, we find that we can remain wholly supportive of the current proposed change. In order to ensure that the City can maximize housing for lower wage earning residents and middle income residents, we support triplexes and fourplexes being limited to the high transit areas with a rent stabilization ordinance that is fully enacted no later than December 2023.

Therefore, our one public comment regarding the most recent March 7 version of the 5th Draft Housing element is below:

For program 6.d, SPTU asks that you include within the 5th draft implementation of a rent stabilization ordinance by December 2023.

South Pasadena Tenants Union looks forward to seeing our input included with the expediency that other revisions have been made in the last few days so that we can comfortably and wholeheartedly commit our support of the 5th Draft to HCD. We are aware that at least one Councilperson had requested that her constituents oppose major components of the March 2 draft with letters to the City Manager. Within hours of that email being circulated, the March 7 redline version was published.

South Pasadena Tenants Union expects that the City act in good faith and weighs our input equally to that of other influencers in the community by including our abovementioned request.

If you have any questions or would like to discuss, I look forward to hearing from you. I can be reached Anne Bagasao at [email protected] or by phone at 626-660-8837.

Sincerely,
Anne Bagasao, Co-Founder
 How addressed: The timeframe for Program 6.d requires that City Council consider a rent stabilization ordinance no later than December 2023.

Joanne Nuckols (March 13, 2023)
I am opposed to any unbundling or separating of parking from any housing development as on page 153 referencing Downtown Specific Plan. This would be a disaster with many unintended consequences. Any reference should be removed from the HE draft unless and until there is a thorough study of the negative impacts of doing so.

Joanne Nuckols
South Pasadena
 How addressed: The Housing Element incorporates existing California law with regards to parking in proximity to high-quality transit.

Ed Elsner (March 22, 23, and 24, 2023)
[Note from City: The City received three comments from this commentor over the course of three days all on the same subject. All three comments are shown below, and only one response is provided to these three comments since they deal with the same subject.] March 22, 2023 comment letter
Dear Director Frausto-Lupo,
3 - 1729
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-258 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE The draft housing element’s rezoning capacity analysis (Table VI-51) is seriously flawed.

The table undercounts existing housing units. For example, every listed site whose current land use is High Density Residential is incorrectly shown as having “0” existing units. This error means that thousands of existing units have not been counted, and that the total Maximum Additional Development Capacity for the listed sites is therefore overstated by the same amount.

On the other side of the coin, the Table VI-51 miscalculates the total Development Capacity Adjustment for every listed site with a residential zoning capacity of 50 du/ac or more.

Although these sites are ostensibly given a 400% development capacity adjustment, the 400% adjustment is not included in the calculation of the total adjustment for any site, resulting in the understatement of total Anticipated Development Capacity by hundreds of units, possibly more. Anticipated Development Capacity is perhaps the most critical metric in the housing element.

These errors have obvious and serious implications for policy making.

For example, as a last-minute addition to the draft housing element, the rezoning of Huntington Drive (to mixed-use with 70 du/ac density) will promote the displacement of many residential tenants. As a practical matter, the displacement will be permanent, for the reasons discussed in my previous comment published at page B1-234 of the draft. The human impacts of mass eviction and involuntary displacement can be devastating, and the decision to rezone Huntington Drive was a rushed decision that was not supported by reliable data.

Every listed Medium Density Residential site and High Density Residential site whose existing unit count is shown as “0” or “1” is suspect and should be checked by searching the APN on the County Assessor’s online portal (https://portal.assessor.lacounty.gov/). The existing unit count for each site should be updated as necessary.

Also, the 400% density adjustment should be included in the total development capacity adjustment for every listed site with a residential zoning of 50 du/ac or more. There is likely a formula error in the spreadsheet that needs to be resolved.

Once these errors are fixed, a determination should be made whether it is really necessary to rezone Huntington Drive to mixed-use, 70 du/ac, in order to meet the city's RHNA obligations. If the city is able to rezone residential sites on Huntington Drive to 30 du/ac (medium density) or 45 du/ac (high density), as it is doing elsewhere in the city, this would minimize the displacement of existing tenants.

Thanks again for your continuing work on the housing element and for your consideration of these comments.

Ed Elsner
[email protected]
March 23, 2023 comment letter
A quick follow up to my comment submitted yesterday:
3 - 1730
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-259 Once the 400% development capacity adjustment is correctly applied to listed sites with a density of 50 du/ac or more, the new total anticipated development capacity is 3,819 housing units according to my calculation.

To put this in perspective, this is 2641 more housing units than the 1,178 total anticipated development capacity stated in the draft housing element for the sites listed in the uncorrected Table VI-51.

It is also 574 more housing units than the city's entire RHNA allocation of 2,067.

With an accurate count of existing units, the total anticipated development capacity will decrease.

But the magnitude of the capacity adjustment error suggests that the city will be able to meet its RHNA obligations without needing to increase density on Huntington Drive to 70 du/ac.

In any event, I don't think the city should be committing to the rezoning programs included in the draft housing element until a corrected Table VI-51 is reviewed and analyzed, even if that means delaying the submission of the draft to HCD.

Thanks again,
Ed Elsner
[email protected]
March 24, 2023 comment letter
Dear Director Frausto-Lupo,
Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on the 5th draft housing element that will be submitted to HCD later today.

The draft indicates that the development standards for the Huntington Drive zone will mirror the standards for the Mission Street Zone of the Downtown Specific Plan.

One suggestion would be to clarify that with respect to residential parcels in the Huntington Drive zone whose current land use is Medium Density Residential or High Density Residential, a specific allowable density is yet to be determined through a zoning process subsequent to the adoption of the housing element, with input from the community and especially from residential tenants who live on Huntington Drive, who would be at risk of displacement from redevelopment.

Stated another way, the allowable 70 du/ac density for the Mission Street Zone in the Downtown Specific Plan should not be considered an objective general plan standard or criteria for the Medium Density Residential or High Residential Density parcels in the Huntington Drive Zone, but a possible allowable density along with 30 du/ac or 45 du/ac mentioned in my previous comments.

A 70 du/ac density in the Huntington Drive zone should be reserved for existing commercial parcels which would be more suitable for redevelopment as mixed-use projects, and I'm 3 - 1731
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-260 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE confident that the city can still meet its RHNA obligations with lower densities for residential parcels on Huntington Drive.

One final suggestion, there should be protections against tenant harassment as part of the package of protections for residential tenants, with appropriate remedies to deter bad actors from improperly influencing tenants to vacate in order to avoid compliance with the other tenant protections the city is proposing.

Thanks again, and best of luck with the submission of the draft.

Ed Elsner
[email protected]
 How addressed: City staff met with commenter on 3/24/23, prior to his final comment, to discuss his concerns. Staff acknowledged the limitations of the dataset that is used for the capacity analysis (Table VI-51). Data was pulled from our vendor’s site and was not closely screened before building the new table. Staff also acknowledged the possibility of a formula error in the table. Upon further review after the meeting with the commenter, the City’s Housing Element consultant determined that there is not a formula error in the table.

Staff clarified that the purpose of the table was to illustrate the breadth of the future rezoning areas and that the upcoming general plan update process would be used to refine the rezoning strategies. Staff clarified that our obligation with the housing element is to identify areas where development can be achieved and our commitment is to engage in a public process to rezone within the areas identified to accommodate our RHNA obligations with a reasonable buffer in order to produce a responsible long-range general plan.

Staff addressed the potential impact of rezoning on existing multi-family residential buildings and underscored the City’s commitment to developing a slate of tenant protection programs.

Staff clarified that in the instance of Huntington Drive, the term “mixed-use zone” was used to reflect the existing corridor conditions with comingled multi-family and commercial zoning.

New “mixed use” is contemplated for existing commercially zoned properties, and increased development capacity is contemplated for existing multi-family properties. The City is not considering converting residential to commercial land uses.

Steven Appleton (March 24, 2023)
Public Comments on the City of South Pasadena 5th Draft Housing Element, Clean Version.

Submitted on March 23, 2023.

Submitted on March 24, 2023 at 11:55 am
COMMENT 1:

In several locations in the 5th Draft Housing Element of the City of South Pasadena the subject of Rental Housing inspections is addressed, including direct mention of Assembly Bill 838. References can be found on pages 7, 67,68,255 and B1-47. The following statement summarizes the City’s stated intent:
3 - 1732
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-261 “To augment the City’s already established code enforcement work, Community Development staff will develop and propose for City Council’s approval a Rental Housing Inspection Program, which would entail systematic, proactive, and routine inspections of certain rental properties to ensure compliance with health and safety codes. This program will support the City’s inspection of rental properties in response to a tenant’s complaint of substandard conditions as required under AB 838 by not only providing the infrastructure and capacity for code enforcement but also preventing tenant habitability issues before they emerge. “page 7.

I am a tenant who complained about substandard conditions and requested Code Enforcement inspection of the unit my family rented in South Pasadena, but City refused to inspect even after July

1. 2022 when it was obligated to inspect per the provisions of AB 838. The City continues to state a policy of “no inspection” of rental housing. As such, I question the 8-year timetable for implementing a full inspection program stated on page 7. If the Housing Element is approved with such a liberal timeline for compliance with AB838, it would enable the continuation of practices that play a role in the displacement of tenants.

I offer the below as rational for my comment:

On three occasions after July 1, 2022, I requested Code Enforcement of the City of South Pasadena to inspect the premises because of improper egress (substandard stairs to unpermitted sleeping quarters), fire code violations, and lack of heating etc. In each case I was told that “City of South Pasadena does not have an occupancy inspection program and will not inspect the property.” I was referred to a nonprofit tenant’s rights group.

City of South Pasadena’s refusal to inspect our rental premises is an unfulfilled obligation. The failure to inspect as required by law impacted our move-out. Future tenants are also impacted. Objective code and habitability inspection would reveal unsafe conditions, including structural deficiencies caused by unpermitted construction that continue to pose risk to any future tenants. Therefore, I have continued to request an inspection of the premises based on the fact that the failure to inspect when requested is an unfilled obligation of the City. The response of City staff was to quote the “no rental housing inspection policy of the City,” as noted below:

Angelica Frausto-Lupo , Community Development Director, City of South Pasadena, January 17, 2023: “I had my building team look into the matter and there is insufficient reason for further investigation or to open a code enforcement case. Further, the City of South Pasadena currently does not have an occupancy inspection program and as such we will not pursue inspection of these properties.”
Paul Riddle, Fire Chief, City of South Pasadena, March 13, 2023:
“I discussed with our Building Department had they advised that this matter has insufficient reason for further investigation or to open a code enforcement case. They also cited the fact, the City of South Pasadena does not have an occupancy inspection program and as such they will not pursue inspection of these properties. Tenants can reach out to a landlord/tenant rights organization such as the Housing Rights Center, https://www.housingrightscenter.org/ or the LA County Department of Public Health to file a complaint.

I suggest that the Housing Element is deficient unless the City of South Pasadena revises it to state that the City of South Pasadena will:
3 - 1733
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-262 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE 1) Immediately accept and process rental housing inspection requests made by tenants or tenant agents in line with the provisions of AB 838.
2) Immediately instruct all staff to change messaging to reflect that tenants have a right to request an inspection and be informed of the results of inspections. 3) Retroactively inspect any housing where a complaint was made by a tenant after July 1,2022 but City refused to inspect. (If a request was made after July 1, 2022, the City’s refusal to inspect is an unfulfilled obligation. The unfulfilled obligation has continuing impacts on past and future tenants.)
COMMENT 2:

I guide you to page Page B1-135 under “How Addressed”. In reference to Table VI-26, the document states, “It should be noted that these units are all single-family properties, and do not include multiunit rental properties.” The Housing Element should clarify that the City will accept and process rental housing inspection requests of tenants of multi-family housing.

Steven Appleton
 How addressed: The City acknowledges that at the time of the events Mr. Appleton refers to, the City was unprepared to fulfill its responsibilities under AB 838. The City is currently aware of its responsibilities under AB 838 and we are attempting to comply with the law. Should a tenant contact the City to request an inspection, we will respond in compliance with AB 838. This obligation is being formalized into a program under the Housing Element by including a proposed occupancy inspection program which would entail systemic, proactive, and routine inspections of certain rental properties to ensure compliance with health and safety codes as noted in the Housing Element Program 1.c-“Housing Rehabilitation and Code Enforcement.” As stated in Program 1.c., the proposed occupancy inspection program “will support the City’s inspection of rental properties in response to tenant’s complaints of substandard conditions as required under AB 838 by not only providing the infrastructure and capacity for code enforcement, but also preventing tenant habitability issues before they emerge.”
Anonymous (March 24, 2023)
As a resident, small developer and commercial property owner on Huntington Drive, I think the city's future development needs require a more aggressive plan for the Huntington Corridor. Right now the Housing Element's main focus is developing the DTSP and expanding the DTSP development standards to other areas including the proposed mixed-use zones.(See Program 3.A and 3.B., Housing Element, 5th draft). But that seems flawed as the DTSP development standards are based on the limits of the downtown area. These include historical resources, the area's existing density, traffic congestion, the small two lane roads that make up Mission St.and Monterey St. and the many more smaller one lane roads that intersect them. However, none of these qualities exist in the same proportion on the Huntington Drive Corridor. Huntington Drive is about 110ft wide. It is a large 3 lane road with NO significant historical resource or comparable density and traffic. Consequently, Huntington Drive can support development standards that are DOUBLE that of the DTSP. With sufficient height and density allowance the majority of the City's RHNA obligations can be satisfied from this area alone. This would create less of a burden to develop the more historically sensitive neighborhoods that make up the DNA of the City's heritage and charms. However, as the area consists largely of income generating commercial and multi family properties, the DTSP development 3 - 1734
Appendix B
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MARCHMAY 2023DECEMBER 2022
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page B1-263 standards as proposed (namely a 70/110 DU/AC and 2.5 F.A.R. is insufficient to motivate us to risk losing guaranteed existing income.

Consequently, creating a different development standard that provides for even more density and massing than the DTSP is warranted and should be supported. Additionally, developing the Huntington Corridor into a highly dense lively mixed use zone will create desperately needed housing and provide for the City's future growth whilst protecting the City's historic family neighborhood charm.
-Anonymous Resident, Owner and Small Developer
 How addressed: The Housing Element accommodates the City’s RHNA requirements throughout the city, including within the downtown area and along Huntington Drive.

Josh Albrektson (May 4, 2023)
At the Feb first city council meeting, Mr. Anderson, the lawyer for the pavilions property, clearly stated that he needed 140 to 160 DU/acre in order for the project to be feasible.

In response, the City of South Pasadena set the density to 110 DU/Acre, 35% lower than what Mr.

Anderson said was required for feasible. Alison Backer in her meeting with me told me that it was intentionally and they considered removing the site as a possible housing site.

South Pasadena is intentionally trying to make sure the pavilions cannot be redeveloped and they should be forced to rezone the Fair Oaks corridor to 140 DU/Acre.

If they do not do this, then there should be a hard deadline that if they do not have a project proposed on Fair Oaks, say by May 1st, 2026 then it would automatically go to 140 DU/Acre. --
Josh Albrektson MD
Neuroradiologist by night
Crime fighter by day
 How addressed: As the City discussed with HCD during its April 24th meeting, Site 15 will be rezoned to allow for 110 du/ac, along with the entire Fair Oaks Avenue corridor. As HCD’s research shows, this density is sufficient to ensure the site is viable for redevelopment to residential uses. Furthermore, the comments made by the property owner’s representative during the February 1st City Council meeting mentioned a variety of viable densities. While they did state that 140 du/ac would be needed, that was with a higher inclusionary requirement than the city currently has, while the City has committed to reducing its inclusionary requirement, and to review and update the reduced requirement throughout the planning period to ensure that it does not create a constraint on development. 3 - 1735
Appendix B
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page B1-264 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE This page intentionally left blank.
3 - 1736
Appendix C:

Letter to Property Owners
3 - 1737

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA

OFFICE OF THE PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1414 MISSION STREET, SOUTH PASADENA, CA 91030
TEL: (626) 403-7210 ▪ FAX: (626) 403-7211
WWW.SOUTHPASADENACA.GOV
October 20, 2020
[PROPERTY OWNER NAME]
[PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS LINE 1]
[PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS LINE 2]
Re: 2021-2029 Housing Element Update
Dear Property Owner,
The City of South Pasadena (City) is in the process of updating its Housing Element of the General Plan as required by state law. The new Housing Element is intended to address the housing needs of current and future City residents. One of the requirements of the Housing Element is for the City to demonstrate that there is sufficient land to allow the development of a range housing types to include higher density multi-family units.

The City has identified the property at [PROPERTY ADDRESS], which our records indicate you own, as having the potential to be developed with higher density multi-family units. A development with up to 30 units per acre is already allowed in this location either under current zoning or would allowed by the draft General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan, currently undergoing community input and anticipated for adoption in mid-2021. One of the options the community will consider through ongoing outreach is whether to allow increasing the height or density on specific sites or in certain areas of the City to accommodate more affordable housing.

The City would like your input regarding the future of your property.  Are you interested in new residential development at [PROPERTY ADDRESS] within the next 3-8 years?
o If yes:
 Have you already begun to explore this possibility?
 Have you considered a particular type of project?
 Have you considered developing the property with affordable units?  Would an increase in height or density change your perspective?  Do you have any concerns about your property being identified for potential housing development in the Housing Element?
We look forward to your input to ensure we develop the most accurate and feasible plan for our housing future.

Please send us an email at [email protected] to provide us with your feedback by November 3, 2020, so that we can complete our Housing Element update effort. If you have any questions or comments please feel free to contact Margaret Lin, Manager of Long Range Planning and Economic Development at [email protected] or (626) 403-7236.

Sincerely,
Joanna Hankamer
Director of Planning and Community Development
3 - 1738
Appendix D:

Qualified Entities
3 - 1739
3 - 1740

ENTITIES INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN CALIFORNIA'S FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL PROGRAM PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65863.11
County Organization Address City ST Zip Phone Number Contact Person E-Mail Address FAX Number Type of Organization Confirm Date Revised List Added FRESNO Fresno Housing Authority P.O. Box 11985 Fresno CA 93776 (559) 443-8475 Edward Stacy [email protected] (559) 445-8981Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 6/14/17 12/16/98 ALL COUNTIES American Baptist Homes of the W6120 Stoneridge Mall Road, 3rd F Pleasanton CA 94588 (925) 924-7162 Ancel Romero (925) 924-7233Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/22/98 ALAMEDA Housing Authority of City of Alam701 Atlantic Ave Alameda CA 94501 (510) 747-4300 Denise Connors [email protected] (510) 522-7848Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/23/98 ALAMEDA Housing Authority of the City of 3203 Leahy Way Livermore CA 94550 (925) 447-3600 Jon D. Hovey [email protected] (925) 447-0942Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/23/98 ALAMEDA Housing Authority of County of A22941 Atherton St Hayward CA 94541 (510) 538-8876 √ [email protected] (510) 727-8554Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 12/23/98 ALL COUNTIES USA Properties Fund 7530 Santa Monica Blvd, Suite 1 West Hollywood CA 90046 (323) 650-8771 Jesse Slansky (323) 650-4745Local, regional, national public agenc X 12/13/13 12/23/98 CONTRA COSTA Rubicon Programs, Inc. 2500 Bissell Ave Richmond CA 90804 (510) 235-1516 Tom Matthews [email protected] (510) 235-2025Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 6/5/17 12/23/98 KERN Golden Empire Affordable Hous 3600 CheSte.r Ave. Ste. B Bakersfield CA 93301 (805) 633-1533 Gary Kammer (805) 633-1617Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 6/14/17 12/23/98 LAKE Lake County Housing Services D255 N. Forbes St. Lakeport CA 95453 (707) 263-2510 Linda Hedstrom [email protected] (707) 263-2751Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 6/14/17 12/23/98 LOS ANGELES West Hollywood Community Hou7530 Santa Monica Blvd, Suite 1 West Hollywood CA 90046 (323) 650-8771 Robin Conerly [email protected] (323) 650-4745Local, regional, public agency X 8/14/14 12/23/98 LOS ANGELES City of Pomona Housing Authori 505 South Garey Ave Pomona CA 91766 (909) 620-2368 Benita DeFrank, Neighborhood Services Director (909) 620-3702Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 6/14/17 12/23/98 LOS ANGELES Hollywood Community Housing 1726 N. Whitley Ave Hollywood CA 90028 (323) 469-0710 Christina V. Duncan (323) 469-1899Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/23/98 LOS ANGELES Hope - Net 760 S. Westmoreland Ave Los Angeles CA 90005 (213) 389-9949 Canoace Whalen [email protected] (213) 389-0098Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/23/98 LOS ANGELES Skid Row Housing Trust 1317 E. 7th St Los Angeles CA 90021 (213) 683-0522 Jim Bonar (213) 683-0781Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/23/98 LOS ANGELES The Long Beach Housing Devel 333 W. Ocean Blvd., 2nd Flr Long Beach CA 90802 (562) 570-6926 Diana V. McNeel (562)570-6746 Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/23/98 MARIN Housing Authority of the County 4020 Civic Center Drive San Rafael CA 94903 (415) 491-2530 Anna Semenova [email protected] (415) 491-2530Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 2/26/14 12/23/98 MARIN Canal Community Alliance 91 Larkspur St San Rafael CA 94901 (415) 454-2640 Tom Wilson [email protected] (415) 454-3967Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/23/98 ORANGE Neighborhood Housing Services 350 Hillcrest La Habra CA 90631 (562) 694-2051 Diane Ste.wart [email protected] (562) 694-2052Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/23/98 SAN DIEGO Housing Development Partners 1122 Broadway, Suite 300 San Diego CA 92101 (619) 578-7555 Dottie Pierce [email protected] (619) 578-7360Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 2/26/14 12/23/98 SAN DIEGO San Diego Housing Commission1122 Broadway, Suite 300 San Diego CA 92101 (619) 578-7555 Dottie Pierce [email protected] (619) 578-7360Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/23/98 SAN DIEGO COUHousing Development Partners 1122 Broadway, Suite 300 San Diego CA 92101 (619) 578-7590 Dottie Pierce [email protected] (619) 578-7356Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 2/26/14 12/23/98 SAN FRANCISCOTenderloin Neighborhood Develo201 Eddy St San Francisco CA 94102 (415) 776-2151 Don Falk [email protected] (415) 776-3952Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/23/98 SAN JOAQUIN Stockton Shelter for the Homele P.O. Box 4803 Stockton CA 95204 (209) 465-3612 Bill Mendelson (209) 943-4806Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/23/98 SANTA CLARA Cambrian Center, Inc. 2360 Samaritan Place San Jose CA 95124 (408) 559-0330 Dale J. Harrington [email protected] (408) 377-0478Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/23/98 SANTA CLARA Charities Housing Development 195 East San Fernando St San Jose CA 95112 (408) 282-1125 Chris Block [email protected] (408) 282-1130Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/23/98 SANTA CLARA Palo Alto Senior Housing Projec 455 E. Charleston Rd Palo Alto CA 94306 (650) 494-1944 Genie Dee [email protected] (650) 493-7437Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/23/98 SONOMA Burbank Housing Development 3432 Mendocino Ave Santa Rosa CA 95403 (707) 526-9782 John Lowry [email protected] (707) 526-9811Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/23/98 ALAMEDA Affordable Housing Associates 1250 Addison St., Ste. G Berkeley CA 94702 Susan Friedlow (510) 649-0312Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 5/9/17 12/24/98 ALL COUNTIES Resources for Community Deve 2220 Oxford St Berkeley CA 94704 (510) 841-4410 Dan Sawislak [email protected] (510) 548-3502Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 6/5/17 12/24/98 ALPINE Amador-Tuolumne Community A935 South State Highway 49 Jackson CA 95642 (209) 223-1485 ERaj Rambob [email protected] (209) 223-4178Local, regional, national public agenc X 5/24/17 12/24/98 CALAVERAS ACLC, Inc 315 N San Joaquin St Stockton CA 95202 (209) 466-6811 (209) 466-3465Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 COLUSA Eskaton Properties Inc. 5105 Manzanita Ave Carmichael CA 95608 (916) 334-0810 Courtney Tatum, Kat [email protected] (916) 338-1248Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 12/24/98 CONTRA COSTA ACLC, Inc 315 N San Joaquin St Stockton CA 95202 (209) 466-6811 (209) 466-3465Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 CONTRA COSTA East Bay NHS 2320 Cutting Blvd Richmond CA 94804 (510) 237-6459 (510) 237-6482Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 CONTRA COSTA Affordable Housing Associates 1250 Addison St., Ste. G Berkeley CA 94702 (510) 649-8500 Susan Friedlow (510) 649-0312Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 5/24/17 12/24/98 CONTRA COSTA Eskaton Properties Inc. 5105 Manzanita Ave Carmichael CA 95608 (916) 334-0810 Courtney Tatum, Kat [email protected] (916) 338-1248Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 12/24/98 EL DORADO Eskaton Properties Inc. 5105 Manzanita Ave Carmichael CA 95608 (916) 334-0810 Courtney Tatum, Kat [email protected] (916) 338-1248Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 12/24/98 FRESNO ACLC, Inc 315 N San Joaquin St Stockton CA 95202 (209) 466-6811 (209) 466-3465Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 FRESNO Better Opportunities Builder, Inc P.O. Box 11863 Fresno CA 93775 (559) 443-8400 Tracewell Hanrahan [email protected] (559) 443-8495Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/24/98 GLENN Eskaton Properties Inc. 5105 Manzanita Ave Carmichael CA 95608 (916) 334-0810 Courtney Tatum, Kat [email protected] (916) 338-1248Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 12/24/98 KERN Self-Help Enterprises 8445 W. Elowin Court/P.O. Box 65Visalia CA 93290 (559) 802-1620 Thomas J. Collishaw [email protected] (559) 651-3634Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/10/18 12/24/98 KINGS Self-Help Enterprises 8445 W. Elowin Court/P.O. Box 65Visalia CA 93290 (559) 802-1620 Thomas J. Collishaw [email protected] (559) 651-3634Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/10/18 12/24/98 LASSEN Eskaton Properties Inc. 5105 Manzanita Ave Carmichael CA 95608 (916) 334-0810 Courtney Tatum, Kat [email protected] (916) 338-1248Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 12/24/98 LOS ANGELES Housing Authority of the City of 2500 Wilshire Blvd, PHA Los Angeles CA 90057 (213) 252-4269 Larry Goins Local, regional, national public agenc X 3/3/11 12/24/98 LOS ANGELES Century Housing Corporation 1000 Corporate Pointe Culver City CA 90230 (310) 642-2007 Ronald A. Griffith (310) 258-0710Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/24/98 MADERA ACLC, Inc 315 N San Joaquin St Stockton CA 95202 (209) 466-6811 (209) 466-3465Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 MADERA Self-Help Enterprises 8445 W. Elowin Court/P.O. Box 65Visalia CA 93290 (559) 802-1620 Thomas J. Collishaw [email protected] (559) 651-3634Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/10/18 12/24/98 MARIN Affordable Housing Foundation P.O. Box 26516 San Francisco CA 94126 (415) 387-7834 Eric Tang [email protected] (415) 752-9902Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 MARIN Affordable Housing Foundation P.O. Box 26516 San Francisco CA 94126 (415) 387-7834 Eric Tang [email protected] (415) 752-9902Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 MARIPOSA Self-Help Enterprises 8445 W. Elowin Court/P.O. Box 65Visalia CA 93290 (559) 802-1620 Thomas J. Collishaw [email protected] (559) 651-3634Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/10/18 12/24/98 MERCED ACLC, Inc 315 N San Joaquin St Stockton CA 95202 (209) 466-6811 (209) 466-3465Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 MERCED Eskaton Properties Inc. 5105 Manzanita Ave. Carmichael CA 95608 (916) 334-0810 Courtney Tatum, Kat [email protected] (916) 338-1248Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 12/24/98 Updated 5-5-21 HCD DOES NOT EVALUATE OR ATTEST TO ANY ENTITY'S QUALIFICATIONS Prepared by California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) 1 of 8
3 - 1741

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

ENTITIES INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN CALIFORNIA'S FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL PROGRAM PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65863.11
County Organization Address City ST Zip Phone Number Contact Person E-Mail Address FAX Number Type of Organization Confirm Date Revised List Added MERCED Self-Help Enterprises 8445 W. Elowin Court/P.O. Box 65Visalia CA 93290 (559) 802-1620 Thomas J. Collishaw [email protected] (559) 651-3634Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/10/18 12/24/98 MONTEREY Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition303 Vintage Park Drive, #250 Foster City CA 94404 (650) 356-2900 (650) 357-9766Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/24/98 MONTEREY Affordable Housing Foundation P.O. Box 26516 San Francisco CA 94126 (415) 387-7834 Eric Tang [email protected] (415) 752-9902Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 MONTEREY South County Housing, Inc. 7455 Carmel St Gilroy CA 95020 (408) 842-9181 Jan Lindenthal [email protected] (408) 842-0277Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 NAPA Affordable Housing Foundation P.O. Box 26516 San Francisco CA 94126 (415) 387-7834 Eric Tang [email protected] (415) 752-9902Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 ORANGE Century Housing Corporation 1000 Corporate Pointe Culver City CA 90230 (310) 642-2007 Ronald A. Griffith (310) 258-0710Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/24/98 ORANGE Civic Center Barrio Housing Cor 1665 E. 4th St, Ste. 210 Santa Ana CA 92701 (714) 835-0406 Helen Brown [email protected] (714) 835-7354Local, regional, national public agenc X 12/24/98 PLACER ACLC, Inc 315 N San Joaquin St Stockton CA 95202 (209) 466-6811 (209) 466-3465Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 PLACER Eskaton Properties Inc. 5105 Manzanita Ave Carmichael CA 95608 (916) 334-0810 Courtney Tatum, Kat [email protected] (916) 338-1248Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 12/24/98 PLACER Affordable Housing Foundation P.O. Box 26516 San Francisco CA 94126 (415) 387-7834 Eric Tang [email protected] (415) 752-9902Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 RIVERSIDE St. Vincent de Paul Village 3350 E St San Diego CA 92102 (619) 687-1029 Bill Bolstad (619) 687-1010Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/24/98 RIVERSIDE Neighborhood Housing Services 1390 North D St San Bernardino CA 92405 (909) 884-6891 Edward Moncrief [email protected] (909) 884-6893 X 12/24/98 SACRAMENTO ACLC, Inc 315 N San Joaquin St Stockton CA 95202 (209) 466-6811 (209) 466-3465Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 SACRAMENTO Eskaton Properties Inc. 5105 Manzanita Ave Carmichael CA 95608 (916) 334-0810 Courtney Tatum, Kat [email protected] (916) 338-1248Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 12/24/98 SACRAMENTO Affordable Housing Foundation P.O. Box 26516 San Francisco CA 94126 (415) 387-7834 Eric Tang [email protected] (415) 752-9902Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 SAN BENITO South County Housing, Inc. 7455 Carmel St. Gilroy CA 95020 (408) 842-9181 Jan Lindenthal [email protected] (408) 842-0277Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 SAN BERNARDINCentury Housing Corporation 1000 Corporate Pointe Culver City CA 90230 (310) 642-2007 Ronald A. Griffith (310) 258-0710Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/24/98 SAN BERNARDINNeighborhood Housing Services 1390 North D St San Bernardino CA 92405 (909) 884-6891 Edward Moncrief [email protected] (909) 884-6893 X 12/24/98 SAN DIEGO St. Vincent de Paul Village 3350 E St San Diego CA 92102 (619) 687-1029 Harvey Mandel [email protected] (619) 687-1010Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/24/98 SAN DIEGO Civic Center Barrio Housing Cor 1665 E. 4th St, Ste. 210 Santa Ana CA 92701 (714) 835-0406 Helen Brown [email protected] (714) 835-7354Local, regional, national public agenc X 12/24/98 SAN FRANCISCOAffordable Housing Foundation P.O. Box 26516 San Francisco CA 94126 (415) 387-7834 Eric Tang [email protected] (415) 752-9902Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 SAN JOAQUIN ACLC, Inc 315 N San Joaquin St Stockton CA 95202 (209) 466-6811 (209) 466-3465Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 SAN JOAQUIN Eskaton Properties Inc. 5105 Manzanita Ave Carmichael CA 95608 (916) 334-0810 Courtney Tatum, Kat [email protected] (916) 338-1248Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 12/24/98 SAN MATEO Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition303 Vintage Park Drive, #250 Foster City CA 94404 (650) 356-2900 (650) 357-9766Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/24/98 SAN MATEO Affordable Housing Foundation P.O. Box 26516 San Francisco CA 94126 (415) 387-7834 Eric Tang [email protected] (415) 752-9902Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 SAN MATEO Palo Alto Housing Corp 725 Alma St Palo Alto CA 94301 (650) 321-9709 Marlene H. Prendergast (650) 321-4341Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 SANTA CLARA Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition303 Vintage Park Drive, #250 Foster City CA 94404 (650) 356-2900 (650) 357-9766Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/24/98 SANTA CLARA Affordable Housing Foundation P.O. Box 26516 San Francisco CA 94126 (415) 387-7834 Eric Tang [email protected] (415) 752-9902Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 SANTA CLARA Palo Alto Housing Corp 725 Alma St Palo Alto CA 94301 (650) 321-9709 Marlene H. Prendergast (650) 321-4341Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 SANTA CLARA South County Housing, Inc 7455 Carmel St Gilroy CA 95020 (408) 842-9181 Jan Lindenthal [email protected] (408) 842-0277Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 SANTA CRUZ Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition303 Vintage Park Drive, #250 Foster City CA 94404 (650) 356-2900 (650) 357-9766Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/24/98 SANTA CRUZ Affordable Housing Foundation P.O. Box 26516 San Francisco CA 94126 (415) 387-7834 Eric Tang [email protected] (415) 752-9902Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 SANTA CRUZ South County Housing, Inc 7455 Carmel St Gilroy CA 95020 (408) 842-9181 Jan Lindenthal [email protected] (408) 842-0277Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 SISKIYOU Eskaton Properties Inc. 5105 Manzanita Ave Carmichael CA 95608 (916) 334-0810 Courtney Tatum, Kat [email protected] (916) 338-1248Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 12/24/98 SOLANO ACLC, Inc 315 N San Joaquin St Stockton CA 95202 (209) 466-6811 (209) 466-3465Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 SOLANO Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition303 Vintage Park Drive, #250 Foster City CA 94404 (650) 356-2900 (650) 357-9766Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/24/98 SOLANO Affordable Housing Associates 1250 Addison St., Ste. G Berkeley CA 94702 (510) 649-8500 Susan Friedlow (510) 649-0312Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 5/24/17 12/24/98 SOLANO Affordable Housing Foundation P.O. Box 26516 San Francisco CA 94126 (415) 387-7834 Eric Tang [email protected] (415) 752-9902Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 SONOMA Affordable Housing Foundation P.O. Box 26516 San Francisco CA 94126 (415) 387-7834 Eric Tang [email protected] (415) 752-9902Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/98 STANISLAUS ACLC, Inc 315 N San Joaquin St Stockton CA 95202 (209) 466-6811 (209) 466-3465Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 STANISLAUS Self-Help Enterprises 8445 W. Elowin Court/P.O. Box 65Visalia CA 93290 (559) 802-1620 Thomas J. Collishaw [email protected] (559) 651-3634Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/10/18 12/24/98 TULARE Self-Help Enterprises 8445 W. Elowin Court/P.O. Box 65Visalia CA 93290 (559) 802-1620 Thomas J. Collishaw [email protected] (559) 651-3634Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/10/18 12/24/98 TUOLUMNE ACLC, Inc 315 N San Joaquin St Stockton CA 95202 (209) 466-6811 (209) 466-3465Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 VENTURA Century Housing Corporation 1000 Corporate Pointe Culver City CA 90230 (310) 642-2007 Ronald A. Griffith (310) 258-0710Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/24/98 YOLO ACLC, Inc 315 N San Joaquin St Stockton CA 95202 (209) 466-6811 (209) 466-3465Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 12/24/98 YOLO Eskaton Properties Inc. 5105 Manzanita Ave Carmichael CA 95608 (916) 334-0810 Courtney Tatum, Kat [email protected] (916) 338-1248Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 12/24/98 ALL COUNTIES BRIDGE Housing Corporation 345 Spear Strett, Suite 700 San Francisco CA 94105 (415) 989-1111 Brad Wiblin (415) 495-4898Local, regional, national public agenc X 12/24/10 12/28/98 AMADOR Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 CALAVERAS Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 COLUSA Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 COLUSA Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 CONTRA COSTA Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 EL DORADO Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 GLENN Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 Updated 5-5-21 HCD DOES NOT EVALUATE OR ATTEST TO ANY ENTITY'S QUALIFICATIONS Prepared by California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) 2 of 8
3 - 1742

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

ENTITIES INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN CALIFORNIA'S FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL PROGRAM PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65863.11
County Organization Address City ST Zip Phone Number Contact Person E-Mail Address FAX Number Type of Organization Confirm Date Revised List Added LOS ANGELES FAME Corporation 1968 W. Adams Blvd. Los Angeles CA 90018 (323) 730-7727 Sandra Hernandez [email protected] (323) 737-5717Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/28/98 NAPA Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 NEVADA Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 PLACER Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 SACRAMENTO Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 SAN JOAQUIN Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 SHASTA Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 SUTTER Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 TEHAMA Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 YOLO Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 YUBA Rural California Housing Corp 3120 Freeboard Drive, Suite 201 West Sacramento CA 95691 (916) 414-4436 Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/28/98 RIVERSIDE BUILD Leadership Development 1280 Bison, Ste. B9-200 Newport Beach CA 92660 (949) 720-7044 Tracy Green [email protected] (949) 720-7434Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/29/98 SACRAMENTO Sacramento Valley Organizing C3263 1st Ave Sacramento CA 95817 (916) 457-0245 Larry Ferlazzo [email protected] (916) 457-0207Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/29/98 SAN BERNARDINBUILD Leadership Development 1280 Bison, Ste. B9-200 Newport Beach CA 92660 (949) 720-7044 Tracy Green [email protected] (949) 720-7434Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/29/98 SAN FRANCISCOBUILD Leadership Development 1280 Bison, Ste. B9-200 Newport Beach CA 92660 (949) 720-7044 Tracy Green [email protected] (949) 720-7434Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/29/98 SOLANO Sacramento Valley Organizing C3263 1st Ave Sacramento CA 95817 (916) 457-0245 Larry Ferlazzo [email protected] (916) 457-0207Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/29/98 YOLO Sacramento Valley Organizing C3263 1st Ave Sacramento CA 95817 (916) 457-0245 Larry Ferlazzo [email protected] (916) 457-0207Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/29/98 ALL COUNTIES Foundation for Affordable Housi 384 Forest Ave., Suite 14 Laguna Beach CA 92651 (949) 443-9101 Darrin Willard (949) 443-9133Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/30/98 BUTTE Community Housing Improveme1001 Willow St Chico CA 95928 (530) 891-6931 Kris Zappettini [email protected] (530) 891-8547Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/30/98 GLENN Community Housing Improveme1001 Willow St Chico CA 95928 (530) 891-6931 Kris Zappettini [email protected] (530) 891-8547Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/30/98 LASSEN Community Housing Improveme1001 Willow St Chico CA 95928 (530) 891-6931 Kris Zappettini [email protected] (530) 891-8547Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/30/98 PLUMAS Community Housing Improveme1001 Willow St Chico CA 95928 (530) 891-6931 Kris Zappettini [email protected] (530) 891-8547Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/30/98 SHASTA Community Housing Improveme1001 Willow St Chico CA 95928 (530) 891-6931 Kris Zappettini [email protected] (530) 891-8547Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/30/98 SUTTER Community Housing Improveme1001 Willow St Chico CA 95928 (530) 891-6931 Kris Zappettini [email protected] (530) 891-8547Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/30/98 TEHAMA Community Housing Improveme1001 Willow St Chico CA 95928 (530) 891-6931 Kris Zappettini [email protected] (530) 891-8547Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 12/30/98 ALAMEDA East Bay Asian Local Developm 310 Eighth Street, Ste. 200 Oakland CA 94607 Lynette Jung Lee [email protected] (510) 763-4143Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 5/9/17 1/5/99 CONTRA COSTA East Bay Asian Local Developm 310 Eighth Street, Suite 200 Oakland CA 94607 (510) 287-5353 (510) 763-4143Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 6/5/17 1/5/99 FRESNO Fresno Co. Economic Opportuni3120 W. Nielsen Ave., Ste. 102 Fresno CA 93706 (559) 485-3733 George Egawa [email protected] (559) 485-3737Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 6/14/17 1/5/99 SOLANO Fairfield Redevelopment Agency1000 WebSte.r St., 2nd Floor Fairfield CA 94533 (707) 428-7688 Lark Solis [email protected] (707) 428-7621Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 1/5/99 EL DORADO El Dorado County Housing Auth 937 Spring St Placerville CA 95667 (530) 621-6167 Joyce Aldrich [email protected] Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 6/14/17 1/6/99 LOS ANGELES American Family Housing 15161 Jackson St. Midway City CA 92655 (714) 897-3221 Donna Gallup [email protected] (714) 893-6858Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 1/5/17 1/6/99 SAN FRANCISCOBernal Heights Neighborhood Ce515 Cortland Ave San Francisco CA 94110 (415) 206-2140 Housing Director (415) 648-0793Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 1/6/99 SAN FRANCISCOMission Housing Development C474 Valencia St, Ste. 280 San Francisco CA 94103 (415) 864-6432 Philip Dockow (415) 864-0378Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 1/8/99 STANISLAUS Modesto Redevelopment Agenc 940 11th St Modesto CA 95355 (209) 577-5247 Bill Cooper [email protected] (209) 544-3982Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 1/8/99 SAN FRANCISCOChinatown Community Developm1525 Grant Ave San Francisco CA 94133 (415) 984-1450 Joanne Lee [email protected] (415) 984-1494Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 1/11/99 ALL COUNTIES The Trinity Housing Foundation 836 Avalon Ave Lafayette CA 94549 (925) 385-0754 Bill Leone [email protected] (925) 215-2403Local, regional, national public agenc X 2/26/14 1/12/99 LOS ANGELES The Long Beach Housing Devel 836 Avalon Ave Lafayette CA 94549 (925) 385-0754 Bill Leone [email protected] (925) 215-2403Local, regional, national public agenc X 6/14/12 1/12/99 LOS ANGELES PICO Union Housing Corporatio 1038 Venice Blvd. Los Angeles CA 90015 (213) 747-2790 Jesus Torres [email protected] (213) 743-3819Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 1/12/99 VENTURA A Community of Friends 836 Avalon Ave Lafayette CA 94549 (925) 385-0754 Bill Leone [email protected] (925) 215-2403Local, regional, national public agenc X 6/14/12 1/12/99 LOS ANGELES Korean Youth & Community Cen680 S. Wilton Place Los Angeles CA 90005 (213) 365-7400 Jimmy Lee (213) 353-1280Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 1/19/99 CONTRA COSTA Pacific Community Services, Inc329 Railroad Ave, P.O. Box 1397 Pittsburg CA 94565 (925) 439-1056 Tom LaFleur [email protected] (925) 439-0831Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 6/5/17 1/21/99 IMPERIAL Coachella Valley Housing Coalit 45-701 Monroe St, Ste. G., Plaza Indio CA 92201 (760) 347-3157 Emilia Mojica [email protected] (760) 342-6466Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 6/14/17 1/21/99 RIVERSIDE Coachella Valley Housing Coalit 45-701 Monroe St, Ste. G., Plaza Indio CA 92201 (760) 347-3157 Emilia Mojica [email protected] (760) 342-6466Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 6/14/17 1/21/99 SAN BERNARDINCoachella Valley Housing Coalit 45-701 Monroe St, Ste. G., Plaza Indio CA 92201 (760) 347-3157 Emilia Mojica [email protected] (760) 342-6466Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 6/14/17 1/21/99 SAN DIEGO Coachella Valley Housing Coalit 45-701 Monroe St, Ste. G., Plaza Indio CA 92201 (760) 347-3157 Emilia Mojica [email protected] (760) 342-6466Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 6/14/17 1/21/99 SOLANO Pacific Community Services, Inc329 Railroad Ave, P.O. Box 1397 Pittsburg CA 94565 (925) 439-1056 Tom LaFleur [email protected] (925) 439-0831Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 1/21/99 SONOMA Pacific Community Services, Inc329 Railroad Ave, P.O. Box 1397 Pittsburg CA 94565 (925) 439-1056 Tom LaFleur [email protected] (925) 439-0831Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 1/21/99 ALAMEDA Community and Economic Deve250 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza Ste. 53Oakland CA 94612 (510) 238-3502 Jefferey P. Levin [email protected] (510) 238-3691Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 5/9/17 1/27/99 ALAMEDA Bay Area Community Services 629 Oakland Ave Oakland CA 94611 (510) 499-0365 Daniel Cooperman [email protected] (510) 569-4589Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/9/17 1/28/99 ALL COUNTIES National Community Renaissanc9421 Haven Avenue Rancho Cucamon CA 91730 (909) 204-3508 Tracey Williams [email protected] (909) 483-6524Local, regional, national public agenc X 5/24/17 5/17/99 ALL COUNTIES Community Housing Assistance 3803 E. Casselle Ave Orange CA 92869 Ken Robertson [email protected] (714) 744-6850Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 5/18/99 CONTRA COSTA Community Housing Developme1535 Fred Jackson Way ste A Richmond CA 94801 (510) 412-9290 Donald Gilmore [email protected] (510) 215-9276Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 5/19/99 DEL NORTE Redwood Community Action Age904 G St. Eureka CA 95501 (707) 269-2021 Bill Rodstrom [email protected] Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 5/19/99 Updated 5-5-21 HCD DOES NOT EVALUATE OR ATTEST TO ANY ENTITY'S QUALIFICATIONS Prepared by California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) 3 of 8
3 - 1743

I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I I
I I

ENTITIES INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN CALIFORNIA'S FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL PROGRAM PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65863.11
County Organization Address City ST Zip Phone Number Contact Person E-Mail Address FAX Number Type of Organization Confirm Date Revised List Added HUMBOLDT Redwood Community Action Age904 G St Eureka CA 95501 (707) 269-2021 Bill Rodstrom [email protected] Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 5/19/99 LOS ANGELES Long Beach Affordable Housing 5855 Naples Plaza, Suite 209 Long Beach CA 90803 (562) 434-3333 H. Kim Huntley (562) 434-3330Local, regional, national public agenc x 9/26/08 5/19/99 MONTEREY Peoples' Self-Help Housing Corp3533 Empleo St San Luis Obispo CA 93401 (805) 540-2452 John Fowler [email protected] (805) 544-1901Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 5/19/99 ORANGE Long Beach Affordable Housing 5855 Naples Plaza, Suite 209 Long Beach CA 90803 (562) 434-3333 H. Kim Huntley (562) 434-3330Local, regional, national public agenc x 9/26/08 5/19/99 SAN BENITO Peoples' Self-Help Housing Corp3533 Empleo St. San Luis Obispo CA 93401 (805) 540-2452 John Fowler http://www.pshh.org/ (805) 544-1901Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 5/19/99 SAN DIEGO Long Beach Affordable Housing 5855 Naples Plaza, Suite 209 Long Beach CA 90803 (562) 434-3333 H. Kim Huntley (562) 434-3330Local, regional, national public agenc x 9/26/08 5/19/99 SAN DIEGO Bayview CDC 5100 Federal Blvd, 2nd Floor San Diego CA 92105 (619) 262-8403 Stasi Williams (619) 262-7836Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/19/99 SAN LUIS OBISP Peoples' Self-Help Housing Corp3533 Empleo St. San Luis Obispo CA 93401 (805) 540-2452 John Fowler [email protected] (805) 544-1901Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 5/19/99 SANTA BARBARALong Beach Affordable Housing 5855 Naples Plaza, Suite 209 Long Beach CA 90803 (562) 434-3333 H. Kim Huntley (562) 434-3330Local, regional, national public agenc x 9/26/08 5/19/99 SANTA BARBARAPeoples' Self-Help Housing Corp3533 Empleo St. San Luis Obispo CA 93401 (805) 540-2452 John Fowler [email protected] (805) 544-1901Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 5/19/99 VENTURA Long Beach Affordable Housing 5855 Naples Plaza, Suite 209 Long Beach CA 90803 (562) 434-3333 H. Kim Huntley (562) 434-3330Local, regional, national public agenc X 9/26/08 5/19/99 VENTURA Peoples' Self-Help Housing Corp3533 Empleo St. San Luis Obispo CA 93401 (805) 540-2452 John Fowler [email protected] (805) 544-1901Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 5/19/99 ALL COUNTIES DML & Associates Foundation 6043 Tampa Ave, Ste. 101A Tarzana CA 91356 (818) 708-2710 Myron Lieberman (818) 708-1944Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 5/23/17 5/21/99 ALL COUNTIES EAH, Inc. 22 Pelican Way San Rafael CA 94901 (415) 599-2712 Scott Johnson [email protected] (415) 453-3683Local, regional, national public agenc X 5/23/18 5/21/99 ALAMEDA Satellite Affordable Housing Ass1835 Alcatraz Ave. Berkeley CA 94703 (510) 647-0700 Susan Friedland [email protected] (510) 647-0820Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 2/26/14 6/10/99 CONTRA COSTA Anka Behavioral Health 1850 Gateway Blvd., Suite 900 Concord CA 94520 (925) 825-4700 (925) 825-2610Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 6/10/99 CONTRA COSTA Anka Behavioral Health 1850 Gateway Blvd., Suite 900 Concord CA 94520 (925) 825-4700 (925) 825-2610Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 6/10/99 CONTRA COSTA Satellite Housing Inc. 2526 Martin Luther King., Jr Way Berkeley CA 94704 (510) 647-0700 Susan Friedland [email protected] (510) 647-0820Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 2/26/14 6/10/99 KERN Housing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 LOS ANGELES Housing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 NAPA Housing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 ORANGE Housing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 RIVERSIDE Anka Behavioral Health 1850 Gateway Blvd., Suite 900 Concord CA 94520 (925) 825-4700 [email protected] (925) 825-2610Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 6/10/99 RIVERSIDE Housing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 SACRAMENTO Satellite Housing Inc. 2526 Martin Luther King., Jr Way Berkeley CA 94704 (510) 647-0700 Susan Friedland, [email protected] (510) 647-0820Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 2/26/14 6/10/99 SACRAMENTO Housing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 SAN BERNARDINHousing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 SAN DIEGO Housing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 SAN FRANCISCOSatellite Housing Inc. 2526 Martin Luther King., Jr Way Berkeley CA 94704 (510) 647-0700 Susan Friedland, [email protected] (510) 647-0820Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 2/26/14 6/10/99 SAN FRANCISCOHousing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 SAN JOAQUIN Housing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 SAN MATEO Housing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 SANTA BARBARAHousing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 SANTA CLARA Satellite Housing Inc. 2526 Martin Luther King., Jr Way Berkeley CA 94704 (510) 647-0700 Susan Friedland, [email protected] (510) 647-0820Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 2/26/14 6/10/99 SOLANO Anka Behavioral Health 1850 Gateway Blvd., Suite 900 Concord CA 94520 (925) 825-4700 [email protected] (925) 825-2610Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 6/10/99 SOLANO Housing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 STANISLAUS Housing Authority of the County P.O. Box 581918 Modesto CA 95358 (209) 523-0705 Rich Chubon [email protected] (209) 522-8637Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 6/10/99 VENTURA Housing Corporation of America 31423 Coast Highway, Ste. 7100 Laguna Beach CA 92677 (323) 726-9672 Carol Cromar [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 6/14/17 6/10/99 LOS ANGELES Abode Communities 701 E. Third St., Ste. 400 Los Angeles CA 90015 (213) 629-2702 Holly Benson (213) 627-6407Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 3/9/00 ALL COUNTIES University River Village 7901 La Riviera Drive Sacramento CA 95826 (916) 381-2001 Kaci Walsh (916) 381-7321Local, regional, national public agency 5/10/17 6/1/00 ALL COUNTIES National Affordable Housing Tru 2335 North Bank Drive Columbus OH 43220 (614) 451-9929 Robert Snow [email protected] (614) 451-3370Local, regional, national public agency 5/24/17 6/1/00 SAN DIEGO San Diego Co. Dept. of Housing 3989 Ruffin Road San Diego CA 92123 (858) 694-4805 Alfredo Ybarra [email protected] (858) 694-4871Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/19/00 ALL COUNTIES California Housing Partnership C369 Pine Street, Suite 300 San Francisco CA 94104 (415) 433-6804 Matt Schwartz [email protected] (415) 433-6805Local, regional, public agency X 8/14/14 10/23/00 ALL COUNTIES Solari Enterprises, Inc. 1544 W. Yale Ave Orange CA 92687 (714) 282-2520 Bruce Solari [email protected] (714) 282-2521Profit-motivated individual or organization 5/24/17 12/29/00 LOS ANGELES Southern California Presbyterian 516 Burchett St Glendale CA 91203 (818) 247-0420 Jacqueline A Seegobm (818) 247-0420Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/29/00 RIVERSIDE Southern California Presbyterian 516 Burchett St Glendale CA 91203 (818) 247-0420 Jacqueline A Seegobm (818) 247-0420Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/29/00 SAN BERNARDINSouthern California Presbyterian 516 Burchett St Glendale CA 91203 (818) 247-0420 Jacqueline A Seegobm (818) 247-0420Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 12/29/00 ALL COUNTIES Mercy Housing, Inc. 1999 Broadway, Suite 1000 Denver CO 80202 303-830-3300 Janet Gaf [email protected] (303) 830-3301Local, regional, national public agency 5/24/17 1/17/01 ALL COUNTIES California Community Reinvestm100 West Broadway Ste. 1000 Glendale CA 91210 818-844-4951 David Saltzman [email protected] (818) 550-9806Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/23/17 1/18/01 FRESNO The East Los Angeles Commun 1248 Goodrich Blvd. Los Angeles CA 90022 (323) 838-8556 Jasmine Borrego [email protected] (323) 838-0548Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 1/29/01 KERN The East Los Angeles Commun 1248 Goodrich Blvd. Los Angeles CA 90022 (323) 838-8556 Jasmine Borrego [email protected] (323) 838-0548Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 1/29/01 LOS ANGELES The East Los Angeles Commun 1248 Goodrich Blvd. Los Angeles CA 90022 (323) 838-8556 Jasmine Borrego [email protected] (323) 838-0548Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 1/29/01 RIVERSIDE The East Los Angeles Commun 1248 Goodrich Blvd. Los Angeles CA 90022 (323) 838-8556 Jasmine Borrego [email protected] (323) 838-0548Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 1/29/01 Updated 5-5-21 HCD DOES NOT EVALUATE OR ATTEST TO ANY ENTITY'S QUALIFICATIONS Prepared by California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) 4 of 8
3 - 1744

I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I
I

I I I I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

ENTITIES INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN CALIFORNIA'S FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL PROGRAM PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65863.11
County Organization Address City ST Zip Phone Number Contact Person E-Mail Address FAX Number Type of Organization Confirm Date Revised List Added SAN BERNARDINThe East Los Angeles Commun 1248 Goodrich Blvd. Los Angeles CA 90022 (323) 838-8556 Jasmine Borrego [email protected] (323) 838-0548Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 1/29/01 SAN DIEGO The East Los Angeles Commun 1248 Goodrich Blvd. Los Angeles CA 90022 (323) 838-8556 Jasmine Borrego [email protected] (323) 838-0548Local, regional, national public agenc X 8/14/14 1/29/01 ALAMEDA Christian Church Homes of Nort 303 Hegenberger Road, Ste. 201 Oakland CA 94621 (510) 632-6712 William F. Pickel [email protected] (510) 632-6755Local, regional, national public agency 5/9/17 2/6/01 ALL COUNTIES Goldrich & Kest Industries, LLC 5150 Overland Avenue Culver City CA 90230 (310) 204-2050 Carole Glodney [email protected] (310) 280-5767Profit-motivated individual or organiz X 8/14/14 4/25/01 LOS ANGELES LTSC Community Development 231 East Third Street, Ste. G 106 Los Angeles CA 90013 (213) 473-1606 Takao Suzuki [email protected] (213) 473-1681Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 4/25/01 ALL COUNTIES East Los Angeles Community C 530 South Boyle Avenue Los Angeles CA 90033 (323) 269-4214 Ernesto Espinoza (323) 261-1065Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 12/24/10 7/13/01 LOS ANGELES Nexus for Affordable Housing 1572 N. Main Street Orange CA 92867 (714) 282-2520 Bruce Solari [email protected] (714) 282-2521Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 7/13/01 ORANGE Nexus for Affordable Housing 1572 N. Main Street Orange CA 92867 (714) 282-2520 Bruce Solari [email protected] (714) 282-2521Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 7/13/01 RIVERSIDE Nexus for Affordable Housing 1572 N. Main Street Orange CA 92867 (714) 282-2520 Bruce Solari [email protected] (714) 282-2521Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 7/13/01 SAN BERNARDINNexus for Affordable Housing 1572 N. Main Street Orange CA 92867 (714) 282-2520 Bruce Solari [email protected] (714) 282-2521Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 7/13/01 SAN DIEGO Nexus for Affordable Housing 1572 N. Main Street Orange CA 92867 (714) 282-2520 Bruce Solari [email protected] (714) 282-2521Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 7/13/01 SANTA BARBARANexus for Affordable Housing 1572 N. Main Street Orange CA 92867 (714) 282-2520 Bruce Solari [email protected] (714) 282-2521Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 7/13/01 VENTURA Nexus for Affordable Housing 1572 N. Main Street Orange CA 92867 (714) 282-2520 Bruce Solari [email protected] (714) 282-2521Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 7/13/01 SACRAMENTO Norwood Family Housing 630 I Street, Second Floor Sacramento CA 95814 (916) 440-1328 Darren Bobrowsky [email protected] (916) 442-6736Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 1/9/02 ALL COUNTIES Bayside Communities 1990 North California Blvd., Ste. 1Walnut Creek CA 94596 (925) 482-9406 Basil Rallis [email protected] (510) 891-9004Profit-motivated individual or organiz X 5/10/17 9/10/02 ALL COUNTIES Newport Development, LLC 9 Cushing, Ste. 200 Irvine CA 92618 (949) 923-7812 Warren Allen [email protected] (949) 585-0449Profit-motivated individual or organiz X 5/24/17 9/10/02 ALL COUNTIES Mercy Housing California 1360 Mission St., Suite 300 San Francisco CA 94103 213-743-5830 Ed Holder [email protected] (415) 553-6373Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/24/17 12/9/02 ALL COUNTIES KDF Communities, LLC 1301 Dove St., Suite 720 Newport Beach CA 92660 (949) 622-1888 John Bernard (949) 851-1819Profit-motivated individual or organization 5/23/17 12/13/02 SONOMA Divine Senior Apartments P.O. Box 148 Occidental CA 95465 (707) 874-3538 Richard W. Blanz (707) 874-3538Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 5/29/03 ALL COUNTIES California Human Development 3315 Airway Drive Santa Rosa CA 95403 (707) 521-4788 John M. Way CaliforniaHumanDevelopment.org (707) 523-3776Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 8/14/14 6/30/03 ALL COUNTIES Reiner Communities LLC 100 Spectrum Center Dr. Suite 83Irvine CA 92618 (949) 753-0555 Dylan Feliciano [email protected] Profit-motivated individual or organiz X 5/16/17 6/30/03 ALL COUNTIES Petaluma Ecumenical Properties 1400 Caulfield Lane Petaluma CA 94954 (707) 762-2336 Vera R. Ciammetti [email protected] (707) 762-4657Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 5/10/17 8/19/03 ALL COUNTIES The John Stewert Company 1388 Sutter St., 11th Floor San Francisco CA 94109 (415) 345-4400 Margaret Miller [email protected] (415) 614-9175State-wide, for-profit X 5/24/17 8/19/03 ALL COUNTIES William G. Ayyad, Inc. 9252 Chesepeake Dr., Suite 100 San Diego CA 92123 (858) 244-0900 * Rebecca Ayyad [email protected] (858) 244-0909Profit-motivated individual or organization 5/24/17 8/19/03 MENDOCINO CDC of Mendocino County 1076 North State Street Ukiah CA 95482 (707) 463-5462 Todd Crabtree [email protected] (707) 463-4188Public housing authority 2/26/14 8/25/03 SONOMA Sonoma County Community Dev 1440 Guerneville Road Santa Rosa CA 95403 (707) 565-7901 Nick Stewart [email protected] 8/14/14 9/8/03 ALL COUNTIES Linc Housing Corporation 100 Pine Avenue, # 500 Long Beach CA 90802 (562) 684-1100 Sid Paul (562) 684-1137 8/14/14 9/15/03 LOS ANGELES Francis R. Hardy, Jr. 2735 W. 94th Street Inglewood CA 90305 (323) 756-6533 Francis R. Hardy, Jr. (323) 756-6533 9/18/03 ALL COUNTIES Domus Development, LLC 594 Howard St., Ste 204 San Francisco CA 94105 (415) 856-0010 Meea Kang (415) 856-0264 X 8/14/14 2/4/04 ALL COUNTIES BUILD Leadership Development P.O. Box 9414 Newport Beach CA 92658 (877) 644-9422 Tracy Green (949) 719-9711Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 5/16/17 2/4/04 ALL COUNTIES Skyline Real Estate Developmen P.O. Box 7613 Newport Beach CA 92658 (949) 293-4705 Lynn Miller [email protected] (949) 719-9711Profit-motivated individual or organization 5/24/17 2/4/04 LOS ANGELES A Community of Friends 9 Cushing, Ste. 200 Irvine CA 92618 (415) 856-0010 Meea Kang [email protected] (415) 856-0264 X 8/27/13 2/4/04 ALL COUNTIES MBK Management Corporation 23586 Calabasas Road, Ste. 100 Calabasas CA 91302 (818) 444-2100 e Jessica Robbins [email protected] (818) 337-7578 X 5/23/17 3/4/04 ALL COUNTIES Cabouchon Properties, LLC Pier 9, Suite 114 San Francisco CA 94111 (415) 433-2000 Susan Terrado (415) 433-2000 5/23/17 4/28/04 ALL COUNTIES Maximus Properties, LLC 23586 Calabasas Road, Ste. 103 Calabasas CA 91302 (818)449-4004 Jeffrey S. McGuire [email protected] (818) 449-4004 5/23/17 4/28/04 ALL COUNTIES Squier Properties, LLC 1157 Lake Street Venice CA 90291 (310) 418-6389 Scott Richards√ [email protected] (310) 418-6389Profit-motivated individual or organization 5/24/17 4/28/04 LOS ANGELES Many Mansions, Inc. 1459 E. Thousand Oaks Blvd.,SteThousand Oaks CA 91362 (805) 496-4948 Neil McGuffin [email protected] (805) 496-4948Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/28/04 LOS ANGELES Winnetka King, LLC 23586 Calabasas Road, Ste. 100 Los Angeles CA 91302 (818) 222-2800 Rick Macaya (818) 222-2800 4/28/04 SANTA BARBARAMany Mansions, Inc. 1459 E. Thousand Oaks Blvd.,SteThousand Oaks CA 91362 (805) 496-4948 Neil McGuffin (805) 496-4948 4/28/04 VENTURA Many Mansions, Inc. 1459 E. Thousand Oaks Blvd.,SteThousand Oaks CA 91362 (805) 496-4948 Neil McGuffin [email protected] (805) 496-4948Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/28/04 ALL COUNTIES Creative Housing Coalition 4612 Alta Canyada Road La Canada CA 91011 (805) 736-9342 Jane Anderson (805) 736-9342 5/23/17 5/19/04 ALL COUNTIES Fallbrook Capital Corporation 6700 Fallbrook Avenue, #111 West Hills CA 91307 (818) 712-6931 Brandt Blaken (818) 712-6931 5/23/17 6/1/04 LOS ANGELES Los Angeles Housing & Commu 1200 W.7th Street, 9th Floor Los Angeles CA 90017 (213) 808-8654 Franklin Campos [email protected] (213) 808-8999 X 8/14/14 3/15/05 ALL COUNTIES West Bay Housing Corporation 1390 Market Street, Ste. 405 San Francisco CA 94102 (415) 618-0012 Bill Pickel (415) 618-0228 X 9/25/12 4/6/05 SAN DIEGO A Community of Friends 1390 Market Street, Ste. 405 San Francisco CA 94102 (415) 618-0012 Bill Pickel (415) 618-0228 X 9/25/12 4/6/05 ALAMEDA Northern California Land Trust, I3122 Shattuck Avenue Berkeley CA 94705 (510) 548-7878 Erin Coyle [email protected] (510) 548-7562 X 8/14/14 6/10/05 CONTRA COSTA Northern California Land Trust, I3122 Shattuck Avenue Berkeley CA 94705 (510) 548-7878 (510) 548-7562 X 8/14/14 6/10/05 LOS ANGELES Orange Housing Development C414 E. Chapman Avenue Orange CA 92866 (714) 288-7600 Todd Cottle (714) 242-2092 X 6/10/05 MARIN Northern California Land Trust, I3122 Shattuck Avenue Berkeley CA 94705 (510) 548-7878 (510) 548-7562 X 8/14/14 6/10/05 ORANGE Orange Housing Development C414 E. Chapman Avenue Orange CA 92866 (714) 288-7600 Todd Cottle (714) 242-2092 X 6/10/05 RIVERSIDE Orange Housing Development C414 E. Chapman Avenue Orange CA 92866 (714) 288-7600x Todd Cottle (714) 242-2092 X 6/10/05 SAN BERNARDINOrange Housing Development C414 E. Chapman Avenue Orange CA 92866 (714) 288-7600 Todd Cottle (714) 242-2092 X 6/10/05 Updated 5-5-21 HCD DOES NOT EVALUATE OR ATTEST TO ANY ENTITY'S QUALIFICATIONS Prepared by California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) 5 of 8
3 - 1745

I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I

I I I I I I I I I I I I

ENTITIES INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN CALIFORNIA'S FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL PROGRAM PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65863.11
County Organization Address City ST Zip Phone Number Contact Person E-Mail Address FAX Number Type of Organization Confirm Date Revised List Added SAN DIEGO Orange Housing Development C414 E. Chapman Avenue Orange CA 92866 (714) 288-7600 Todd Cottle (714) 242-2092 X 6/10/05 SAN FRANCISCONorthern California Land Trust, I3122 Shattuck Avenue Berkeley CA 94705 (510) 548-7878 (510) 548-7562 X 8/14/14 6/10/05 SAN MATEO Northern California Land Trust, I3122 Shattuck Avenue Berkeley CA 94705 (510) 548-7878 (510) 548-7562 X 8/14/14 6/10/05 ORANGE Riverside Chartable Corporation 3803 E. Casselle Ave Orange CA 92869 (714) 628-1650 Kenneth S. Robertson (714) 628-1657 8/14/14 9/2/05 LOS ANGELES Home and Community 2425 Riverside Place Los Angeles CA 90039 (213) 910-9738 Sabrina Williams (213) 913-5819 11/28/05 ALL COUNTIES Wakeland Housing & Developm 1230 Columbia St. Ste. 950 San Diego CA 92101 (619) 326-6215 Tim Wray (619) 235-5386 X 5/24/17 12/27/05 LOS ANGELES Hart Community Homes 2807 E. Lincoln Ave Anaheim CA 92086 (714) 630-1007 William Hart (714) 630-3714 X 12/27/05 ORANGE Hart Community Homes 2807 E. Lincoln Ave Anaheim CA 92086 (714) 630-1007 William Hart (714) 630-3714 X 12/27/05 KERN Keller & Company 4309 Argos Drive San Diego CA 92116 Chad Keller (619) 795-7151 6/14/17 2/8/06 KERN Poker Flats LLC 1726 Webster Los Angeles CA 90026 Jennifer B. Luria (323) 661-2936 6/14/17 2/8/06 LOS ANGELES Keller & Company 4309 Argos Drive San Diego CA 92116 Chad Keller (619) 795-7151 2/8/06 LOS ANGELES Poker Flats LLC 1726 Webster Los Angeles CA 90026 Jennifer B. Luria (323) 661-2936 2/8/06 ORANGE Keller & Company 4309 Argos Drive San Diego CA 92116 Chad Keller (619) 795-7151 2/8/06 ORANGE Poker Flats LLC 1726 Webster Los Angeles CA 90026 Jennifer B. Luria (323) 661-2936 2/8/06 RIVERSIDE Keller & Company 4309 Argos Drive San Diego CA 92116 Chad Keller (619) 795-7151 2/8/06 RIVERSIDE Poker Flats LLC 1726 Webster Los Angeles CA 90026 Jennifer B. Luria (323) 661-2936 2/8/06 SAN BERNARDINKeller & Company 4309 Argos Drive San Diego CA 92116 Chad Keller (619) 795-7151 2/8/06 SAN BERNARDINPoker Flats LLC 1726 Webster Los Angeles CA 90026 Jennifer B. Luria (323) 661-2936 2/8/06 SAN DIEGO Keller & Company 4309 Argos Drive San Diego CA 92116 Chad Keller (619) 795-7151 2/8/06 SAN DIEGO Poker Flats LLC 1726 Webster Los Angeles CA 90026 Jennifer B. Luria (323) 661-2936 2/8/06 ALL COUNTIES Hampstead Development Group 3413 30th Street San Diego CA 92104 (619) 543-4200 Chris Foster (619) 543-4220 X 8/24/11 5/5/06 KERN Housing Authority of the County 601 24th Street Bakersfield CA 93301 (661) 631-8500 Stephen M. Pelz (661) 631-9500 8/14/14 5/5/06 SANTA CRUZ Housing Authority of the County 2931 Mission Street Santa Cruz CA 95060 (831) 454-5901 Ken Cole 8/14/14 5/5/06 LOS ANGELES Coalition for Economic Survival 514 Shatto Place, Suite 270 Los Angeles CA 90020 (213) 252-4411 Alison Dickson (213) 252-4422 X 6/8/06 ORANGE Coalition for Economic Survival 514 Shatto Place, Suite 270 Los Angeles CA 90020 (213) 252-4411 Alison Dickson (213) 252-4422 X 6/8/06 RIVERSIDE Coalition for Economic Survival 514 Shatto Place, Suite 270 Los Angeles CA 90020 (213) 252-4411 Alison Dickson (213) 252-4422 X 6/8/06 SAN BERNARDINCoalition for Economic Survival 514 Shatto Place, Suite 270 Los Angeles CA 90020 (213) 252-4411 Alison Dickson (213) 252-4422 X 6/8/06 VENTURA Coalition for Economic Survival 514 Shatto Place, Suite 270 Los Angeles CA 90020 (213) 252-4411 Alison Dickson (213) 252-4422 X 6/8/06 ALL COUNTIES A. F. Evans Development, Inc. 4305 Univeristy Ave. Suite 550 San Diego CA 92105 (619) 282-6647 Anne Wilson (619) 282-4145 X 1/26/12 10/11/06 ALL COUNTIES California Coalition for Rural Hou717 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento CA 95814 (916) 443-4448 Alicia Sebastian [email protected] (916) 447-0458 X 5/23/17 10/11/06 ALL COUNTIES Chelsea Investment Corporation725 South Coast Highway 101 Encinitas CA 92024 (760) 456-6000 Jim Schmid (760) 456-6001 5/23/17 10/11/06 ALL COUNTIES Corporation for Better Housing 15303 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1100 Sherman Oaks CA 91403 (818) 905-2430 Mary Silverstein (818) 905-2440 5/23/17 10/11/06 ALL COUNTIES Community HousingWorks 2815 Camino Del Rio South, Ste. San Diego CA 92108 (619) 858-9031 Daniel Marcus [email protected] (619) 282-4145Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 6/7/18 10/11/06 IMPERIAL Calexico Community Action Cou 2306 M.L. King Calexico CA 92231 (760) 357-2995 Steve F. Rivera (760) 357-2923 6/14/17 10/11/06 LOS ANGELES Clifford Beers Housing, Inc. 1200 Wilshire Blvd. Ste. 205 Los Angeles CA 90017 James Bonar (213) 316-0111 X 5/3/07 ALL COUNTIES USA Properties Fund 2440 Professional Drive Roseville CA 95661 (916) 773-5866 Geoffrey C. Brown (916) 773-5866 5/24/17 7/12/07 CONTRA COSTA City of Walnut Creek 1666 N. Main Street Walnut Creek CA 94596 (925) 943-5899 Laura Simpson [email protected] (925) 256-3500 X 2/26/14 9/11/07 ALL COUNTIES Bank of America, N.A. 555 California St., 6th Floor San Francisco CA 94104 (415) 953-2631 Gabriel Speyer (415) 622-1671 5/16/17 12/4/07 ALL COUNTIES Fairfied Residential LLC 5510 Morehouse Drive, Suite 200 San Diego CA 92121 (858) 824-6406 Paul Kudirka [email protected] (858) 635-8606 5/23/17 12/4/07 MONTEREY CHISPA Inc. 295 Main Street, Suite 100 Salinas CA 93901 (831) 757-6251 Normond V. Kolpin (831) 757-7537 5/29/08 ALL COUNTIES Allied Pacific Development, LLC 169 Saxony Road, Suite 103 Encinitas CA 92024 (760) 557-1480 (760) 557-1480 X 5/27/10 ALL COUNTIES Belveron Real Estate Partners, L268 Bush St., #3534 San Francisco CA 94104 (415) 273-6801 (415) 520-5688 X 5/27/10 DEL NORTE Humboldt Bay Housing Develop PO Box 4655 Arcata CA 95518 (707) 826-7312 Bonnie Hughes [email protected] (707) 826-7319 X 8/14/14 5/27/10

HUMBOLDT
Humboldt Bay Housing
Development Corporation
(DBA Housing Humboldt) PO Box 4655 Arcata CA 95518 (707) 826-7312 Elizabeth [email protected](707) 826-7319Local, regional non-profit X 8/14/14 5/27/10 ALL COUNTIES Richman Group of California, LL21520 Yorba Linda Blvd, Suite G- Yorba Linda CA 92887 (714) 837-6138 Pamela Mikus [email protected] X 5/28/10 ALL COUNTIES Renaissance Housing Communi 110 Pacific Avenue, Suite 292 San Francisco CA 94111 (415)0419-4027 David Silver (415) 789-448 X 8/9/10 ALAMEDA Alameda County Allied Housing 224 W. Winton Avenue, Room 10 Hayward CA 94541 (510) 670-5404 Linda Gardiner [email protected] (510) 670-6378Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 5/9/17 9/27/10 ALL COUNTIES Mesa Realty Advisors 56 Cbana Blanca Henderson NV 89012 (310) 213-5310 Rick W. Toney X 9/25/12 9/27/10 CONTRA COSTA Alameda County Allied Housing 224 W. Winton Avenue, Room 10 Hayward CA 94541 (510) 670-5404 (510) 670-6378Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 9/27/10 9/27/10 LOS ANGELES CSI Support & Development Se 201 E. Huntington Drive Monrovia CA 91016 (626) 599-8464 Isa Woods (626) 599-8463 X 9/27/10 Updated 5-5-21 HCD DOES NOT EVALUATE OR ATTEST TO ANY ENTITY'S QUALIFICATIONS Prepared by California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) 6 of 8
3 - 1746

I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I

I I I I I I I I I I I I

ENTITIES INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN CALIFORNIA'S FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL PROGRAM PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65863.11
County Organization Address City ST Zip Phone Number Contact Person E-Mail Address FAX Number Type of Organization Confirm Date Revised List Added ORANGE A Community of Friends 56 Cbana Blanca Henderson NV 89012 (310) 213-5310 Rick W. Toney X 9/25/12 9/27/10 ORANGE CSI Support & Development Se 201 E. Huntington Drive Monrovia CA 91016 (626) 599-8464 Isa Woods (626) 599-8463 X 9/27/10 RIVERSIDE CSI Support & Development Se 201 E. Huntington Drive Monrovia CA 91016 (626) 599-8464 Isa Woods (626) 599-8463 X 9/27/10 SAN BERNARDINCSI Support & Development Se 201 E. Huntington Drive Monrovia CA 91016 (626) 599-8464 Isa Woods (626) 599-8463 X 9/27/10 ALL COUNTIES California Commercial Investme 4530 E. Thousand Oaks Blvd., Ste Westlake Village CA 91362 (805) 495-8400 (805) 495-5471 X 8/14/14 12/24/10 ALL COUNTIES Dawson Holdings, Inc. 300 Turney Street, 2nd Floor Sausalito CA 94965 (801) 244-6658 Tim Fluetsch (801) 733-6116 X 8/14/14 12/24/10 ALL COUNTIES WNC Community Preservation P 17782 Sky Park Circle Irvine CA 92620 (714) 662-5565 (714) 662-4412 X 3/3/11 AMADOR Mutual Housing California 8001 Fruitridge Road, Suite A Sacramento CA 95820 (916) 453-8400 Rachel Iskkow [email protected] (916) 453-8401Local, regional, national public agenc x 4/21/16 3/3/11 SOLANO Mutual Housing California 8001 Fruitridge Road, Suite A Sacramento CA 95820 (916) 453-8400 Holly Wunder Stiles [email protected] x 8/14/14 3/3/11 ALAMEDA ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 BUTTE ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 CONTRA COSTA ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 EL DORADO ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 FRESNO ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 IMPERIAL ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 KERN ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 KINGS ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 LOS ANGELES ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 MADERA ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 MENDOCINO ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 MERCED ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 MONTEREY ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 ORANGE ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 PLACER ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 RIVERSIDE ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 SACRAMENTO ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 SAN BENITO ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 SAN BERNARDINROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 SAN DIEGO ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 SAN FRANCISCOROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 SAN JOAQUIN ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 SAN LUIS OBISP ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 SAN MATEO ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 SANTA BARBARAROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 SANTA CLARA ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 SANTA CRUZ ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 STANISLAUS ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 TULARE ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 VENTURA ROEM Development Corporatio 1650 Lafayette Circle Santa Clara CA 65050 (408) 984-5600 E Erin Caputo [email protected] (408) 984-3111 X 5/24/17 3/30/11 KERN Abbey Road Inc. 15305 Rayen Street North Hills CA 91343 (818) 332-8008 Jonathon Dilworth (818) 332-8101 6/14/17 3/28/12 LOS ANGELES Abbey Road Inc. 15305 Rayen Street North Hills CA 91343 (818) 332-8008 Jonathon Dilworth (818) 332-8101 X 6/14/17 3/28/12 NAPA SWJ Housing PO Box 815 Sebastopol CA 95473 (707) 823-9884 Scott Johnson (707) 634-1422 X 8/14/14 3/28/12 ORANGE City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach CA 92660 (949) 644-3221 Melinda Whelan X 8/14/14 3/28/12 ORANGE Abbey Road Inc. 15305 Rayen Street North Hills CA 91343 (818) 332-8008 Jonathon Dilworth (818) 332-8101 X 6/14/17 3/28/12 SAN BERNARDINAbbey Road Inc. 15305 Rayen Street North Hills CA 91343 (818) 332-8008 Jonathon Dilworth (818) 332-8101 X 6/14/17 3/28/12 SOLANO SWJ Housing PO Box 815 Sebastopol CA 95473 (707) 823-9884 Scott Johnson (707) 634-1422 X 8/14/14 3/28/12 SONOMA SWJ Housing PO Box 815 Sebastopol CA 95473 (707) 823-9884 Scott Johnson (707) 634-1422 X 8/14/14 3/28/12 VENTURA Abbey Road Inc. 15305 Rayen Street North Hills CA 91343 (818) 332-8008 Jonathon Dilworth (818) 332-8101 X 6/14/17 3/28/12 ALL COUNTIES Preservation Partners Developm21515 Hawthorne Blvd. Suite 125 Torrance CA 90503 (310) 802-6681 Chuck Treatch [email protected] (310) 802-6680A California limited partnership, for-p X 8/14/14 1/16/13 ALL COUNTIES Berkadia 823 Colby Drive Davis CA 95616 (916) 769-7768 Al R Inouye [email protected] X 8/1/16 2/26/14 ORANGE Jamboree Housing Corporation 17701 Cowan Ave, #200 Irvine CA 92614 (949) 214-2395 Roger Kinoshita [email protected] (949)214-2395 Local, region, national, nonprofit org 4/22/16 4/22/16 ALL COUNTIES American Community Developer 20250 Harper Avenue Detroit MI 48225 (313) 884-0722 Derek M. Skrzynski [email protected] (313) 884-0722Profit-motivated individual or organiz X 9/2/16 9/2/16 ALL COUNTIES Highland Property Development 250 W. Colorado Bv. Suite 210 Arcadia CA 91007 (626) 698-6357 Paul Patierno [email protected](626) 698-6365Profit-motivated individual or organization 9/27/16 Updated 5-5-21 HCD DOES NOT EVALUATE OR ATTEST TO ANY ENTITY'S QUALIFICATIONS Prepared by California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) 7 of 8
3 - 1747

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

ENTITIES INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN CALIFORNIA'S FIRST RIGHT OF REFUSAL PROGRAM PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65863.11
County Organization Address City ST Zip Phone Number Contact Person E-Mail Address FAX Number Type of Organization Confirm Date Revised List Added ALL COUNTIES GAL Affordable LP 250 W. Colorado Bv. Suite 210 Arcadia CA 91007 (626) 698-6357 Paul Patierno (626) 698-6365Profit-motivated individual or organization 10/24/16 ALL COUNTIES Eden Housing, Inc. 22645 Grand Street Hayward CA 94541 (510) 582-1460 Andrea Osgood [email protected] (510) 582-6523Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 11/8/16 LOS ANGELES Innovative Housing Opportunitie 19772 Macarthur Bv., Ste. 110 Irvine CA 92612 (949) 863-9740 Patricia Whitaker (949) 863-9746Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/6/17 ORANGE Innovative Housing Opportunitie 19772 Macarthur Bv., Ste. 110 Irvine CA 92612 (949) 863-9740 Patricia Whitaker (949) 863-9746Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/6/17 RIVERSIDE Innovative Housing Opportunitie 19772 Macarthur Bv., Ste. 110 Irvine CA 92612 (949) 863-9740 Patricia Whitaker (949) 863-9746Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/6/17 SAN BERNARDINInnovative Housing Opportunitie 19772 Macarthur Bv., Ste. 110 Irvine CA 92612 (949) 863-9740 Patricia Whitaker (949) 863-9746Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/6/17 VENTURA Innovative Housing Opportunitie 19772 Macarthur Bv., Ste. 110 Irvine CA 92612 (949) 863-9740 Patricia Whitaker (949) 863-9746Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/6/17 SAN DIEGO Innovative Housing Opportunitie 19772 Macarthur Bv., Ste. 110 Irvine CA 92612 (949) 863-9740 Patricia Whitaker (949) 863-9746Local, regional, national nonprofit org X 4/7/17 ALL COUNTIES Lincoln Avenue Capitol, LLC 680 5th Avenue, 17th Floor New York NY 10019 (646) 585-5524 Andrew Mika [email protected] Profit-motivated individual or organiz X 8/30/19 5/3/17 LOS ANGELES Community Development Comm700 W. Main Street Los Angeles CA 91801 (626) 586-1812 Larry Newnam [email protected] (626) 943-3815Loca., regional, national public agency 11/6/17 8/17/17 FRESNO Self-Help Enterprises 8445 W. Elowin Court/P.O. Box 65Visalia CA 93290 (559) 802-1620 Thomas J. Collishaw [email protected] (559) 651-3634Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 4/10/18 4/10/18 ALL COUNTIES Colrich Multifamily Investments, 444 West Beach St. San Diego CA 92101 (858) 490-2300 Danny Gabriel [email protected] (858) 490-0264Profit-motivated individual or organization 4/16/18 ALL COUNTIES Standard Property Company, IN 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 3 Los Angeles CA 90067 (310) 553-5711 Brad Martinson bmartinson@standard-companies.(310) 551-1666Profit-motivated individual or organization 6/4/18 ALL COUNTIES Jonathon Rose Companies 551 Fifth Ave, 23rd Floor New York NY 10176 (917) 542-3600 Nathan Taft [email protected] (917) 542-3601Profit-motivated individual or organization 6/27/18 ALL COUNTIES JEMCOR Development Partners1700 El Camino Real Suite #400 Sna Mateo CA 94402 (415) 941-5847 Michael McDermott [email protected] Profit-motivated individual or organization 8/8/18 ALL COUNTIES Catalyst Housing Group, LLC 21 Ward Street, Suite 2 Larkspur CA 94939 (415) 205-4702 Jordan Moss [email protected] Profit-motivated individual or organization 12/11/18 LOS ANGELES Los Angeles County Developme 700 W. Main Street Alhambra CA 91801 (626) 586-1816 KeAndra Cylear-Dod [email protected] Local, regional, national public agency 4/18/19 ALL COUNTIES Veritas Urban Properties LLC 2050 Hancock Street, Suite B San Diego CA 92110 (619) 746-5191 Gilman Bishop [email protected] Profit-motivated individual or organization 4/24/19 LOS ANGELES Santa Fe Art Colony Tenants As2415 S. Sante Fe Avenue, Unit 2 Los Angeles CA 90058 (310) 663-6665 Sylvia Tidwell [email protected] Tenants' Association 5/2/19 SANTA CLARA Silicon Valley at Home 350 West Julian Street, Building 5San Jose CA 95110 (669) 254-1009 Mathew Reed [email protected] Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 7/10/19 LOS ANGELES San Gabriel Valley Habitat for H 400 S Irwindale Ave Azusa CA 91702 (626) 709-3277 Mark Van Lue [email protected] Local, regional, national nonprofit org. 8/12/2019 Updated 5-5-21 HCD DOES NOT EVALUATE OR ATTEST TO ANY ENTITY'S QUALIFICATIONS Prepared by California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) 8 of 8
3 - 1748

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I
Appendix E:

Accessory Dwelling Unit
Projection Methodology
3 - 1749
3 - 1750
Appendix E

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023
Page E1-1
Analysis for projecting accessory dwelling units as part of meeting South Pasadena’s Regional Housing Needs
Allocation (Revised: September 2022)
As part of the Housing Element Update for the City of South Pasadena (City) and to ensure that the City is able to meet the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) assigned by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the City may project the number of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) that is expected to be built over the course of the 6th Round Housing Element Cycle. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) recognizes that ADUs have become more popular in recent years and expects the trend to continue. ADUs are seen as an attractive option for developing housing given their affordability to lower-income renters, relatively low cost to construct, and their ability to provide income and alternative housing options to homeowners.

Assuming a certain number of ADUs will be developed over the course of housing element implementation has been acceptable to the State of California since ADU law was instituted in 2003.

These projections are based on recent past ADU development trends in the jurisdiction and the current market rents for ADUs in the jurisdiction. State law regulating ADUs has changed significantly since 2016, requiring local jurisdictions to allow ADUs more broadly across a jurisdiction and with development standards and other regulations that reduce cost and other barriers to ADU development.

This includes changes to require less on-site parking, allow fewer fees to be charged related to ADUs, and allow conversion of existing structures to ADUs.

HCD “Safe Harbor” Calculation
HCD’s Housing Element Site Inventory Guidebook, finalized in June 2020, has clarified parameters for analyzing ADU past performance and using it to project the number of ADUs expected to be developed as part of meeting the City’s RHNA. HCD has explained that the quantity of ADU building permits issued in previous years, particularly since 2018 as effects of the changes to the law began having more impact, may be used as a baseline for making the calculations. According to HCD, to project the number of ADUs expected, there are two methods that are acceptable to arrive at a ‘safe harbor’ number for projected ADUs. Both are based on past approvals of ADUs in a jurisdiction. Based on preliminary discussions with HCD for South Pasadena, the safe harbor number can be relied on in the 6th Round Housing Element in combination with programs to comply with state ADU regulations and monitor ADU production. The two options for ‘safe harbor’ analysis are described here:
 Use the number of ADU building permits in the jurisdiction since January 2018 to estimate new production. Take the average number of ADUs that have received building permits per year since the beginning of 2018. That average number can be assumed to be the average number of ADUs that will be permitted per year through the rest of the 6th Cycle RHNA projection period (through October 15, 2029). The 6th Cycle RHNA projection period begins June 30, 2021.  Assume an average increase of five times the previous planning period ADU construction trends prior to 2018. Take the average number of ADUs with building permits issued per year between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2017, which is the part of the 5th Housing Element RHNA projection period occurring before January 1, 2018, when many of the new ADU laws began to take effect. Multiply that average by five. That average number can be assumed to be the 3 - 1751
Appendix E
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023
Page E1-2

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE average number of ADUs that will be permitted per year through the rest of the 6th Cycle RHNA projection period (through October 15, 2029).

A jurisdiction may choose to use one or the other of these approaches if better data is available for one of the timeframes. Before 2018, South Pasadena had only approved one ADU (during the 5th Cycle).

During that time, the ADU regulations in the City were much more limiting and ADUs were only allowed on parcels larger than 12,000 square feet. Once the new state laws took effect, the ADU numbers began to increase. Between January 1, 2018, and the present (mid-2022), an average of 16 ADUs received planning permits per year with an increase every year.

Four ADUs received building permits in 2018, seven in 2019, eight in 2020, 19 in 2021 and 38 during the first two-thirds of 2022 (by August 31), for an average of over 16 ADUs per year receiving building permits during that timeframe.

When 16 ADUs per year on average are projected through the end of the projection period, the City estimates a safe harbor number of 148 ADUs between June 30, 2021, and October 15, 2029.

Projection Based on Data Reflecting South Pasadena’s Specific Circumstances If a jurisdiction expects a higher number of ADU approvals in the 6th Cycle than what is projected using one of the safe harbor options, additional data, analysis of trends, and supporting programs, including a monitoring program, must be included in the Housing Element. The City of South Pasadena does expect a higher number of ADUs will be permitted than the safe harbor number of 148 ADUs, because of the recent upward trajectory following updates to the City’s ADU zoning regulations that went into effect in early June and December 2021, and based on the results of other ADU programs and initiatives that have been implemented or are planned at the City.

Over five years, ADU building permit activity has increased as follows:
 2017 to 2018 – increase from 1 to 4 ADUs that received building permits  2018 to 2019 – increase from 4 to 7 ADUs that received building permits  2019 to 2020 – increase from 7 to 8 ADUs that received building permits  2020 to 2021 – increase from 8 to 19 ADUs that received building permits  2021 to June 30, 2022 – increase over 6 months to 29 ADUs (or 58 ADUs projected to an annualized number) that received building permits
The 19 permits issued in 2021 and 29 permits issued in the first half of 2022 far exceeded the City’s earlier (Public Review Draft) projection of 12 ADU permits. The increase can be attributed to two important policy actions taken by the City Council:

Adoption in December 2021 of an urgency ordinance with standards for constructing ADUs on historic properties, along with comprehensive design guidelines that pave an administrative (by-right) path for owners of historic properties to build an ADU. Council adopted the same ordinance permanently into the Municipal Code on February 2, 2022. These changes to the code resolved issues that have delayed approval of ADUs and reduced application submittals. Staff immediately noticed an increase in interest and new applications with approval of the new standards. Additionally, the City streamlined the application process with new forms and electronic submittal. Accordingly, more complete applications have been received and approved more quickly.

Additionally, at the end of 2021, the City added four new Planning staff to increase permit processing 3 - 1752
Appendix E

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023
Page E1-3
capacity, including ADU applications.

With increased staffing and clear, objective Code standards, the City has increased confidence in the projections provided in the first two public drafts. The City has already initiated several of the programs in this 2021-2029 Housing Element, including homeowner education and assistance and the ADU amnesty program for property owners with an existing unpermitted ADU on their property to legalize based on compliance with the Building Code. A list of the programs and initiatives the City is undertaking related to ADUs is included at the end of this memo.

The trend in ADU application submittals since the Code was amended, documented above, supports an assumption that the “safe harbor” is far below reasonably projected numbers, and given the City’s RHNA, it is important to use a projection that is reflective of the permit activity experienced since conditions changed starting in June 2021. As the third Public Review Draft is released, data through August 2022 shows a sharp increase in applications and building permits, and the City expects to issue 58 ADU building permits in 2022. To maintain a conservative forecast, this sharp increase will be considered to 8 represent a “bubble” due to pent-up demand, with future years of the planning period remaining as forecast earlier (39 annually) as shown in Table 1. In order to remain consistent with the public’s and HCD’s understanding of the City’s approach for the RHNA forecast and the housing program, the City will continue to use the figure of 297 units for those purposes, as projected in earlier public review drafts.

Table 1. Accessory Dwelling Unit Projection
Year ADU Planning Permits ADU Building Permits
2020 - Actual 17 8
2021 - Actual 62 19
Issued from June 30 through December 31 2021
(Actual) 28 9
Issued from January 1 through June 30
2022 (Actual) 50 29
Remainder of 2022 50 29
2023 55 39
2024 55 39
2025 55 39
2026 55 39
2027 55 39
2028 55 39
2029 (through October 15) 40 28
Total January 1, 2022-October 15, 2029 470 320
It is quite possible that the projection in Table 1 is too low, as market trends show growing popularity for ADU construction. Applications on historic properties in particular are just beginning to be submitted. For informational purposes, a second, more robust, scenario is included in Table 3 that assumes that 2022 was a bubble, but which projects a stronger growth trend throughout the planning period, with 75% of applications moving forward to building permit issuance.

ADU Affordability Analysis
SCAG prepared its Regional ADU Affordability Analysis for the entire SCAG region in 2020. The analysis was accepted by HCD in late 2020 and is the best proxy for estimating affordability levels for 3 - 1753
Appendix E
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023
Page E1-4

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE South Pasadena. The analysis made findings for affordability of ADUs by subregion based on data gathered on current rents and occupancy of ADUs in addition to industry research about affordability levels of ADUs, including those that do not reach the rental market. ADU research conducted by the University of California, Berkeley’s Center for Community Innovationi indicates that 40 percent of ADUs are typically rented to family members or friends at either no cost or below-market rental rates.

SCAG conservatively estimated that 15 percent of the ADUs in their region would be in this category and thus rented to the extremely low-income category of households. Table 2 lists the projected 297 ADUs by income category based on the SCAG analysis for the Los Angeles II subregion that includes South Pasadena.

Table 2. Projected ADUs - Affordability
Percentage Number of ADUs Income Category Affordable To:
15% 45 Extremely Low Income
9% 27 Very Low Income
44% 131 Low Income
2% 6 Moderate Income
30% 89 Above Moderate Income
100% 297 Total
An Alternative Projection Based on the 2021-2022 ADU Permit Trend As noted above, Table 3 presents a scenario that reflects the actual number of approved ADU Planning applications and building permits issued in 2021, accounts for 2022 ADU permits as a bubble, and assumes an increase in applications from 2021 to 2023 that continues for three years before leveling off.

This scenario also assumes that 75 percent of approved Planning applications will receive building permits. Based on these assumptions, this more robust scenario projects a total of 403 ADUs between January 1, 2022, and October 15, 2029.

Table 3. Possible Higher Accessory Dwelling Unit Projection Year
ADU Planning
Applications
ADU Building
Permits Issued Notes
2020 30 8 Actual
2021 45 21
Actual
150% increase in Planning applications; 400%
increase in building permits.

Issued after June 30, 2021 28 9 Actual
2022 100 58 Assumption of same level of applications for the remainder of 2022 (same as Table 1)
2023 55 41
Assumption of 2022 as a bubble, but increase in
applications over 2021 and 75% moving forward
to building permits
2024 60 45 Assumption of 10% increase in applications and 75% moving forward to building permits 2025 66 50
2026 72 54
2027 72 54 Assumption of steady application rate,
no increase 2028 72 54
2029
(through October 15) 63 47 Same assumption as previous year, through October 15, 2029
Total January 1, 2022-
October 15, 2029 560 403
3 - 1754
Appendix E

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023
Page E1-5
Projections Relative to Existing Single-family Housing Stock In 2019, South Pasadena’s single-family housing stock consisted of 5,642 units. 30 ADU permits were issued in the previous housing element cycle, including the first half of 2021.

The projection of 297 units, which is used for RHNA and program purposes in this housing element and Table 3 both project many more ADUs, and for context, it is informative to consider the number of single-family properties within the city and whether those projections make sense within that context.

Table 4 includes the 30 5th cycle ADUs, the 9 units permitted in the 2nd half of 2021, together with the actual and projected 2022-2029 ADUs for both projection scenarios and calculates them as a percentage of the 2019 housing stock. As shown, the more conservative projection would result in about 6 percent of single-family properties that have ADUs in 2029. The more aggressive scenario results in 7.8 percent.

In either case, more than 92 percent of single-family properties remain unchanged.

Table 4: Percentage of ADUs Projected Relative to Housing Stock Housing Stock (5,642 units) 5,642
Additional ADUs as a % of
housing stock
Total ADUs as a % of housing
stock
297ADUs (+30+9) 336 5.4% 6.6%
Table 3 ADUs (+30+9) 442 7.3% 7.8%
Additionally, the estimate of ADUs as a percentage of single-family properties does not take into account that some ADUs will be constructed on multifamily properties. It is anticipated that these will become more popular as apartment building owners get savvier regarding ADU law. As of 2022, the City has already approved the first such applications. Furthermore, the City’s program creating an amnesty process for illegal units, to recognize them as ADUs, will bring additional units into the housing stock, and are not contemplated in this scenario. Based on this information, it can be concluded that both of the ADU projection scenarios are realistic within the context of the overall existing housing stock in South Pasadena.

City of South Pasadena ADU Initiatives and Programs for 2021-2029 Program 3.f – Allow and Facilitate ADUs
Assumption of same level of applications and 75% moving forward to building permits Program 3.i – ADU Amnesty Program
Program 3.j – Adjust ADU Permit, Utility Connection, and Impact Fees Program 3.k – ADU Education and Promotion and Homeowner Outreach i Chapple et al. 2017. Jumpstarting the Market for Accessory Dwelling Units: Lessons Learned from Portland, Seattle, and Vancouver.

University of California, Berkeley’s Center for Community Innovation. 3 - 1755

I I I I
Appendix F:

Realistic Capacity Analysis
3 - 1756
3 - 1757
Appendix F
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page F1-1 Justification of the 95 percent Realistic Capacity
Assumption Applied to Downtown and Mixed-Use Sites
Much of the City of South Pasadena’s lower-income Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is proposed to be accommodated in the Draft Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) area and the mixed-use Neighborhood Centers proposed in the General Plan Update. These sites are included in the set of sites with detailed exhibits and descriptions in Appendix A. Where full redevelopment of a site or adding to existing structures is assumed for the Housing Element analysis, a realistic development capacity of 95 percent is assumed. The realistic capacity assumption of 95 percent is supported by past and current trends showing redevelopment at 97 percent or more of the base capacity and by new policies requiring inclusionary housing and providing design incentives, FAR bonuses, height concessions and other options to increase density (state density bonus) for projects on these sites. This appendix is included to provide the background and analysis to support that 95-percent assumption.

Multi-unit Housing: Trending Upward in South Pasadena and Regionally The City of South Pasadena is nearly built out and has very little vacant land of a size suitable for multifamily development. However, the market in South Pasadena and the region has addressed this situation with infill and mixed-use redevelopment of sites that include a portion or all of the site with new residential units.

After a hiatus following construction of South Pasadena’s first new mixed-use, transit-adjacent development in 2005, several multiple-unit residential or mixed-use projects containing higher density housing have recently been constructed or approved in South Pasadena (see Table 1), demonstrating an increasing interest to construct multi-family housing in the city. These are all on sites that were previously developed. The Mission Bell Project, approved in 2020, includes adaptive reuse of existing historic structures. The Senior Housing Project, with 13 affordable units, was approved in 2020 under the City’s first state density bonus application. The Seven Patios Project, with 60 housing units, was approved in 2021. All three projects were able to achieve higher densities with a range from 22 to 50 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) without accounting for removal of the nonresidential portions of the project from the total parcel or site in the case of the mixed-use projects. All three projects achieved higher than 95 percent of allowed development capacity and two achieved higher than 100 percent.

While the trend toward higher density, mixed-use development in South Pasadena is more recent, it is consistent with what is happening in the region, where projects containing multi-family housing of various densities, unit sizes, and architectural styles are being developed at 100 percent or higher percent of allowed capacity on previously developed sites (See Housing Element Tables VI-44 and 42). Most are receiving the entitlements with the inclusion of dedicated affordable units as a prerequisite to receiving significant density bonuses that are attractive to developers and make the project feasible. 3 - 1758
Appendix F
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page F1-2 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Table 1. Representative Projects on Non-Vacant Sites in South Pasadena Address/
Project Name
Assessor’s
Parcel
Numbers Acres
Entitled, Under
Construction, or
Completed? Zone
Previously
Developed
With/
Existing Uses Project Description
Total
Number of
Dwelling
Units Density
Percentage of Allowed
Capacity
Similar Sites in Table
VI-46
(and Site ID)
Seven Patios
845 El Centro
Street
5315-019-048
5315-019-045
5315-019-046

1.6 Entitled in 2021;
Construction
anticipated in
2022
MSSP
and RM
Office building
Three parcels
were consolidated
Mixed-use, transit-oriented
development (TOD),
multifamily housing (studios,
lofts, flats, and townhomes),
and street-fronting
commercial uses (restaurant
and retail).
60 45 du/acre in
MSSP portion
9 du/acre in
RM portion
97% of allowed FAR and
>100% allowed density (project
used bonus parking for extra
floor); MSSP density is capped
only by development standards
(not du/ac); max FAR is 1.5;
project used 1.45 FAR
Odd-shaped sites near
transit:

Gold Line Storage (10);
North side of Mission (8,
11, 13, 14);
Other sites near rail
transit: City Yard (9);
Fremont/Mission (13,
14), Arco (9)
Mission Bell
1101, 1107, 1115
Mission Street
5315-008-045
5315-008-043 0.72
Entitled in 2020;
Construction
anticipated in
2022
MSSP
A portion of the
existing historic
building to be
demolished and
the other portion
adaptively reused
Two parcels were
consolidated
Mixed-use: 7,394 square feet
of commercial retail space
along Mission Street and
Fairview Avenue frontages
and 36 residential units above
and to the rear of the
commercial uses.
36 50
98% of allowed FAR and
>100% of allowed density
(project used bonus parking for
extra floor); MSSP density is
capped only by development
standards (not du/ac); max FAR
is 1.5; project used 1.48 FAR
School Site -12 (historic
resource); Site Gold Line
Storage - 10; Parking Lot
sites -15, 16, 21
(rectangular; several
parcels combined);
Eight Twenty
820 Mission
Street
5315-017-094
5315-017-082
5315-017-067
5315-017-103

1.90 Built in 2017 MSSP Laboratories
Mixed-use, TOD, multifamily
housing (studios, lofts, flats,
and townhomes) and streetfronting commercial uses.
38 20
109% of allowed FAR (allowed
FAR was 0.8; project approved
at 0.87 FAR through Planned
Development Permit process)
Gold Line Storage - 10;
Parking Lot sites -15, 16,
21 (rectangular; several
parcels combined)
625 Fair Oaks
Senior Housing 5315-001-072 2.62 Entitled in spring 2020 CO Commercial retail
with underutilized
parking lot
No parcel
consolidation for
redevelopment
Senior housing with 86 units,
13 affordable. Density bonus
project with additional height
and density.
86 33
138% of allowed density
(allowed density is 24 du/acre);
FAR is 3.6, including existing
office building and additional

2.45 FAR for housing
Sites on Fair Oaks (17,
18, 22, 23, 24)
Mission Meridian
Village Meridian
Avenue and
Mission Street
5315-021-001
5315-021-079
5315-021-047

1.6 Built in 2005 MSSP
Lower-density,
dilapidated homes
and a
convalescent
hospital
Residences are all ownership
units. Includes three-story
mixed-use building w/ 5,000
square feet of ground-floor
retail and 14 loft
condominiums, residential
structures w/50 units—
condominiums, townhomes,
and duplexes and three
single-family residences.

Overall density of 40
units/acre.
67 42
97% of allowed FAR (Allowed
FAR was 1.5, project approved
at 1.45)
Meridian site (Site 11)
Source: PlaceWorks and City of South Pasadena, 2021
3 - 1759
Appendix F
CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023
2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE Page F1-3 Why this trend will continue and likely increase: Inclusionary Housing and Density Bonus Chapter 6.5 (Housing Development Resources) provides a full narrative of the inclusionary housing ordinance (see Zoning Provisions to Encourage Affordable Housing), which Council adopted in May 2021. The projects in Table 1 were developed prior to the City’s adoption of this ordinance. Only one of them voluntarily included affordable units and received bonus density and height, achieving 138% of the underlying density (allowed capacity), the highest of the five projects. Now that the inclusionary units are required, coupled with by-right density bonus, this has become a central component of the strategy to build affordable units and forms an important component of the basis for anticipating the 95-percent realistic capacity.

Because the properties identified in the Sites Inventory (Appendix A) with a 95-percent realistic capacity assumption are eligible for the design incentives in the adopted Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and because the Inclusionary Housing regulations apply to all residential projects of more than three units, the realistic capacity on these sites takes the Inclusionary Housing regulations into consideration.

The inclusionary housing regulations streamline use of the State Density Bonus to increase the amount of affordable housing approved in the City. This recent change will work together with proposed changes in the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan, both currently being updated, to allow higher-density housing in more areas of the city through mixed-use zoning and an affordable housing overlay. These changes will be adopted at or near the same time as Housing Element adoption. Zoning updates to codify those changes will occur shortly after the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan are adopted. The City has been conducting outreach and gathering input from the community and decision makers since early 2019 and support has been expressed for the proposed increased density.

State and Local Regulations encourage full development of allowed capacity for project feasibility
In the process of developing the inclusionary housing ordinance, the City reviewed analysis of jurisdictions throughout the state, including several with similar housing markets within the San Gabriel Valley and wider Los Angeles County region in order to choose a level that would result in the most affordable units while maintaining project feasibility. The recently increased State density bonus, which offers density bonuses up to 35% or 50% for providing very-low or lower income units, combined with the streamlined incentives, supports economic feasibility for projects with 20% affordable units as required by the ordinance. The City has not been made aware of any pending applications that were cancelled due to adoption of the inclusionary housing regulations. In fact, the effect thus far has been as anticipated; the City has received more inquiries from developers since adopting the inclusionary housing regulations.

In September 2021, the City received the first Design Review application subject to the inclusionary housing code, for 108 one- and two-bedroom condominium units in a mixed-use, 84,198 square-foot, 50-foot height project. The proposed project would include 20% of its base units as affordable. The applicant is requesting to comply with the streamlined density bonus provisions and receive Codeallowed concessions. However, staff understands that many developers need to wait for density increases in the forthcoming General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan before submitting applications.

Ongoing Analysis and Monitoring
In July 2021, the City contracted with EPS, an economics consultant firm, to prepare an Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee Study and develop Affordable Housing Program Recommendations. This work will analyze the inclusionary housing regulations and make recommendations for the City’s affordable 3 - 1760
Appendix F
DECEMBER 2022MARCHMAY 2023 CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
Page F1-4 2021-2029 PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE housing program or participation in a regional affordable housing production program. The analysis will also support the City’s understanding of housing production trends and confirm the assumptions that it is realistic to anticipate that developments will be proposed at 95 percent of the zoning capacity. The City has committed in the programs section of this Housing Element to reviewing the effectiveness of the inclusionary regulations starting in 2022 and revising if needed at that point.

Conclusion
Based on the trends and regulations analyzed, the assumption of 95 percent of realistic development capacity on the DTSP and mixed-use sites is reasonable and potentially conservative based on the fact that the most recently approved and developed multifamily and mixed-use with multifamily projects are developing at a higher percentage of allowed capacity. Table 2 shows the number of units on these sites at 95, 100, and 110 percent of allowed capacity under the proposed DTSP and General Plan. Note that the figures include the small number of sites that have a lower-capacity assumption in the DTSP and mixed-use areas. The realistic capacity percentages are lower on those sites because of existing uses that are anticipated to remain on part of the sites.

While 95 percent is the assumption used for this housing element, the number of units potentially possible at 100 and 110 percent of capacity are included in Table 2 to demonstrate what could easily happen if the recent trends to take advantage of state density bonus law for multifamily projects in South Pasadena continue.

Table 2. Capacity Assumption Alternatives
95% Capacity 100% Capacity 110% Capacity
Units 1,545 1,623 1,781
3 - 1761
City Council
Agenda Report ITEM NO. ___
DATE: May 30, 2023
FROM: Arminé Chaparyan, City Manager
PREPARED BY: John Downs, Interim Finance Director
Hsiulee Tran, Deputy Finance Director
SUBJECT: Review of the Draft Proposed Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Budget Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council review the Draft Proposed Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Budget.

Background
The Finance Commission received a first draft of this document on May 16, 2023, staff implemented the recommended changes, as well as any remaining clean up measures in finessing the document. The Finance Commission will review a revised draft on June 1, 2023 for their consideration to recommend for approval, and the City Council will receive the final proposed budget for consideration and adoption on June 7, 2023.

The Finance Department has made considerable efforts in engaging the community in the budget process. An online survey, community outreach about engagement opportunities have been publicized, and two in-person and virtual budget input sessions were held on May 18, 2023. These are in addition to the draft budget discussions with each member of Council with Department Directors, two budget workshops for staff, as well as the opportunity to engage on this document at the Finance Commission meeting.

Discussion/Analysis
Enclosed is the updated draft Proposed Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Budget. The focus of this report will be the integrity of the document for final review from the Finance Commission and a subsequent review and approval from the City Council.

Fiscal Impact
This document is meant to ensure the city’s finances for the upcoming fiscal year.

Attachments:

1. Draft Proposed Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Budget

2. Budget Changes

3. Position Control Report

4. Master Fee Schedule
4 4 - 1
ATTACHMENT 1
Draft Proposed Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Budget
4 - 2
Proposed DRAFT Budget
For the 2023-2024 Fiscal Year
Mayor
Jon Primuth
Mayor Pro Tempore
Evelyn G. Zneimer
Councilmember
Jack Donovan
Councilmember
Janet Braun
Councilmember
Michael A. Cacciotti
City Treasurer
Zhen Tao
City Manager
Arminé Chaparyan
Population 26,314 (2021)
Draft May 30, 2023
4 - 3
I City of
SOUTH

PASADENA
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 1

MISSION STATEMENT
The City of South Pasadena is committed to providing effective and efficient municipal services for the community while preserving our quality of life and small-town character in a 21st Century environment.

VISION STATEMENT
We are a culturally and economically diverse, and fiercely independent community that cherishes creativity, education and our small-town character, committed to building a more just and environmentally and financially sustainable future.

CORE VALUES
not in priority order
▪ Honesty and Integrity
▪ Teamwork
▪ Outstanding customer-friendly service
▪ Responsiveness
▪ Open and accessible government
▪ Community participation
▪ Fiscal responsibility
4 - 4

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 2
Table of Contents
About South Pasadena......................................................................................................................................... 6 Municipal Organizational Chart ....................................................................................................................... 8 City Manager’s Budget Message..................................................................................................................... 9 FY22/23 Fund Balance....................................................................................................................................... 24 FY22/23 Reserves Balance.............................................................................................................................. 25 FY23/24 Fund Balance....................................................................................................................................... 26 FY23/24 Reserves Balance.............................................................................................................................. 32 Revenue Detail....................................................................................................................................................... 33 Expenditure Summary by Fund.................................................................................................................... 42 General Fund Revenue Summary................................................................................................................ 51 General Fund Expenditure Summary ........................................................................................................ 52 Capital Improvement Projects....................................................................................................................... 53 City Council............................................................................................................................................................. 66 City Council / 101-1010-1011 ....................................................................................................... 67 City Manager........................................................................................................................................................... 44 City Manager / 101-2010-2011 ..................................................................................................... 46 Economic Development / 101-2020-2012 ................................................................................. 49 Community Promotion / 220-2010-2301 ................................................................................... 50 Key Performance Indicators........................................................................................................ 51 Management Services........................................................................................................................................ 44 Management Services / 101-2030-2031 .................................................................................... 47 City Clerk / 101-2030-2033............................................................................................................ 50 Elections / 101-1020-1022 ............................................................................................................ 53 Human Resources / 101-2030-2034 ........................................................................................... 54 Legal Services / 101-2010-2501 .................................................................................................. 57 Information Services / 101-2030-2032 ....................................................................................... 58 Key Performance Indicators........................................................................................................ 61 Finance .....................................................................................................................................................67 Finance / 101-3010-3011.................................................................................................................................... 69 Non-Departmental Overhead / 101-3010-3041....................................................................................... 72 Insurance Fund / 103-3010-2501................................................................................................................... 73 OPEB Trust Fund / 110-3010-3011............................................................................................................... 75 4 - 5

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 3
SLFRF Fund / 206-XXXX-XXXX...................................................................................................................... 76 Utility Billing / 500-3010-3012......................................................................................................................... 77 Key Performance Indicators........................................................................................................................... 79 City Treasurer......................................................................................................................................................... 80 City Treasurer / 101-3000-3021 ................................................................................................... 82 Police .......................................................................................................................................................................... 83 Police / 101-4010-4011 .................................................................................................................. 85 Facilities and Maintenance Equipment / 105-4010-4011 ...................................................... 90 Measure H / 241-4010-4011 .......................................................................................................... 91 Asset Forfeiture / 270-4010-4011/4015 ...................................................................................... 92 Police State Grant – AB 3229 / 272-4010-4018 ........................................................................ 93 Homeland Security Grant / 274-4010-4019 .............................................................................. 94 Key Performance Indicators........................................................................................................ 95 Fire ............................................................................................................................................................................... 97 Fire / 101-5010-5011 ....................................................................................................................... 99 Emergency Preparedness / 101-5010-5012 ........................................................................... 104 Key Performance Indicators...................................................................................................... 105 Public Works.........................................................................................................................................................107 Public Works Administration / 101-6010-6011 ...................................................................... 111 Environmental Services / 101-6010-6015 ............................................................................... 114 Facilities Maintenance / 101-6010-6601 .................................................................................. 120 Sewer Maintenance / 210-6010-6501 ....................................................................................... 123 Traffic Signals / 215-6010-6115 ................................................................................................. 127 Street Lighting / 215-6010-6201 ................................................................................................ 128 Street Tree Maintenance / 215-6010-6310 .............................................................................. 131 Median Strips / 215-6010-6416 .................................................................................................. 134 Street Maintenance / 230-6010-6116 ........................................................................................ 135 Prop “A” Maintenance / 232-6010-6417 .................................................................................. 138 Measure R / 233-6010-6011 ........................................................................................................ 139 Measure M / 236-6010-6011........................................................................................................ 140 Measure W – Safe Clean Water Act / 239-6010-6011........................................................... 141 SGVCOG / 247-6010-6011 ........................................................................................................... 143 Water Distribution / 500-6010-6710 .......................................................................................... 144 Water Production / 500-6010-6711 ........................................................................................... 148 Water Efficiency Projects / 503-6010-6713 ............................................................................ 152 4 - 6

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 4
Key Performance Indicators...................................................................................................... 155 Community Development...............................................................................................................................157 Community Development / 101-7010-7011 ............................................................................ 159 Housing Authority / 228-7200-7220 ......................................................................................... 163 Key Performance Indicators...................................................................................................... 164 Library ......................................................................................................................................................................166 Library / 101-8010-8011 ............................................................................................................... 168 Key Performance Indicators...................................................................................................... 172 Community Services ........................................................................................................................................173 Senior Services / 101-8030-8021 .............................................................................................. 177 Community Services / 101-8030-8031 ..................................................................................... 180 Recreation and Youth Services / 101-8030-8032 ................................................................. 183 Prop “A” – Local Transit Administration / 205-2010-2210 ................................................. 187 Prop “A” – Transit Planning / 205-8030-8024 ....................................................................... 188 Prop “A” – Dial A Ride / 205-8030-8025 .................................................................................. 190 Prop “C” – Local Transit Administration / 207-2010-2260 ................................................. 193 Dial-A-Ride / 207-2010-8025 ....................................................................................................... 194 Mission Meridian Public Garage / 226-2010-2029 ................................................................ 195 CDBG Senior Nutrition Program / 260-8030-8023 ................................................................ 196 Recreation and Youth Services / 295-8030-8032 ................................................................. 197 Arroyo Seco Golf – Administration / 295-8040-8041 ........................................................... 198 Arroyo Seco Golf – Course Maintenance / 295-8040-8042 ................................................ 200 Arroyo Seco Golf – Driving Range / 295-8040-8043 ............................................................ 201 Arroyo Seco Golf – Shop / 295-8040-8044 ............................................................................. 202 Arroyo Seco Golf – Food and Beverage / 295-8040-8045 .................................................. 203 Key Performance Indicators...................................................................................................... 204 Successor Agency – CRA Debt Service / 227-7200-7211..............................................................205 Redevelopment Obligations Trust / 927-9800-9811..........................................................................205 Full-Time Authorized Positions ..................................................................................................................206 Part-Time Authorized Positions..................................................................................................................210 Position Distribution by Funding Source..............................................................................................211 Glossary of Budget Terms.............................................................................................................................213 Description of Funds........................................................................................................................................216 Financial Policies ...............................................................................................................................................221 4 - 7

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 5
Basis of Budget Accounting ........................................................................................................................222 GANN Limit............................................................................................................................................................223 4 - 8

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA ABOUT
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 6
About South Pasadena
The City of South Pasadena is located approximately six miles northeast of downtown Los Angeles, between the cities of Pasadena, San Marino, Los Angeles and Alhambra. It has a population of 26,314. Founded in 1874 by the Indiana Colony, the City was incorporated as a General Law city of the State of California on March 2, 1888. South Pasadena is known for its tree-lined streets, historic California Craftsman-style homes, unique small businesses and its outstanding public schools. This small-town atmosphere makes South Pasadena one of California's most desirable locations. South Pasadena has quality education, a strong religious community, an extensive network of parks and a rich architectural heritage. Dynamic civic organizations, a population of ethnic and cultural diversity, and a vital seniors' group further enrich our small-town quality of life. Small, proud and independent, the City of South Pasadena has battled for a hundred years to preserve its status as a distinct—and distinctive—community. South Pasadena possesses a full-service City government that provides high-quality services in general administration, police, fire, library, public works, community development, and redevelopment projects.

City History
In early 1874, the area that is now South Pasadena was a part of the San Gabriel-Orange Grove Association. In 1875, the stockholders of the association voted to name their town Pasadena and just three years later, residents living in the southern portion of Pasadena considered themselves South Pasadenans.

In February of 1888, in order to control their own territory, South Pasadenans voted eighty-five to twenty-five for incorporation. A board of trustees was elected and Ammon B. Cobb was appointed as the first marshal, with Marshal B. Selmen as his deputy.

On March 2, 1888, South Pasadena officially incorporated with a population of slightly over 500. 4 - 9

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA ABOUT
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 7
The City’s boundaries established in 1889 are essentially the same today. South Pasadena consists of 3.44 square miles of prime residential property. In 1876, unimproved land with water was selling from $75 to $150 an acre. Today a vacant lot in South Pasadena can be sold for more than $200,000.

Few cities in California are better recognized for the quality of its small-town atmosphere and rich legacy of intact late 19th and early 20th century neighborhoods and residences. South Pasadena also has a strong claim to having the oldest and most historic sites in the San Gabriel Valley. For many centuries, its adjacency to a natural fording place along the Arroyo Seco had served as a gateway to travel and commerce for aboriginal peoples here and along the coast. It was here that Hahamognas greeted Portola and the missionaries who later established the San Gabriel Mission a few miles to the west.

The initial buildings on the Rancho San Pascual, which subsequently gave birth to the Cities of Pasadena, South Pasadena and Altadena, were built here. The first of these adobe structures became headquarters for General Flores and his staff in 1847 where they agreed to surrender to American forces, ending Mexican Colonial rule in California.

In 1888, South Pasadena incorporated the southern portion of the Indiana Colony and land south and eastward to the Los Angeles border, becoming the sixth municipality in Los Angeles County.

With the establishment of the Raymond Hotel and the Cawston Ostrich Farm, the small community was able to attract tourists and increasingly large waves of new residents to the Pasadena area in the late 19th and early 20th Centuries. With completion of the Pacific Electric Short Line, putting the entire city within easy walking distance of the “red car” stations, South Pasadena also became one of the first suburbs of Los Angeles. It is now certainly one of the bestpreserved cities, maintaining a small-town quality and humanity in the scale of its buildings, its residential streetscapes and historic commercial core.
4 - 10

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 8
Municipal Organizational Chart
4 - 11
( Residents of South
Pasadena
/
Citv Council "
Mayor Michael A. Cacciotti
Mayor Pro Tern Jon Primuth
Councilmember Jack Donovan
Councilmember Diana Mahmud
'" Councilmember Evelyn G. Zneimer ~
--------------------- r -------- ---------------------- --------- ---------------------- 1 --------------------------- '
( City Attorney ) [ City Manager 1 ( Boards and
Commissions
' Office of the ' ' [ (Elected) ' ' City Clerk ' City Treasurer ' - - - - - --- --- - - --- -- - - - - - - ------ - - - - I
I I 1
Management Fire Police Finance
Services Fire Chief Police Chief Finance Director
Mgmt Svcs Director

I I I I
/ .... ,, -.... / .... / ....

Community Community Public Works Services Library Development Public Works Community Services Library Director Community Development Director Director Director '- '- ~ '- . '-

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET MESSAGE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 9
City Manager’s Budget Message Fiscal Year 2023-24
June 7, 2023
Honorable Mayor and City Council,
It is my pleasure to present to you the Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-2024 Annual Budget, which we embarked on under the theme of continued Transparency and Collaboration. As we close out this year, we reflect on the progress and improvements made during Fiscal Year 2022-23 across all our City departments, in professionalizing the agency and delivering it to new standards, and in the level of service we provide our community.

This year, we continued our efforts in completing organizational assessments, including the Finance and Community Services departments, and embarking on the Police assessment. These assessments provide the agency an opportunity to review staffing and resources, work flows and outputs, research and incorporate industry best practices, review and improve upon policy, and deliver each department, and the agency, to the next level. The Library has also completed a Strategic Plan and held a Joint study session with the City Council and Library Board of Trustees to discuss the future of the site. On the topic of site assessments, we have completed a facility assessment of the Library site, and will be beginning the City Hall site assessment shortly.

Hand in hand with the assessments, the City has remained committed to hiring the best and the brightest in our industry, and have facilitated over 50 recruitments and hirings in the last year, and also experienced the transitioning of a number of staff during this unprecedented recruiting season. New hires including the hiring of a new Deputy Finance Director/Controller for operational oversight, and a Senior Management Analyst in creating the City’s Housing Division, in late 2022.

This budget resources our departments to transition from temporary to permanent staffing, and allows us to focus the year ahead. GWD: Get Work Done.

The City continues implementing the 2021-2026 Strategic Plan, which highlights and resources the priorities of the City Council and community. With the City’s Strategic Plan over 50% completed, and the onboarding of a new Councilwoman and City Treasurer in early 2023, staff will facilitate a Strategic Plan revisit, including community engagement and input, in Fall 2023, to revisit our priorities and ensure we are on track to meet the needs of the community.

We have engaged with our community more than before, and continue that commitment. Our launch of the City’s mobile app, SouthPas Mobile, provided resources, information and customer requests at community member fingertips, and also provided another engagement tool with our constituents. We have released a Request for Proposal for a new City website, anticipated to launch end of year, which will be a user-friendly, welcoming resource to community members, visitors and staff. Community engagements and surveys gleaned information on communications preferences, input on the proposed budget, the housing element, and more. In working with the City Council, we have better utilized the tremendous brain power and servitude of our City commissions in providing actionable recommendations for consideration in policymaking, as well as come together on a number of study sessions focused on streets, housing, and the future of the library site, for brainstorming and priority setting efforts.

This year saw the return of our City’s events and programming, including the Commissioner Congress as well as a City Hall Open House event to introduce the new staff to the community 4 - 12

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET MESSAGE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 10
and welcome everyone back post-COVID. In this budget we have included a wish list of items we have heard back on from the City Council and the community, with the first phase costs listed below:
• Vision 2050- $100,000
• Library Master Plan- $150,000
• Multi-Cultural City Celebration- $50,000
As we close out our pandemic years, we look to the future and to transitioning to the new normal, which includes a further commitment to resident and business support, resources and service.

Our Economic Development Team continues building upon their programming and service to the City, working to put our business community on the map, in championing and strengthening the local economy, and in welcoming new investment to the community. Another significant transition includes the award of a new contract for City Attorney Services. The City Council directed staff to work with a Council sub-committee in developing and released a Request for Proposal for City Attorney Services, and staff from the City Manager’s Office worked diligently on the process— City Council will consider the award of contract in June 2023.

We have established a Housing Division in the Community Development Department, and they have hit the ground running on key priorities and programs, including the Housing Element and various programs, the Caltrans surplus properties and the policy decisions that City Council will soon begin to make on the opportunity to exercise first right of refusal on those properties, research on the no-fault eviction moratorium as it related to our 52% of renter residents. The budget proposes almost $1M in Housing Element implementation and programmatic efforts, including:
• Tenant protection- $400,000
• Racially Restrictive Covenants- $100,000
• Cultural Heritage Ordinance Update- $200,000
• Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO) In-Lieu Fee Study- $23,000 • Ballot Measure on Height Limit Study- $100,000
• General Plan/ Downtown Specific Plan consultant (Rangwalla)- $150,000 We have also furthered our commitment to the social services, veterans, elder adults and various partner agencies. While not a direct service provider, the City recognizes that a number of service providers touch and serve our community, and we have identified the opportunity to establish a Social Services Task Force, which leverages resources available to our community, identify gaps in service to pursue further partnerships. The team has launched a Social Services Resource Guide and a Elder Adults Resource Guide, and will continue looking for opportunities here.

The year ahead holds many priorities and goals: implement the City Hall Electrification Project, which includes infrastructure investments at City Hall and the transition of the Police fleet vehicles to electric, street repaving and infrastructure improvements, the programmatic efforts in our Housing Element and transitioning to compliance and implementation including the finalizing of the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan, the implementation of the Slow Streets Program.

Staff will actively look for opportunities to solicit grant funding for City programming. We look forward to the progress we will make with our City Council, Commissions and Boards, community members and staff.
4 - 13

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET MESSAGE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 11
Finances
Specifically, on the City’s financials, we have made great strides. The City has adopted citywide policies and protocols, delivered a timely Mid-Year Budget Report to Council, has made notable improvements on the City audit, and is delivering a timely budget and 5-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). We delivered on our commitment for transparency and information sharing, having delivered quarterly budget updates that have now shifted to monthly updates, delivering monthly operational status updates during a height of transition, and intentionally sharing pertinent information with the Finance Commission along with the City Council. We continue the commitment to share information and bring the community along with our efforts as good stewards of our finances.

The agency is financially healthy, and great efforts are being made to implement best practices, policies and protocols to best serve our agency and community. The City received $6.1 million in State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds for the fiscal year 2022-2023. City Council prioritized partial use of the funds toward significant resource replacements and citywide technological advances to support improved service and oversight, as well as improving the user experience.

For the FY 2023-2024 Budget, the Finance Department embarked on establishing a zero-base budget, and worked with all City Departments in utilizing this process to provide a collaborative product that provides a clean start to the budget document in justifying all appropriations. The FY 2023-2024 proposed Budget includes a minimal increase in expenditures verses the revenue received, and also addresses two large issues that staff became aware of in March 2023: an outstanding invoice of $1.6M due to CJPIA, and about a $1M structural issue in Workers Compensation Insurance Fund. These items have been accounted for and addressed in this budget, and staff will prioritize a review and improvements of the City’s insurance procedures, carriers and process in the year ahead.

Financial Policies and Procedures
On September 7, 2022, the City Council adopted the 2022 Finance Policies and Procedures in order to, among other things, establish rules and regulations to establish efficient procedures for the purchase of supplies, services and equipment at the lowest possible cost commensurate with quality needed, to exercise positive financial control over purchases, to clearly define authority for the purchases function, and to assure the quality of purchases. On December 7, 2022, City Council adopted the Second Reading and Adoption of an ordinance of the City of South Pasadena, California, Amending Section 2.99-29 of Article XI Relating to "Purchasing Procedures", and Sections 2.99-35 and 2.99-37 of Article XIII "Awarding Public Works Contracts" of Chapter 2 of the South Pasadena Municipal Code.

On March 15, 2023, the Finance Department presented the Fiscal Year 2022-23 City Council Budget Policies at the Joint meeting of the City Council with Finance Commission, for review and direction. After deliberation, the City Council voted on the document with some edits to be made in working with the Finance Commission, and that document was approved at the May 16, 2023 Finance Commission and May 17, 2023 City Council meetings, respectively. The Finance Department will continue working with the Finance Commission on establishing a bi-annual review of the City Council’s adherence to these policies, at the mid-year mark and at the end of each fiscal year. Together, these documents and efforts will continue to contribute to our commitment of good financial stewardship of our agency and community, coupled with working on a five-year projection of forecasting into the new fiscal year.
4 - 14

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET MESSAGE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 12
Budget Input
The FY 2023-24 Budget document includes the detailed Proposed Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget document, Capital Improvement Plan and Miscellaneous Fee Schedule. Staff conducted Community input opportunities by hosting an online survey for Budget input, which gleaned 165 comments. The two major items determined from the online survey were continued Public Safety support, and improvements to infrastructure. The City also hosted two in person and virtual Community Budget Forums on May 18, 2023, and a review of the final proposed document to Finance Commission on June 1, 2023.

The budget process has focused on a zero-based budget that included a major clean up of the budget document as well as the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) five-year document. The process was collaborative across all City departments, and resources requested are to provide for workload catch up as well as adding capacity to meet the needs of the years ahead.

Thanks to the City Council, our Finance Commission, and all City Departments and staff for their diligence, hard work and efforts in producing this guiding document. I appreciate the continued support of the South Pasadena residents of the City and our efforts in serving our community. We look forward to a positive and fruitful 2023-24 fiscal year.

Respectfully submitted,
Arminé Chaparyan
City Manager
4 - 15

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET MESSAGE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 13
General Fund Operating Revenue History
The chart below summarizes the General Fund Operating revenues from FY 2019/20 to the Adopted FY 2022/23. The Budgeted FY 2022-2023 Revenues were estimated to be $42,849,230, and the estimate for June 30, 2023 is $36,588,626. The difference in estimated revenues for FY 2022-2023 is due to recording the State and Local Fiscal Recover Funds (SLRF) of $6,059,235 from the General Fund into it’s own fund, but the City is anticipating an increase to $39,523,631 for FY 2023-2024 due to increases of $1,162,715 in Property Taxes, $166,712 in Sales Taxes, $289,359 in Utility Users Taxes, $54,477 in Franchise Fees, $450,906 in Uses of Money and Property, $239,866 in Fire Interagency Support, $517,257 in Current Services and $53,838 of other revenues.

General Fund FY 2022-2023 Projected Summary
The General Fund Balance starting July 1, 2022 was $18,931,422. Revenues are $36,588,626 and expenditures are expected to total $35,681,208. Transfers out of $2,210,847 and reserve adjustments of $1,834,998 leave a projected end balance for June 30, 2023 of $19,462,991. The increase of expenditures and transfers out is due to unanticipated vendor payments for prior years services, additional positions, higher utility costs and incurring an unanticipated CJPIA invoice related prior years general liability and worker’s compensation claims of $1,654,761. 4 - 16
Actual Actual
Revenue Catego!'Y. 2019/20 2020/21
Property Taxes 15,491,557 16,773,318
Assessments & Special Taxes 342,237 347,931
Sales Taxes 2,864,474 5,132,645
Uti lity Users Taxes 3,445,454 3,738,531
Franchise Fees 950,130 1,200,408
License & Permits 861,697 808,280
Fines & Forfertures 264,60 1 143,449
Use of Money & Property 989,984 4,788,970
Other Agencies 64,239 955,205
Current Services 2,985,842 3,079,621
All Other Revenues 74,367 183,717
Reimbursement From Other Funds 483 384 483 384
Total GF Revenues 28 817 965 37.635460
General Fund
Beginning Balance 07/01/22
Revenues
Expenditures
Transfers Out
Reserves Adjustment
Actual Budgeted Estimated
2021/22 2022/23 2022/23
17,906,070 18,140,368 18,537,792
364,223 360,000 360,000
6,096,613 6,346,000 6,311 ,321
3,875,268 4,299,703 4,063,103
1,289,532 1,217,000 1,217,000
814,081 903,280 764,777
52,29 1 140,000 56,500
(495,381) 508,500 894,109
179,525
3,836,129
250,50 1
483 384
34 652 238
6,489,295 235,634
3,877,200 3,624,263
84,500 40,743
483 384 483 384
42 849 230 36 588 626
$18,931,422
36,588,626
(35,681 ,208)
(2,210,847)
1,834,998
Projected End Balance 6/30/23 $19,462,991
Fund Balances reflect spendable (unassigned)
balances and excludes reserves.

Proposed
2023/24
19,700,384
375,149
6,478,033
4,352,462
1,271,477
796,200
58,000
1,345,014
475,500
4,141,520
46,508
483 384
39 523 631

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET MESSAGE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 14
General Fund FY 2022-2023 Projected Reserves
The projected General Fund Reserves end balance for June 30, 2023 totals $4,464,943, with deletions totaling $1,834.998 from the Storm Water Reserve, Library Park Drainage Reserve, Slater Reimbursement Reserve, SR-110 Interchange Project (Rogan Fund Match), and the Stables CIP Reserve.

General Fund Summary for FY 2023-2024 Projected Summary The General Fund Balance starting July 1, 2023 is estimated to be $19,462,991. Revenues are estimated at $39,523,631 and expenditures are expected to total $39,630,567. Transfers In of $4,693, transfers out of $1,265,000 and reserve adjustments of $500,000 are projected leaving a projected end balance for June 30, 2024 of $18,595,748. The increase of expenditures are due to Employee Labor negotiations and salary adjustments, one-time costs primarily due to the development of the City’s Housing Element, new permitting software and furniture purchases as well as the impact of inflation on the purchase of goods and services.

Beginning
Balance
FY 22-23 Additions Deletions
Ending
Balance
FY 22-23
Arroyo Golf Course / Bike Trail 600,000 600,000
CalTrans Vacant Lot Purchases 392,000 392,000
Legal Reserve 500,000 500,000
Library Expansion 200,000 200,000
Maint. Yard / Comm. Ctr 267,067 267,067
Renewable Energy Sources Reserve 700,000 700,000
Storm Water 600,000 300,000 300,000
Library Park Drainage Reserve 22,000 22,000 -
Financial Sustainability Reserve 900,000 900,000
Slater Reimbursement Reserve 345,876 40,000 305,876
Vehicle Replacement Reserve 100,000 100,000
SR-110 Interchange Proj (Rogan Fund Match) 1,410,000 1,410,000 - Stables CIP Reserve 62,998 62,998 -
Mental Health Reserve 200,000 200,000
Total: 6,299,941 - 1,834,998 4,464,943
4 - 17
General Fund
Beginning Balance 07/01/23
Revenues
Expenditures
Transfers In
Transfers Out
Reserve Adjustments
Projected End Balance 6/30/24
$19,462,991
39,523,631
(39,630,567)
4,693
(1,265,000)
500,000
$18,595,748

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET MESSAGE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 15
General Fund FY 2023-2024 Projected Reserves
The projected General Fund Reserves end balance for June 30, 2024 totals $3,964,943, with deletions totaling $500,000 from the Storm Water Reserve as well as the re-programming of the Mental Health Reserve toward staffing costs, in consideration of the significant funding that has been allocated by Senator Portantino and Congresswoman Chu toward the San Gabriel Valley Care (SGV CARE), previously known as the Mental Health Mobile Co-Response Team.

General Fund Revenues
A majority of General Fund Revenues continue to come from Property and Sales Tax:
• $20,075,533 (51%) comes from property taxes and special taxes • $6,478,033 (16%) from sales tax
• $4,352,462 (11%) from utility users tax
• $4,141,520 (11%) from current city services
• Remainder 11% from use of money & property, and other revenue sources General Fund Expenditures
The goal for the Fiscal Year 2023-24 budget season was to build a status-quo budget based on a zero-based budget, which allowed each Department to go through the exercise of starting from zero to build their respective budgets from the ground up, and to justify every line item. This exercise led to the leaning out of the budget to provide for the funding to make some priority and necessary staffing growth. Employee Wages and Benefits, and City Operations and Maintenance make up more 97% of Expenditures. Increases are due to Employee Labor negotiations and salary adjustments to bring staff that were significantly behind (10-30%) up to more comparative salaries. In this budget we also ask for funding for a complete Comprehensive Classification and Compensation Study to further delve into our staff positions, pay and wages.

As signified in the Midyear Budget report to City Council and Finance Commission, the City continues to feel the impact of inflation, with rising costs to doing business, purchasing goods and materials, across the board.
• $27,102,511 (68%) wages & benefits
• $12,270,055 (31%) operations & maintenance
• $258,000 (1%) capital projects
Beginning
Balance
FY 23-24 Additions Deletions
Ending
Balance
FY 23-24
Arroyo Golf Course / Bike Trail 600,000 600,000
CalTrans Vacant Lot Purchases 392,000 392,000
Legal Reserve 500,000 500,000
Library Expansion 200,000 200,000
Maint. Yard / Comm. Ctr 267,067 267,067
Renewable Energy Sources Reserve 700,000 700,000
Storm Water 300,000 300,000 -
Financial Sustainability Reserve 900,000 900,000
Slater Reimbursement Reserve 305,876 305,876
Vehicle Replacement Reserve 100,000 100,000
Mental Health Reserve 200,000 200,000 -
4,464,943 - 500,000 3,964,943
4 - 18

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET MESSAGE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 16
Positional Changes
- Add one new full-time Accounting Technician I in Finance - Upgrade two part-time Management Aide positions to one full-time Management Aide position in Community Services
- Upgrade one part-time Community Services Coordinator to one full-time Community Services Coordinator in Community Services
- Upgrade one part-time Management Aide to one full-time Management Assistant in Fire - Add one new full-time Human Resources Specialist position in Management Services - Upgrade one part-time Community Improvement Coordinator to one full-time Community Improvement Coordinator in Community Development
- Add one new full-time Management Assistant in Community Development - Add one new full0time Principal Engineer in Public Works - Add one new full-time Water Operations Supervisor in Public Works - Add one new full-time Management Analyst (Water/Sustainability) in Public Works - Add one new full-time Sergeant (Office of Professional Standards) in Police - Add one new full-time Police Clerk I in Police
- Add one new full-time Police Administrative Assistant in Police General Fund Operating Expenditures by Type
The chart below summarizes the General Fund Operating expenditures by types from FY 2019/20 to the Proposed FY 2023/24.

General Fund Operating Expenditures by Type
General Fund Operating Expenditures By Department
The chart below summarizes the General Fund Operating expenditures by department from FY 2019/20 to the Proposed FY 2023/24. Of note for this fiscal year:
- Public Safety, composed of the Fire and Police Departments, accounts for 48% of the General Fund budget.
- While the Public Works General Fund portion is only 10%, it is important to note that other functions of the department are accounted for in other funds such as the Water, Sewer and other special funds.

Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Fd Category/Fund 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 101 Wages & Benefits 19,457,515 22,108,355 25,216,188 24,289,564 24,177,311 27,102,511 101 Operations & Maintenance 6,677,254 5,875,483 7,495,907 12,678,219 11,177,997 12,270,055 101 Capital Outlay 95,613 39,802 13,005 305,400 155,900 258,000 101 Other Expenses - - - - - -
101 Transfer Out - - - - - -
101 Capital Projects - - - 795,000 170,000 -
101 - General Fund Total 26,230,381 28,023,640 32,725,100 38,068,183 35,681,208 39,630,567 4 - 19

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET MESSAGE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 17
General Fund Operating Expenditures by Department
4 - 20
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Department/PrQgram ExJ> 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 City Council 45,401 35,890 45,446 49,194 71 ,388 81 ,903 City Manager 1,512,868 1,577,656 1,815,368 1,201 ,339 1,116,593 1,274,785 Management Services
Management Services - - 6,615 480,230 415,995 496,105
City Clerk 113,311 115,512 - 470,283 389,517 447,319
E.lections 185,743 76,843 93,242 166,00 0 110,809 63,900 Human Resources 324,830 350,761 - 898,923 905,818 915,553 Transportation Planning 12,835 287 90 - - -
Legal Services 492,566 607,285 572,032 895,140 895,140 500,000 Information Sy stems 573,881 541 ,110 - 833,200 889,657 1,151 ,511 Finance
Finance 755,116 871 ,011 1,040,325 1,203,880 1,144,568 1,050,473 City Tre asurer 9,211 8,444 9,993 8,752 8,752 9,239
Non-Dept/Overhead 1,060,512 996,366 2,264,416 2,694,140 2,669,105 2,539,444 Police 9,171 ,740 10,400,998 11 ,384,907 11 ,032,589 11 ,020,087 11 ,512,034 Fire
Fire 5,435,419 6,315,749 7,716,685 6,670,340 7,198,725 7,300,602 Emergency Pre parednes s 91 ,913 31 ,932 46,904 55,000 51 ,000 55,000 Public W orks - - - - - -
Ad min & Engineering 586,534 618,493 572J 17 924,621 526,444 1,243,249 Environmental Services 54 653 55,009 304,980 140,241 207,480 Park Maintenance 497,591 476J 93 581 ,680 1,086,294 504,755 975,901 Facilities Mainten ance 799,206 826,985 901 ,702 1,171 ,959 907,533 1,344,778 Community Development 1,876,257 1,819J 69 2,428,641 3,622,199 3,047,629 4,152,225 Library 1,525,685 1,608,369 1,839,131 1,932,290 1,866,927 2,211 ,234 Community Services
Senior Services 330,809 202,374 237,957 431 ,985 390,480 540,765 Community Services 172,667 217,223 276,302 356,440 421 ,305 466,119 Recreation and Youth Services 656,232 323,135 835,939 783,405 818,737 1,090,949 Capital Projects - - - - 170,000 -
Total GF Expenditures 26,230,381 28,023,640 32,725,100 37,273,183 35,681 ,208 39,630,567

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET POLICY
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 18
FY 2023/2024 Budget Policies Draft

PURPOSE STATEMENT
To enhance fiscal transparency and maintain and improve fiscal sustainability, the City of South Pasadena annually adopts fiscal policies to establish a framework to ensure a balanced budget, maintain healthy reserves, appropriately fund the City’s infrastructure needs, establish fees and charges, and ensure compliance with City Council directives.

This policy is adopted annually as part of the Budget adoption process and may be revised by City Council action.

1. ANNUAL BUDGET
The City adopts an annual budget. The City’s fiscal year starts on July 1st and concludes on June 30th. The annual budget for the new fiscal year will be adopted before June 30th.

The following are key elements of the City’s budget and budget process:
● Budgetary appropriations are made by the City Council, through formal budget adoption.
● The City Manager submits the Proposed Budget to the City Council no later than the final City Council meeting in May.
● The budget is adopted by the City Council before June 30th, following a public meeting where constituents are given an opportunity to comment on the Proposed Budget.
● Prior to consideration by the City Council, the Proposed Budget will be reviewed by the Finance Commission.

2. BALANCED BUDGET
The City strives to maintain a balanced operating budget for all governmental funds (all funds except the enterprise funds), with total on-going revenues equal to or greater than total on-going expenditure, so that at year end all these funds have a positive fund balance and the General Fund balance is maintained. ● The budget is balanced at the individual fund level. The estimated revenue sources must be sufficient to cover proposed uses.
● Ongoing operations are funded by recurring revenues.
● City policies on reserve requirements for specific funds are adhered to in the budget.
● If shortfalls are projected after the budget adoption, during quarterly financial reviews, the City Manager will present a plan to address such shortfalls with sustainable measures in order to achieve a balanced budget by fiscal year-end. ● Non-recurring revenues or one-time funding may be used to balance the budget during economic downturns, or as a result of unforeseen events.

3. APPROPRIATIONS AND BUDGETARY CONTROL
4 - 21

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET POLICY
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 19
The City Council holds public hearings and adopts the City’s annual budget and may modify appropriations with majority approval. During the fiscal year, any budget adjustments (increases in appropriations at the fund level) that cannot wait for the Mid-Year review or that exceed the City Manager’s budget authority described below, must be submitted by the City’s departments for City Council review and approval. The review and approval may occur at any City Council meeting, at the request of staff or the City Council. The City Council approves any revisions that increase the total budgeted expenditures or revenues at the fund level, and any changes to permanent and full-time positions.

The legal level of expenditures is controlled at the fund level, and appropriations lapse at the end of each fiscal year. Re-appropriation by the City Council only occurs for multiyear infrastructure and capital projects.

Department Heads may, without Council approval, amend individual line items within any fund in the maintenance and operations portions of the budget without increasing total appropriations for that division. The City Manager may, without Council approval, amend individual line items within any fund, and between divisions and programs, in the personnel costs, maintenance and operations, capital outlay and capital projects portions of the budget without increasing total appropriations for that fund.

4. GENERAL FUND RESERVES
General Fund Reserves are described as:
● Unassigned Fund Balance - These reserves are in spendable form and may become either restricted, committed, or assigned. The City strives to attain a General Fund undesignated fund balance equal to a minimum 30% of General Fund revenues at year end.
● Assigned Fund Balance – These reserves are set aside or earmarked for particular purposes, and the authority to designate these reserves can be delegated, and may take less formal action to limit how the reserves are used. ● Restricted Fund Balance – These reserves are subject to restrictions that are legally enforceable by outside parties, such as bondholders. ● Committed Fund Balance – These reserves are designated by the City Council, and are designated for specific purposes, through formal action. Committed balances can be modified by the City Council taking formal action.

Committed (Designated) Reserves shall be reviewed and designated annually by the City Council prior to Budget adoption. Upon designation of a reserve for a specific purpose, the Council will ensure the following:
● The purpose of the reserve will be specified at the time of designation. ● The City Council will also identify whether the designation is a one-time designation or whether an amount specified by the City Council will be added to the designated reserve on an annual basis.
4 - 22

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET POLICY
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 20
● Nothing limits the City Council’s authority to un-designate, or re-designate any General Fund Designated Reserve for another governmental purpose, pursuant to formal City Council action.

5. ENTERPRISE FUND
The City requires the water, sewer, and golf course enterprise funds be selfsupporting. The City recognizes that enterprise funds function with accounting practices that are different from those used by governmental funds. Therefore, for enterprise funds, the City will strive to maintain operating budgets that produce annual net revenues that meet or exceed the compliance requirements of debt coverage rations generally.

The sewer fund was recognized as an enterprise fund starting in FY 2009/10, with the requirement of self-supporting funding. Water and sewer rate increases will assure that revenues exceed operating expenditures, including debt service. Budgeted water capital projects will be paid from a $37.8 million 2016 Water Bond issuance. Bond debt service will be paid out of water revenues. Sewer revenues along with a revolving loan from the State will pay for sewer capital improvements.

The Water Fund will maintain a reserve equal to 30% of revenues. The Sewer fund will maintain a reserve equal to 30% of revenues.

6. INFRASTRUCTURE
The City maintains a long-range fiscal perspective through the use of a Capital Improvement Program to maintain the quality of City infrastructure, including streets, sidewalks, sewers, drains, lighting, buildings, parks, and trees. The City Council adopts capital projects budgets and may modify appropriations with majority approval. All changes in appropriations at the fund level during the year must be submitted to the City Council for approval.

Beginning in FY 2013/14, the City’s goal has been to commit a minimum of $2,000,000 per year towards street improvements. This amount has fluctuated based upon available resources

7. ACCOUNTING AND REPORTING STANDARDS
The City will comply with all requirements of generally accepted accounting principles, and will publish an Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) in compliance with generally accepted accounting principles, prepared in coordination with our independent auditors, no later than the first quarter of each calendar year. The ACFR, along with the Auditor’s report on internal controls and compliance, will be presented to the City Council at a public meeting, after first being presented to the Finance Commission. The City shall endeavor to achieve audits with minimal auditor findings in the form of significant deficiencies. The City shall swiftly and thoroughly respond, to auditor findings of material weakness. 4 - 23

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET POLICY
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 21

8. MIDYEAR AND INTERIM FINANCIAL REPORTING
The City will publish a midyear budget update in March of each year. The midyear budget update shall present estimated outcomes and the implications for the budget year. The report shall give attention to the financial issues and policy matters anticipated to have the most significant short and long-term financial planning importance to the City Council. Pursuant to the content of the midyear report, the City Council shall provide specific and general direction to staff for short- and long-term budgetary planning.

To comply with the policy, the City Manager will ensure the following:
● The midyear budget update will be presented to the City Council in February or March of each year.
● At the midyear budget update, staff will present to the City Council any necessary adjustments to the budget. The adjustments are based on additional funding, or major changes in revenues or expenditures, or previously approved budget adjustments.
● Monthly budget updates will be provided to the City Council starting in the Spring of 2023.

9. RISK MANAGEMENT
The City will identify and quantify all areas of financial and operating risk, and prepare contingencies for those risks, including legal liabilities, infrastructure maintenance, emergency response, and contract and employee obligations. The City will work with the City’s insurance providers to seek full coverage of actuarially projected needs.

Liability and Workers Compensation liability is reported in accordance with GASB 10, and further explained below.
● The City manages risk through a combination of purchased insurance and selfinsurance. ● The City self-insured workers’ compensation claims with a self-insured retention of $125,000 and general/auto liability claims, with a self-insured retention of $100,000 per covered claim. Excess workers’ compensation and general/auto liability insurance coverage shall be purchased.
● An annual actuarial study shall be conducted to provide an estimate of the selfinsured liability to be recorded by the City in accordance with Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 10. This statement requires the City to accrue a liability on its financial statements for a reasonable estimate of the cost of claims and expenses associated with all reported and unreported claims. ● The City’s goal is to maintain reserves to fund its outstanding self-insured liabilities at the minimum level of 70 percent.
● The City shall maintain a Self-Insurance Fund to both fund the liability reserve and workers compensation, and recover all associated risk management costs, including claim payments, insurance premiums and any deductibles, and claim 4 - 24

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET POLICY
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 22
administration (internal and external). The fund’s revenues shall be generated through assessments to City funds based on their claim experience and outstanding liabilities. These departmental assessments shall be evaluated annually and adjusted as needed.
● Staff shall report to the Finance Commission and City Council at least annually on the claims processed, amounts paid, and steps taken to manage and reduce the City’s risk and liability.

10. DEBT AND INVESTMENTS
The City will consider the use of debt for long-term capital assets when the cost of debt is lower than the City’s investment return, and when operating revenues are available to pay the debt. We will maximize the investment return on City Cash balances within the higher concerns of safety and liquidity. An investment policy will be submitted annually to the City Council for review and adoption in September or October of each year. The City shall at all times maintain compliance with the California Government Code with respect to the content and function of its Investment Policy.

Annually, the Investment Policy is reviewed by the City’s Finance Commission, prior to being approved by the City Council. Additionally, the City Treasurer shall provide monthly reports to the City Council which shall include all reportable elements specified in the City’s Investment Policy.

11. CONTROL OF FINANCIAL ASSETS
All financial assets will be under the direct authority of the City Treasurer and Finance Director. Regarding Capital Assets, the City will capitalize assets and equipment with individual minimum value of $5,000 for non-infrastructure assets, and $25,000 for infrastructure assets.

12. SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR SERVICES
The City will publish, and the Finance Department will update, the schedule of fees for services as a component of the annual budget. The Fee Schedule will be reviewed by the Finance Commission prior to implementation each July 1st. .

13. LONG-TERM LIABILITIES
The City shall evaluate long-term liabilities (debt borrowing, compensated absences, claims and judgements, pensions, post-employment benefits (OPEB), on a case by case basis. The City will work with the California Public Employee Retirement System and the City’s insurance providers to seek full coverage of actuarially projected needs.

Funding is budgeted on a pay-as-you-go basis for leave liabilities, and retiree health insurance costs. In accordance with GASB 45, a third-party actuarial valuation of the City’s liability for annual retiree medical costs has been completed every two years since FY 2008/09.
4 - 25

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA BUDGET POLICY
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 23

14. GANN APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT
The City will annually adopt a Resolution establishing the City’s appropriation limit (the Gann Limit) calculated in accordance with Article x111-B of the constitution of the State of California Government code and any other voter approved amendments or state legislation that affects the City’s appropriations limit. The Gann Limit will be adopted by Resolution.

The City is restricted to an amount of annual appropriations from proceeds of taxes, and if proceeds of taxes exceed allowed appropriations, the excess must either be refunded to the State Controller or returned to the taxpayers through revised tax rates or revised fee schedules. Alternatively, an excess of one year, may by offset against a deficit in the following year.
4 - 26

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA FUND BALANCE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 24
FY22/23 Fund Balance
4 - 27
Beginning Fund Year-End Year-End Transfers Transfers Reserve n mg Fund Description Balance Revenues Espenditures In Out Adjustments Fund Balance
101 Gener al Fund (Undesignated) 18,931,422 36,588,626 35,681,208 2,210,847 1,834,998 19,462,991 101 GF (Council Designated Reserves) 6,299,941 (1,834,998) 4,464,943 103 Insurance Fund (1,952,514) 3,220,620 4,686,289 1,489,285 (1,928,898) 104 Street Improvements Program 2,358,321 55,183 2,303,138 105 Facilities & Equip. Replacement 2,470,794 34,844 231,853 2,273,785 106 Technology Surcharge 23,225 28,000 51,225
108 SR 110 Gen Fund Reserve 100,000 338,483 238,483
110 OPEB Trust Fund 1,141,509 56,308 1,000 1,196,817
201 MT A Pedestrian Improvement (29,951) (29,951)
205 Prop"A" 1,858,066 657,124 696,249 1,818,941
206 SLFRFFund 3,029,618 3,029,618 2,560,519 3,498,717
207 Prop"C" 1,217,459 538,724 276,799 1,479,384
208 TEA/Metro 151,469 2,136 153,605
209 Carlyle Library Bequest 2,800,000 2,800,000
210 Sewer 5,178,182 1,922,864 836,150 425,808 5,839,089 211 CTC Traffic Improvement
213 SB2 Planning Gr ant 50,000 50,000
214 Rogan HR5394 Gr ant
215 Street Light & Landscape 94,009 887,644 1,328,283 383,079 36,449 217 Public, Educ. & Gov't. Fund 189,911 10,195 200,106
218 Clean Air Act 153,513 35,407 188,920
219 CalRecycle Local Asst. Gr ant
220 Business Improvement Ta~ (15,609) 91,125 112,000 (36,484) 223 Gold Line Mitigation Fund 63,408 894 64,302
226 Mission Meridian Public Gar age (362,057) 9,100 (371,157) 228 Housing Authority 116,972 48,284 11,700 153,556
230 State Gas Ta~ 919,457 705,028 836,175 788,310
232 County Park Bond (210,465) 61,500 61,500 (210,465)
233 Measure R 1,443,120 22,668 44,927 1,420,861
236 MeasureM 1,796,106 469,472 152,362 2,113,216
237 Road Maint. & Rehab. Acct. 1,242,193 604,433 1,846,626 238 MSRCGrant (152,986) 4,550 (157,536)
239 Measure 'w 281,223 258,815 285,608 254,430
241 Measure H (87,699) 18,000 (69,699)
242 Prop C E~change (345,047) 180,188 17,093 (181,951)
245 Bike & Pedestrian Paths
248 BTAGrants (416,948) (416,948)
249 Open Streets Gr ant (311,796) (311,796)
255 Capital Growth 588,529 48,537 100,000 537,066
260 COBG (2,584) (2,584)
270 Asset Forfeiture 232,477 3,278 60,000 175,755
272 Police Gr ants - State (COPS) 389,869 227,116 130,000 486,985 274 Homeland Security Gr ant (146,371) (146,371)
275 Park Impact Fees 805,885 111,582 51,255 866,212
276 Historic Preservation Gr ant 5,627 79 5,706
277 HSIPGrant (228,661) 69,397 372,256 (531,520)
278 Housing Element Gr ant
295 Arroyo Seco Golf Course 2,038,860 1,279,000 1,336,882 1,980,978 310 Sewer Capital Projects (386,424) 425,808 425,808 (386,424) 327 2000 Ta~ Allocation Bonds 924,867 924,867
500 'water 84,113,145 9,716,510 7,033,455 3,006,226 83,789,974 503 'water Efficiency Fund 977,507 162,284 174,193 965,598 505 2016 'water Revenue Bonds (32,554,670) 2,500,300 2,448,838 (32,606,132) 506 SRF Loan - 'water (171,384) 264,966 (436,350)
510 'water & Sewer Impact Fees 1,057,608 75,702 1,133,310 550 Public Financing Authority (4,080,707) 531,676 557,388 (4,054,995) 927 Redev. Obligations Trust Fund 132,278 196,500 196,500 132,278

98.770.697 64.212.502 61.215.838 5.642.881 5.642.881 - 101. 767 .361 227 Successor Agency to CRA I (206,373)1 200,193 I (406,566) Successor Aqenc• Total r206.373l - 200.193 - - - r4o6.566l 1111•• --,----1111_., I:-..-,;-- ,,..,,. I • 1:.11111:t 1;--.F...a:+:t " :+: I 'I

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA FUND BALANCE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 25
FY22/23 Reserves Balance
Beginning
Balance
FY 22-23 Additions Deletions
Ending
Balance
FY 22-23
Arroyo Golf Course / Bike Trail 600,000 600,000
CalTrans Vacant Lot Purchases 392,000 392,000
Legal Reserve 500,000 500,000
Library Expansion 200,000 200,000
Maint. Yard / Comm. Ctr 267,067 267,067
Renewable Energy Sources Reserve 700,000 700,000
Storm Water 600,000 300,000 300,000
Library Park Drainage Reserve 22,000 22,000 -
Financial Sustainability Reserve 900,000 900,000
Slater Reimbursement Reserve 345,876 40,000 305,876
Vehicle Replacement Reserve 100,000 100,000
SR-110 Interchange Proj (Rogan Fund Match) 1,410,000 1,410,000 - Stables CIP Reserve 62,998 62,998 -
Mental Health Reserve 200,000 200,000
Total: 6,299,941 - 1,834,998 4,464,943
4 - 28

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA FUND BALANCE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 26
FY23/24 Fund Balance
4 - 29
Fund Description Beginning Fund Year-End Year-End Transfers Transfers Out Reserve Ending Balance Revenues E1 enditures In Ad-ustment Fund Balance 101 General Fund (Undesignated) 19,462,991 39,523,631 39,630,567 4,693 1,265,000 500,000 18,595,748 101 GF (Council Designated Reserves) 4,464,943 (500,000) 3,964,943 103 Insurance Fund (1,928,898) 3,671,883 3,566,267 (1,823,282) 104 Street Improvements Pro gr am 2,303,138 2,303,138 0 105 Facilities & Equip. Replacement 2,273,785 44,395 531.502 144,225 1,525,097 405,805 106 Technology Surcharge 51,225 32,000 83,225
108 SR 110 Gen Fund Reserve 238,483 70,474 168,009
110 OPEB Trust Fund 1,196,817 58,560 1,000 1,254,378
201 MT A Pedestrian Improvement (29,951) (29,951)
205 Prop "A" 1,818,941 821.973 895,569 1.745,345
206 SLFRF Fund 3,498,717 3,498,717
207 Prop"C" 1,479,384 661,776 2,866 300,000 1,838,294
209 Carlyle Library Bequest 2,800,000 2,800,000
208 TEA/Metro 153,605 2,722 156,327
210 Sewer 5,839,089 2,288,250 1,240,680 958,308 5,928,350 211 CTC Traffic Improvement
213 SB2 Planning Gr ant 135,000 135,000
214 Rogan HR5394 Gr ant 1,087,899 1,087,899 0
215 Street Light & Landscape 36,449 905,062 1,715,682 (774,171) 217 Public, Educ. & Gov't. Fund 200,106 11,433 211,539
218 Clean Air Act 188,920 36,011 224,931
219 CalRecycle Local Asst. Gr ant
220 Business Improvement Tas (36,484) 91.875 110,500 (55,109) 223 Gold Line Mitigation Fund 64,302 1,139 65,441
226 Mission Meridian Public Gar age (371,157) 15,000 (386,157) 228 Housing Authority 153,556 49,427 16,200 30,000 156,783 230 State Gas T as 788,310 784,432 1,348,761 200,000 23,981 232 County Park Bond (210,465) 118,000 11 8,000 (210,465) 233 Measure R 1,420,861 506,776 128,472 300,000 1,499,166 234 Measure M-MAT 475,000 475,000
236 MeasureM 2,113,216 577,234 228,472 204,062 2,257,916 237 Road Maint. & Rehab. Acct. 1,846,626 691,569 585,093 1,953,102 238 MSRCGrant (157,536) 246,925 246,925 (157,536)
239 Me.:isure 'iJ 254,430 257,722 313,138 292,500 (93,485) 240 Measure M MSP 250,000 250,000
241 Measure H (69,699) 18,500 (51,199)
242 Prop C Eschange (181,851) (181,951)
243 Measure R- MIP 475,000 475,000
245 Bike & Pedestrian Paths 31,103 25,000 6,103
247 SGVCOG Gr ants 45,000 45,000
248 BTAGrants (416,948) (416,948)
249 Open Streets Gr ant (311,796) (311,796)
255 Capital Growth 537,066 70,877 70,474 537,468
260 CDBG (2,584) 427,381 19,599 407,782 (2,584)
270 Asset Forfeiture 175,755 4,177 60,000 119,933
272 Police Gr ants - State (COPS) 486,985 233,566 178,011 542,540 274 Homeland Security Gr ant (146,371) (146,371)
275 Park Impact Fees 866,212 174.757 1,025,000 15,969
276 Historic Preservation Gr ant 5,706 101 5,807
277 HSIPGrant (531,520) 307,862 251.507 (475,165)
278 Housing Element Gr ant 4,000 4,000
281 CA State Library Building For ward 368,445 368,445
295 Arroyo Seco Golf Course 1,980,978 1,649,650 1,245,087 730,593 1,654,948 310 Sewer Capital Projects (386,424) 425,808 425,808 (386,424) 327 2000 T as Allocation Bonds 924,867 924,867
400 Capital Improvement Projects Fund 15,981,568 16,368,071 386,503 500 w'ater 83,789,974 15,532,978 9,813,920 5,970,826 83,538,207 503 \1 ater Efficiency Fund 965,598 282,158 364,442 420,000 463,314 505 2016 \1 ater Revenue Bonds (32,606,132) 2,501,050 2,501,050 (32,606,132) 506 SRF Loan - \1 ater (436,350) 264,966 (701,316)
510 \1 ater & Sewer Impact Fees 1,133,310 208,172 1,342,482 550 Public Financing Authority (4,054,995) 529,276 528,276 (4,054,995) 827 Redev. Obliaations Trust Fund 132,278 196,600 196,600 132,278 IOI. 767 .361 73.362.024 84.986.718 19.973.123 19.973.123 - 90.142.667 227 Successor Aqenc~ to CRA I [406,5661 1 196,600 200,600 I r 410,5661 Successor Aqenc, Total 1406.5661 196.600 200.600 - - - 1410.5661 ·••.:.--.-- 1•-· . ' I '"' :• , : : : '' ,., II ■

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA FUND BALANCE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 27
FY23/24 Transfers In
4 - 30
I
lRANSFERS IN FY 23-24
Fund Name Description Amount
01 General Fund Accounting Adjustment
To,tal Fund 101
05 FaciL ,& Equip_ Replacemen1Tesla Lease Model Y
To,tal Fund 105
3 o Sewer
3 O Sewer
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
Debt Service Principle
Debt Service Interest
To,tal Fund 3-1 o
Grevalia&l3erkshire Pocket Park
FremontJHt.mtinqton MAT Project
VoiP Phone System Installation
Golf Course Nettinq Replacemen
Nortli1-South Corridor ITS Di:>_loy
CD Permit Manaqement Software
CD Record Scan ,& Doc Manaqmnt
City/Civic EV Charqinq System
Arroyo Park EV Ch arq i nq System
Fair Oaks Traffic Siqnal Const
Street Repairs - 2023
,825 Mission Yard Security Gate
Citywide Facility Repair
FD Front 13ay Door Replacement
PD Loc!Qer/Restroom Improvement
PD Improvements
PD Bri efi nq Room u pdate
PD1st Floor Inter PaintJDrywal
War Memorial AudioNis. Equipm
Pocket Park Construction
ADA Sidewalk Repairs
War Memorial HVAC Repairs
Rec. Fae i I i1ti es l<Jey System
Fair Oaks ITS Pro ject
GreveliaJFair Oaks Int. lmprv
Ann. Water Main Repairs
Library HVAC Repairs
Library ADA Ramp, Liqht. & Imp
Water Facil. Site lmpro\llements
Advanced Meterin,q lnfr. (AMI)
Pedestrian Crossinq Devices
Rect. Rapid Flashinq Beacons
Rio Hondo LRS Alham Wash Trtm
EV Charqinq Station {MS.RC)
Ci.!\IWide Facilities Assessment/ Security Enh.

Library Security Camera System
4,6,93
4 ,s.9,3.
144,225
144,225
25,3,262
172,546
4 25,808
,825,000
475,,000
1,80 000
730,593
j__,228 ,848
260,000
35,2,700
~ .042
3,886,102
160,000
366 271
,80,000
190,000
17,000
19,000
13,000
407 782
25,000
50,000
2,000,000
254 100
20,000
,88 000
150,000
200,000
264,962
5,000
226 876
20,000

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA FUND BALANCE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 28
FY23/24 Transfers In
4 - 31
I TRANSFERS IN FY 23-24
Fund
400 OIP
Name Description ~
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 CIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 CIP
40 0 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
400 OIP
5-05 Water Rev Bonds
505 Water Rev Bonds
505 Water Rev Bonds
505 Water Rev Bonds
505 Water Rev Bonds
505 Water Rev Bonds
55-0 Public Financinq Authority
550 Public Fi111 ancinq Authority
550 Public Financinq Authority
550 Public Financinq Authority
550 Public Financing Authority
Water Facil _ Site Improvements
Advanced Meterinq lnfr_ (AMI)
Pedestrian Crossi111q Devices
Rect Rapid Flashinq Beacons
Rio Hondo LRS Alham, Wash Trtm
EV Charqinq Station {MSRC )
Citywide Facilities A:ssessment! Security Enh_
Library Security Camera §¥stem
CM MS/Work Order Sy_?tem/GIS
Elevated Tan ks-Raymond/Bi Ii k:ie
Sewer Sys_ Rep_, Rehab&Replace
Westside Reservoir
Climate Action Plan
FD Diesel Exhaust System Replaoe1111 ent
308 San Pas,rnal Residence Improvements
Aqend a Man aqemerit System
City Website Sy_?tem & Desiqn
Library Facility lmJ;)rovements
Library Roof
Library Master Plan
Parks Master Plan
Snake Trail Improvements
Senior Center Floorinq
Arr,Q_yo Seco San Rafael & San Pascual Pro ject!
H mi1ti 111qton Drive Green Street
City Hall Stormwater Project
Fremont!Hlmtington MIP Project
To,tal Fund 400
Debt Service - Fees
Issuance Cost Expense
Debt Service - Princi, al
Debt Service - Interest
Def Loss Amort Expense
Premium Amort Expense - 20 16
To,tal Fund 505
Debt Service - Fees
Debt Service-Professional Svc
Debt Service - Princil2&- 2013
Debt Service - Interest - 2013
Premium Amort Experi s,e -20 13
To,tal Fund 550
,88,000
150,000
200,000
264,'962
5,000
226,876
20 000
11 5,,000
120 000
475,000
525,000
120,000
50,000
30,000
50 000
60,000
100 514
291,781
150,000
50,000
60,000
4-37 500
250,000
500,000
475,000
1 s,,ase,0,71
1,250
1,03,5, 000
_ 1,414,588
258,250
(208,038)
2, 50,1, 0·50,
2,000
4-50,000
104,988
(27J12)
529,,276,
Total Transfer In 19,973,123

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA FUND BALANCE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 29
FY23/24 Transfers Out
4 - 32
F11.1nd
TRANSFERS OUT FY 23-24
Name
General Fund
General Fund
Genera.I Fund
Genera.I Fun d
General Fun d
General Fun d
Genera.I Fund
104 Street Imp. Pro g.
104 Street Imp. Pro g.
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. ,& Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip. Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip,_ Rep lacement
105 Facil. & Equip,. Rep lacement
108 SR 11 0 GF Reserve
207 PropG
.210 Sewer
210 Sewer
210 Sewer
210 Sewer
213 SB2' Planning Grant
214 Rog an H R5294 Grant
2:2.8 Housing Authority
230 Gas Tax
2::n Measure R
Description
VoiP' Phone System Installation
OD P'e rm it Management Software
OitylOivic EV Charging System
Agenda Management System
Offi' Webs ite ~ stem & Des ign
Oity Ha.II Stormwa.ter Proj ect
Arroyo Seco San Rafae l & San P'ascua.l Proj ects
Totall Fund 101
Street Re pairs - 202:3
Acco unting Adju stment
Total Fund 104
82:5 Mission Ya.rd Security Gate
Oiu,wi de F aci I ity Re p,ai r
FD Front Bay Door Rep lacem ent
PD Locker/Restroo m Improvement
PD Improvements
PD Briefing Ro om Update
PD1 st Floor Inter Pa.int/Drywa.l
War Memorial HVAC Repairs
Li l:J-ra.ry HVAC Re p,a.irs
Li l:J-ra.ry ADA Ramp, Light. & Imp
Oicywidle Facilities Assess ment/ Security Enh.

Library Security Camera. System
FD Diesel Exhaust System Re placement
Library Facility Improvem ents
Library Roof
Libra Master Plan
Senior Center Flooring
Total Fund 105
North-South Corridor ITS Dploy
Total Fund 108
Street Re pairs - 202:3
Total Fund 103
OM r ,sm ork Order SystemJGIS
Sew er Sys. Re p., RehaM ,Re place
Debt Service - Principal
Debt Service - Interest
Total Fund 210
OD P'ermit Management Software
Total Fund 213
North-South Corridor ITS Dploy
Total Fund 214
3,08 San P'ascual Residence Improvem ents
Total Fund 223
Street Re pairs - 202:3
Total Fund 230
Street Re pairs - 202:3
Totall Fund 233
Amount
180,000
125,000
250,000
50,000
60,000
300,000
300,000
1,26,5,000
2,298,445
4,693
2,3'()3, 133,
160,000
366,271
80,000
190,000
17,000
19,000
13,000
25,000
109,263
20,000
2:26,876
20,000
5 0,000
43,2:21

1.25,466
60,000
1 525,0917
70,474
7~),474
300,000
300,0001
57,500
475,000
253,262
172,546
9,53, 3'()8,
135 ,000
135,000
1,087,899
1,087,89,91
30,000
3{),,000
200,000
.2-00,0001
300,000
300,000

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA FUND BALANCE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 30
FY23/24 Transfers Out
4 - 33
TRANSFERS OUT FY 23-24
Fund Name Description Amount
234 M easu r,e M-MAT
236 M ea.su r,e M
236 Measur,e M
237 RMRA.
238 MSRC
238 MSRC
2l9 M ea.su r,e W
2l9 Measu r,e W
2l9 M easu r,e W
24"0 M ea.su r,e M M SP
240 Measur,e M MSP
243 Measur,e R - MIP
2 5 B ik!e & Ped:estrian Path
255 Capita.I Griowth
260 ODBG
275 Pa rk Impact F,ees
275 Pa rk lm,pa.ct F,ees
275 Pa rk Impact F,ees
277 HSIP Grant
277 HSIP Grant
281 CA State Ub:r,a ry B Id. Fu rw,a rd
281 CA State Lib:ra ry B Id. F,o rward
281 CA State Lib:ra ry B Id. Forward
295 Arrl[lyo Seoo Go If
Fr,emantJHuntmgtan MAT PruJect
To tal f lllildl 234
Stneet R,e;pairs - 2023
R1ect. Rapid Fla.shin91 Bea.cans
Total f 11rn dl 2l6
Street R,e;pa irs - 2023
To tal f 11rn dl 237
Tesla. uea.se Madel Y
City/Ciivic IEV Ch ar g;in 91 Syst em
Total f 11rn dl .2l8
Rio Hondo LRS Alham, Wash Trtm
rr )'lo 5eoo San Rafael & San P,asou a.l Projects
Hunting.tan Dr ive Gr,een Str,eet
To tal f 11rn dl 239
Pede.stria n Omssdn 91 Devices
Gr,ev,elia/fair Oaks Int. lmp:rv
Total f 11rn dl 240
Fr,emantJHuntingtan MIP Projeot
To tal f lllildl 243
Street R,e;pairs - 2023
Totall f 11rn dl 245
Na rth,-So uth Go rrido r rrs Dp'.loy
Total f 11rn dl 255
ADA Sidewalk R,e;pa irs
To tal f 11rn dl .260
Gr,ev,alia:8JBerk.sih ire Pocket Park
Parks r,, aster Plan
Sn ak1e Trail lmpmv,ements
To tal f 11rn dl 275
Fair Oaks Traffic Sig;n al <Con.st
R1ect. Rapid Fla.shin91 Beacons
Total f 11rn dl 277
Lib:r,ary HVA!C Fl!e;pairs
Lib:rary Facility lmpmvements
Library Fl!oof
Total f 11rn dl 28
Cuu e Netting Fl!e;p.1aoemen
Total f 11rn dl 295
..
t
r
!
475,000
475,000
177,565
26, 97
204,0S:2
585,093
585,093
1 4,225
102,700
246,9.25
5,000
37,~00
2~0,000
292,500
200,000
~0,000
250,000
475,000
475,000
25,000
25,000
70, 74
70,474
"107,782
407,7&2
825,000
1 ~0,000
~0,000
II ,025,000
13,042
238,465
2511,507
1 4,837
57,293
166,315
368,445
H0,593
730,593

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA FUND BALANCE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 31
FY23/24 Transfers Out
4 - 34
TRANSFERS OUT FY 23-24
Fund Name Description Amount
:iOO Water Ann . Wa.ter Main Rie;l)a irs 2 ,000,000
500 Water Water f.acil. Site lmp:rovements 88,000
500 Water Adiv,anced Metering lnfr. (AM I) 1:i0,000
:iOO Water or,, r,, S!!Mo rk o rd:er Sys-teml'GIS 57,:iOO :iOO Water IEilevated Tan~Ra,ymon cfJBili~ie 120,000
500 Water Westside R,eser¥o ir 525,000
:iOO Water De:bt Service - F,ees 1,25'0
500 Water De:bt Service - Princil)al 1,'035,000
500 Water De:bt Se.rvice - lntenest 1,4 1 ,588
:iOO Water Def uo&S Arna rt IE>ql)ens,e 258,2:iO
:iOO Water Pr,emium A mo rt IExpens,e - 2016 (208,038)
500 W.ater De:bt Service - foes 2 ,000
:iOO Water De:bt Se.rvice - Principal - 20"13 4 :i0,000 :iOO Water De:bt Service - lntenest - 2013 11() ,988
:iOO Water Pr,emium Amo rt IExpens,e - 2013 (27,7 12 )
Total Fund 500 5,970,826
503 Water Efficiency Olima.te Action Plan 120,000
:i03 Water Efficien cy Oity Hall Stormwater Pmject 3'00,000 Total Fund 503 420,000
Total Transfer Out 19,973 ,123

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA FUND BALANCE
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 32
FY23/24 Reserves Balance
Beginning
Balance
FY 23-24 Additions Deletions
Ending
Balance
FY 23-24
Arroyo Golf Course / Bike Trail 600,000 600,000
CalTrans Vacant Lot Purchases 392,000 392,000
Legal Reserve 500,000 500,000
Library Expansion 200,000 200,000
Maint. Yard / Comm. Ctr 267,067 267,067
Renewable Energy Sources Reserve 700,000 700,000
Storm Water 300,000 300,000 -
Financial Sustainability Reserve 900,000 900,000
Slater Reimbursement Reserve 305,876 305,876
Vehicle Replacement Reserve 100,000 100,000
Mental Health Reserve 200,000 200,000 -
4,464,943 - 500,000 3,964,943
4 - 35

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA REVENUE DETAIL
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 33
Revenue Detail
4 - 36
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated
Acct Account Title 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 4000-000 Property T as - Current Secured 11,578,594 12,386,279 12,823,306 13,425,000 r 13,758,186 14,543,151 4010-000 Property T as - Unsecured 115,324 435,198 759,197 416,300 416,300 448,243 4015-000 Property T as - Residual SA 133,780 101,674 213,625 135,000 135,000 139,050 4020-000 Property T as - Prior Years (29,505) (23,528) 2,129 (25,000) 3,000 3,090 4030-000 Property T as - Int & Pen 35,319 45,544 51,961 30,000 30,000 30,900 4035-000 Property T a:-c - Postponement 18,790 29,653 30,542 4040-000 Highway Rental 117,783 112,115 112,334 112,114 112,114 115,477 4050-000 Homeowners E:-:emption 60,796 58,805 58,841 60,000 60,000 61,800 4060-000 Supplemental - Seo/Unsee 333,877 320,286 409,925 310,000 310,000 422,223 5002-000 Motor Vehic le In Lieu Adj. 3,145,589 3,318,155 3,445,099 3,676,954 3,713,192 3,905,907 Proper111 T aa 15.491.557 16.773.318 17.906.070 18.140.368 18.537.792 19.700.384 4150-000 Library Special T as 342,237 347,931 364,223 360,000 360,000 375,149 ssessments 8: Specia T aHes 342.23 3 .93 364.223 360.000 360.000 3 5. 49 4200-000 Sales & Use T as 2,149,095 2,398,132 2,730,069 2,892,000 2,949,321 2,972,321 4200-002 Sales T as - Measure A 412,661 2,407,750 2,993,038 3,114,000 3,022,000 3,121,000 4201-000 PSAF - Prop 172 Sales T a s 302,718 326,764 373,506 340,000 340,000 384,712 Sales Taa 2,864.474 5,132.645 6,096.613 6,346.000 6,311.321 6,478.033 4230-001 Utility T as - Water 774,712 960,932 844,642 1,079,703 860,095 903,100 4230-002 Utility T as - Electric 1,429,355 1,562,810 1,750,422 2,000,000 1,960,473 2,136,916 4230-003 Utility T as - Gas 450,337 489,887 590,186 570,000 570,000 643,302 4230-004 Utility T as - Telephone 584,161 410,435 417,483 400,000 400,000 396,609 4230-006 Utilit T as - Cable 206,889 314,466 272,535 250,000 272,535 272,535 Utilit11 Users T aa 3,445.454 3,738.531 3,875.268 4,299.703 4,063.103 4,352.462 4210-001 Fr anohise - Refuse 556,224 553,981 575,957 567,350 567,350 593,236 4210-002 Franchise - Cable TV 185,465 228,125 223,941 226,000 226,000 230,659 4210-003 Franchise - Electric 155,020 163,883 159,650 159,650 168,800 4210-004 Franchise - Gas 53,149 58,579 63,688 54,000 54,000 68,783 4220-000 Real Pro ert Transfer 155,292 204,703 262,064 210,000 210,000 210,000 Othe He 50. 3 .200. 08 .289.53 .000 .000 .2 . 4400-000 Business License 359,324 386,163 381,395 434,000 381,500 391,000 4405-000 Business License SB1186 Fee 9,445 9,778 9,353 9,000 9,000 9,400 4420-000 Bus Lie Penalties & Trans 16,075 6,011 5,497 5,000 11,000 8,000 4440-000 Tobacco Retail Permit 480 240 960 480
4460-000 Parking Permits 360,898 283,235 280,095 350,000 247,000 252,000 4445-000 Filming Permits 67,487 80,498 86,130 60,000 83,000 85,000 4465-001 Fire Permits 5,015 14,418 19,453 4,000 11,450 12,000 4470-001 Gr a ding Permits 362 300 300
4470-002 Street I Curb Permits 27,117 27,793 25,231 30,000 21,827 30,000 4470-004 Street Closure Permits 5,672 4,461 3,000 3,000 4470-005 New sr ack Permits 573 462 500 500
4480-000 FOG Wastewater Permit 8,248 142 1,045 7,000 5,000 Licenses & Permits 861.697 808.280 814.081 903.280 764.777 796.200 4600-000 Vehicle Code Fines 46,821 34,108 48,049 30,000 18,000 18,500 4610-000 Parking Citations 207,821 100,057 (437) 100,000 37,000 38,000 4620-000 Other Court Fines 9,959 9,284 4,679 10,000 1,500 1,500 Fines 8: Forfeitures 264.601 143.449 52.291 140.000 56.500 58.000 4800-000 Interest Income 299,006 238,731 224,197 181,000 509,664 950,437 4802-000 Gain , Loss on Investments 7,853 25,833 (11,890) 4805-000 Unrealized Gain I Loss 201,885 (261,442) (1,125,662) 4815-000 Chamber Farmers Mkt Cap lmpr 2,250 4,665 11,572 3,000 6,455 5,022 4820-000 Rental - Stables 73,149 106,240 129,316 100,000 140,000 140,000 4820-001 Rental - Stables - CIP Rsv 7,678 48,693 69,608 55,000 60,000 60,000 4825-000 Rental - Tennis 63,700 79,100 78,896 75,600 98,000 108,000 4825-001 Rental - Tennis - CIP Rsv 700 4,900 8,400
4830-001 Rental - Cellular Site 4,374,440
4830-002 Rental - Cell Phone Site 44,536 23,013
4830-003 Rental - Cell Site - AT&T 32,392 15,062
4830-004 Cell Phone - C\.//Bilicke 33,142 20,188
4830-005 Cell Phone -Verizon-San Pascual 29,477 17,524 26,197 4830-006 Cell Phone - Cingular OG 36,538 14,617
4830-009 Cell Phone - Cingular ASP 35,187 16,090
4830-010 Cell Phone - Verizon - MH 22,309 10,416
4840-000 Rental - \./ ar Memorial Building 26,146 (600) 23,707 50,000 30,000 32,000

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA REVENUE DETAIL
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 34
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Acct Account Title 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 4850-000 Rental - Eddie Park 3,541 - 1,415 3,000 2,000 2,000 4860-000 Rental - Library Comm Room 11,108 2,954 4,182 2,000 19,853 20,000 4870-000 Rental - Racquet Ball Ctr - - - - - -
4885-000 Rental - Sr Citizen Ctr 2,616 - 2,098 3,000 10,000 12,000 4890-000 Rental - Farmer's Market 5,625 11,662 12,617 5,000 16,137 12,555 4891-000 Rental - Orange Grove 2,861 - - 2,500 - -
4892-000 Rental - Misc 36,784 35,730 43,647 5,000 - -
4893-000 Rental - Batting Cages 9,787 1,153 12,642 10,000 - - 4894-000 Rental - Youth House 1,712 - 2,079 5,000 2,000 3,000 Use of Money & Property 989,984 4,788,970 (495,381) 508,500 894,109 1,345,014 5000-000 Motor Vehicle In Lieu 20,772 - - - - -
5400-000 Sale of Property 1,167 993 4,314 - - -
5020-000 State Reimb - Police Training 14,700 12,562 18,619 30,000 18,000 18,000 5030-000 State Mandated Cost - - - - - -
5071-003 Miscellaneous Grants 500 273,820 5,245 85,060 136,634 136,000 5071-005 Non-Federal Grants - Pub. Works - - - - - -
5071-007 Misc Federal Grant - 328,205 - - - -
5071-011 Library Svc. CENIC Grant - - 12,030 - - -
5073-001 Grants-Police - 6,712 41,046 - 21,000 21,500
5073-002 Grants-Fire 27,100 - - - - -
5073-005 SLF Recovery Funds - - - 6,059,235 - -
5077-003 Metro Gold Line Authority - - - - - -
5310-001 Fire Interagency Support Reimb - 332,914 98,272 315,000 60,000 300,000 Revenue From Other Agencies 64,239 955,205 179,525 6,489,295 235,634 475,500 5150-001 Business License App Fee 25,092 23,741 20,215 15,000 15,000 22,000 5150-002 Non Sufficient Fund Chg 294 105 140 300 - -
Current Services-Finance 25,386 23,846 20,355 15,300 15,000 22,000 5200-001 Community Development Misc Fee 15,812 - 16,976 20,000 12,492 30,000 5200-002 Planning Fees 256,431 232,459 230,111 680,000 260,000 300,000 5200-003 Plan Check 350,036 334,541 760,453 475,000 635,000 700,000 5200-004 Building Permits 396,542 459,335 558,420 460,000 460,000 600,000 5200-007 Administrative Citations 1,200 1,545 - 1,200 10,000 25,000 5200-008 Design Review Fee - - 12,534 - 34,000 38,000
5200-009 Cultural Heritage (CHC) Fee - - 9,086 - 25,000 30,000 Art Development Fee - - - - - 7,500
Current Services-Community Development 1,020,020 1,027,880 1,587,581 1,636,200 1,436,492 1,730,500 5220-001 Engineering Fees - Misc 159,689 140,208 138,558 60,000 115,226 110,000 5220-002 Engineering Plan Check 2,786 345 234 2,500 1,176 2,500 5221-000 Public Works Plan Check Fees - - 1,044 - - -
5223-000 NPDES 101,720 78,305 79,225 90,000 61,733 94,000 5224-000 Public Works - Filming 1,295 - - - - -
Current Services-Public Works 265,489 218,859 219,061 152,500 178,136 206,500 5230-001 Police Special Svcs 10,926 189,262 3,385 5,000 2,500 2,500 5230-004 Vehicle Impound Fees 30,971 14,418 25,733 20,000 26,000 27,000 5230-005 Police Svcs - Filming 207,875 285,925 119,993 250,000 320,000 326,000 5280-001 Animal Control Fees 857 163 - 800 - -
Current Services-Police 250,629 489,768 149,111 275,800 348,500 355,500 5255-000 Passport Services 14,646 301 - 7,000 - -
Current Services-Library 14,646 301 - 7,000 - -
5260-000 Library Fees - - 596 - 736 700
5260-002 Library Fines 30,190 575 79 - - -
5260-003 Library Replacements 2,950 763 7,979 5,000 7,500 6,200 5260-004 Library Equip. Rental - - 235 - 1,218 1,400
Current Services-Library 33,139 1,337 8,889 5,000 9,454 8,300 5265-002 Sr. Citizens Classes 17,436 41 11,525 28,000 14,000 16,000 5265-003 Sr. Citizens Membership 8,335 1,885 7,754 7,500 8,000 8,000 5265-004 Sr. Citizens Bus Trips 2,605 (40) (230) 3,000 4,500 3,500 5265-005 Snr. Citizens Center Programs 1,104 300 9 1,000 1,077 1,120 5265-006 Bingo - Coffee - Med. I.D. 897 - 51 500 420 500 5270-001 Camp Med Fees 238,880 11,218 302,382 430,400 300,000 390,000 5270-002 Recreation Classes 108,560 195,086 286,146 250,000 200,000 230,000 5270-003 Special Events 10,262 4,897 8,212 10,000 9,000 10,000 5270-004 MTA Bus Pass - General - - - - - -
5270-005 Park/Field Reservations 26,035 7,296 91,736 60,000 50,000 60,000 5270-007 Adult Sports - - - - - -
5270-008 Concerts in the Park - - 1,450 10,000 13,000 25,000 5270-009 War Memorial Kitchen 2,500 - 1,179 2,500 1,250 2,500 Current Services-Community Services 416,614 220,684 710,215 802,900 601,247 746,620 4 - 37

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA REVENUE DETAIL
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 35
4 - 38
Actual
Acct Account Title 2019/20
i 5283-001 Fire Dept - Filming 113,240
i 5283-002 Fire, Dep< - Plan Check 57,387
i 5283-007 Fire Dept - Inspection 56,335
i 5290-001 Paramedic fees 680,353
i 5300-000 Paramedic Subscriptions 27,560
5302-000 fire Command Reimbursements 23,994
i 5305-001 fire Miscellaneous 449
Current-Services-fire 959.918
C,nren es_- 9115.,.1/.
5420-000 'w'orkers Comp Reimb
5425-000 Gen. Liability Insurance Reimb
5430-000 Damage to City Property 7,430
5440-000 Candidate filing Fee
5460-000 Recycling Revenue 12,238
5460-001 Recycling Container
5490-000 Cash Over/Shon (764)'
5501-001 Donations - Misc 70
5501-003 Donations - Senior Meals 2,806
5501-005 Donations - Library
5505-000 Miscellaneous 37,529
5505-001 Duplication Fees 7,698
5510-000 Credit Card Transaction Fee 7,360
5530-400 PD Reports 8: Misc Fees
Actual Actual
2020/21 2021/22
134,038 75,195
41,646 38,584
114.883 113.825
533,057 681,690
27,108 82,805
180,143 148,774
12 46

1.096.947 1.140.918
:J._ ,Ii. , I/Jc,.
72,416
1,301 250
1,571
2,850 11,710
(1,578) (21)
3 93
23,913
68,511 223,089
8,394 1,510
6,337 8,092
5,778
Budgeted
2022/23
100,000
45,000
60,000
650,000
27,500
100,000
5,000
54,000
20,000
4,000
1,500
Estimated
2022/23
145,860
23,227
109,461
601,786
25,000
130,000
100
12,973
9,200
2,000
9,000
7,570
Proposed
2023/24
130,000
25,000
100,000
625,000
35,000
157,000
16,508
10,000
4,000
9,000
7,000
5550-000 Prior Year Adj=u•=•=mcc. enc..t ..... _________ =-c=c'c(0,l ___ =-==---===~---=--,,=--=-------,-==-----==-. Other Revenue 74.367 183.717 250.501 84.500 40.743 46.508 , 5610-000 Reimbursement-Sewer Fund 63,022 63,022 63,022 63,022 63,022 63,022 , 5640-000 Reimbursement-\./a<er Fund 414,362 414,362 414,362 414,362 414,362 414,362 Reimbursements From Other Funds 483.384 483.384 483.384 483.384 483.384 483.384 101- GENERAL FUND TOTAL 28.817.965 37.635.460 34.652.238 42.849.230 36.588,626 39,523,631 . 5410-000 Insurance Reimbursement - \.IC 77,293 53,052 528,610 80,000 360,620 381,137 · 5410-001 Insurance Reimbursemen,-GL 48,231 454,257 114,773 55,000 55,000 675,000 · 5420-000 ln,ernal Service Charge - \.IC 671,573 681,385 671,480 765,000 765,000 647,346 . 5425-000 ln<ernal Service Charg,-se_-,.cG=L ______ __,.= 4=' 15'-':,3'-::1=' 2 ___ =-(4:c0c'-8:c,0-::-0-=-' 0).__--=--1':",8cc0~0,:c0:c: 00----=-r:2cc,0'-::4:"-0:c,0:c: 00c-_--=-.,,2='=,0'-=4~0:c,0-::-0="0 __ =-=1,'-=9:c: 57<-:':c: 80"=0., Other Revenue 1.212.415 781.294 3.114.863 2.940.000 3.220.620 3.671,883 103 - INSURANCE FUND TOTAL 1.212,415 781.294 3.114,863 2,940,000 3.220.620 3,671,883 4800-000
4802-000
4805-000
Interest Income
Gain I Loss on Investments
Unrealized Gain I Loss
Use of Mone, & Pro en,
5505-000 Miscellaneous
5550-000 Prior Year Ad.us<ment
Other Revenue
4,000

4.000
13,688
(992)
(77,139)
(64.442)
104 - STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM FUND 4.000 - (64.442) - - - : 4800-000 ln,eres< Income 23,208 10,423 7,694 1,000 34,844 44,395 Use of Mone~ & Prop,en, 23,208 10,423 7,694 1,000 34,844 44,395 5550-000 PriorYearAdjc,us,.<,.m..,en_,, ____________________________________________ ..

Other Revenue
105 - FACILITIES & EQUIP REPLACEMENT TOTAL 23.208 10.423 7.694 1.000 34.844 44.395 5520-000 Technology Surcharg,e ________________ --=-3rc, 1=2="6 ___ -='2=0..c,0=9=9'-----=1=5~,0=0~0----=2,8=,0~0~0-----=-3=2=,0=0=0., Other Revenue 3,126 20,099 15,000 28,000 32,000
106 -TECHNOLOGY SURCHARGE TOTAL - 3.126 20.099 15.000 28.000 32,000 16,544

16.544
56,308 •

56.308
1;
58,560

58.560
,I

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA REVENUE DETAIL
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 36
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Acct Account Title 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 4200-000 Sales & Use Tax 505,425 528,052 642,891 626,217 626,217 768,191 Sales Tax 505,425 528,052 642,891 626,217 626,217 768,191 4800-000 Interest Income 30,002 18,059 5,220 10,000 26,907 34,282 4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 391 1,271 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 14,595 (12,865) - - - - Use of Money & Property 44,988 6,466 5,220 10,000 26,907 34,282 5266-000 Dial - A - Ride Charges 2,787 1,671 2,217 5,000 2,500 2,500 Charges for Current Services 2,787 1,671 2,217 5,000 2,500 2,500 5500-000 MTA Bus Pass - Senior 3,040 160 1,000 5,000 1,500 5,000 5504-000 Prop A - NTD Disc. Incentive 12,156 30,364 - 10,000 - 12,000 5505-000 Miscellaneous - - - - - -
5550-000 Prior Year Adjustment - - - - - -
Other Revenue 15,196 30,524 1,000 15,000 1,500 17,000
568,396 566,713 651,328 656,217 657,124 821,973
5073-000 Miscellaneous - - 3,029,618 3,029,618 3,029,618 - Other Revenue - - 3,029,618 3,029,618 3,029,618 -
- - 3,029,618 3,029,618 3,029,618 -
4200-000 Sales & Use Tax 419,251 438,000 533,265 519,430 519,430 637,194 Sales Tax 419,251 438,000 533,265 519,430 519,430 637,194 4800-000 Interest Income 22,104 12,329 3,478 9,000 19,294 24,582 4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 296 847 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 11,047 (8,571) - - - -
Use of Money & Property 33,447 4,605 3,478 9,000 19,294 24,582 4460-001 Parking Revenue 39,021 2,164 5,890 40,000 - -
Charges for Current Services 39,021 2,164 5,890 40,000 - - 491,719 444,769 542,633 568,430 538,724 661,776
4800-000 Interest Income 10,843 2,375 475 - 2,136 2,722 4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 107 138 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 3,990 (1,400) - - - -
Use of Money & Property 14,940 1,114 475 - 2,136 2,722
5077-041 MTA Grant - Ped. Improv. - LTF - - - - - -
Revenue From Other Agencies - - - - - -
208 - TEA/METRO TOTAL 14,940 1,114 475 - 2,136 2,722
5071-000 Carlyle Library Bequest - - - - 2,800,000 -
Revenue From Other Agencies - - - - 2,800,000 -
209 - CARLYLE LIBRARY BEQUEST TOTAL - - - - 2,800,000 - 4800-000 Interest Income 124,084 68,264 58,032 60,000 101,213 182,699 4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 1,609 4,810 (2,579) - - - 4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 60,000 (48,674) (200,653) - - - Use of Money & Property 185,693 24,399 (145,200) 60,000 101,213 182,699 5310-000 Sewer Service Charges 1,959,372 2,108,764 2,200,532 2,100,551 1,821,651 2,100,551 5315-000 Penalty - Sewer 3,071 - - 5,000 - 5,000
5335-000 Water Impact Fees - - - - - -
Charges for Current Services 1,962,443 2,108,764 2,200,532 2,105,551 1,821,651 2,105,551 5505-000 Miscellaneous - - - - - -
5550-000 Prior Year Adjustment - - - - - -
Other Revenue - - - - - -
210 - SEWER TOTAL 2,148,137 2,133,163 2,055,332 2,165,551 1,922,864 2,288,250 5071-006 Federal Grant - Rogan HR 5394 - - - - - -
Revenue From Other Agencies - - - - - -
- - - - - -
5071-000 SB2 Planning Grant - - - - 50,000 135,000
Revenue From Other Agencies - - - - 50,000 135,000
213 - SB2 PLANNING GRANT TOTAL - - - - 50,000 135,000
5071-000 Rogan HR5294 Grant - - - - - 1,087,899
Revenue From Other Agencies - - - - - 1,087,899
213 - ROGAN HR5394 GRANT TOTAL - - - - - 1,087,899
4100-000 Street Light Assessments 890,461 892,903 898,450 900,000 887,149 900,000 Assessments & Special Taxes 890,461 892,903 898,450 900,000 887,149 900,000 4800-000 Interest Income 3,834 1,862 1,225 4,000 48 62
Use of Money & Property 3,834 1,862 1,225 4,000 48 62
5430-000 Damage to City Property - - - - - -
5501-012 Donations - Tree Dedications 11,727 13,536 20,437 5,000 447 5,000 Other Revenue 11,727 13,536 20,437 5,000 447 5,000
906,023 908,301 920,112 909,000 887,644 905,062
205 - LOCAL TRANSIT RETURN "A" TOTAL
207 - LOCAL TRANSIT RETURN "C" TOTAL
211 - CTC TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT TOTAL
215 - STREET LIGHT & LANDSCAPE TOTAL
206 - SLFRF FUND TOTAL
4 - 39

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA REVENUE DETAIL
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 37
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Acct Account Title 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 4800-000 Interest Income 2,398 822 564 1,000 2,695 3,433 Use of Money & Property 2,398 822 564 1,000 2,695 3,433 5250-000 PEG Fees 23,744 9,074 7,668 10,000 7,500 8,000 Revenue From Other Agencies 23,744 9,074 7,668 10,000 7,500 8,000 217 - PUBLIC, EDUC., & GOV'T. TOTAL 26,142 9,896 8,231 11,000 10,195 11,433 4800-000 Interest Income 3,285 1,697 393 1,500 2,207 2,811 4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 36 121 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 1,326 (1,224) - - - -
Use of Money & Property 4,646 594 393 1,500 2,207 2,811 5082-000 AB 2766 (SCAQMD) Fees 33,136 33,243 32,872 33,200 33,200 33,200 Revenue From Other Agencies 33,136 33,243 32,872 33,200 33,200 33,200 218 - CLEAN AIR ACT TOTAL 37,782 33,836 33,265 34,700 35,407 36,011 5071-009 CalRecycle SB1383 Local Asst. Grant - - - - - - Revenue From Other Agencies - - - - - -
219 - CALRECYCLE GRANT TOTAL - - - - - -
4800-000 Interest Income 85 20 1 500 - -
Use of Money & Property 85 20 1 500 - -
5412-000 Business Improvement Tax 53,771 67,454 56,619 60,000 60,000 60,000 5412-001 BIT - Filming Permits 26,615 30,086 32,760 26,000 31,125 31,875 Other Revenue 80,386 97,540 89,379 86,000 91,125 91,875 80,471 97,560 89,380 86,500 91,125 91,875
4800-000 Interest Income 966 299 195 - 894 1,139
Use of Money & Property 966 299 195 - 894 1,139
966 299 195 - 894 1,139
4875-000 Rental - MMV Parking 3,685 - - - - -
Use of Money & Property 3,685 - - - - -
3,685 - - - - -
4800-000 Interest Income 2,901 - 316 - - -
4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments - - - - - -
4880-000 Rental - Nursery Property - - - - - -
Use of Money & Property 2,901 - 316 - - -
Proceeds from Trust Fund - - - - - 196,600
Other Revenue - - - - - 196,600
227 - SA-CRA TOTAL 2,901 - 316 - - 196,600
4800-000 Interest Income 1,868 1,007 243 - 1,984 2,527
4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 24 68 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 894 (693) - - - -
4810-000 Rental - Arroyo House 8,350 9,513 10,538 10,428 9,600 10,200 4880-000 Rental - Nursery/Theater Property 12,000 11,000 25,380 35,100 36,700 36,700 Use of Money & Property 23,136 20,896 36,161 45,528 48,284 49,427 228 - HOUSING AUTHORITY TOTAL 23,136 20,896 36,161 45,528 48,284 49,427 4800-000 Interest Income 24,463 12,314 2,825 10,000 13,065 16,646 4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 304 842 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 11,354 (8,518) - - - -
Use of Money & Property 36,121 4,638 2,825 10,000 13,065 16,646 5038-000 State Gas Tax - 2103 180,969 170,923 203,534 252,804 231,452 267,195 5039-000 State Gas Tax - 2105 133,878 130,520 142,999 165,606 162,698 176,937 5040-000 State Gas Tax - 2106 80,727 77,965 86,420 96,966 96,911 105,129 5050-000 State Gas Tax - 2107 169,046 160,651 171,078 226,244 194,902 212,525 5060-000 State Gas Tax - 2107.5 6,000 21,964 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 5070-000 State Gas Tax - SB1 29,505 - - - - -
Revenue From Other Agencies 600,126 562,024 610,031 747,620 691,963 767,786 5535-000 Loader Fee - Athens - - - - - -
Other Revenue - - - - - -
230 - STATE GAS TAX TOTAL 636,247 566,662 612,856 757,620 705,028 784,432 220 - BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT TAX TOTAL
223 - GOLD LINE MITIGATION FUND TOTAL
226 - MISSION MERIDIAN PUBLIC GARAGE TOTAL
4 - 40

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA REVENUE DETAIL
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 38
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Acct Account Title 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 4800-000 Interest Income - - - - - -
Use of Money & Property - - - - - -
5084-006 County Park Bond - (Prop A) 33,014 - 17,649 400,000 - - 5084-008 County Park Bond - Maint 4,553 - - 70,000 61,500 118,000 Revenue From Other Agencies 37,567 - 17,649 470,000 61,500 118,000 232 - COUNTY PARK BOND TOTAL 37,567 - 17,649 470,000 61,500 118,000 4200-000 Sales & Use Tax 313,988 328,956 399,884 389,573 - 477,895 Sales Tax 313,988 328,956 399,884 389,573 - 477,895
4800-000 Interest Income 29,154 12,829 3,864 10,000 22,668 28,881 4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 364 854 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 13,581 (8,642) - - - -
Use of Money & Property 43,099 5,041 3,864 10,000 22,668 28,881 233 - MEASURE R TOTAL 357,087 333,996 403,748 399,573 22,668 506,776 5071-022 LACMTA Measure M MAT - - - 475,000 - 475,000
Revenue From Other Agencies - - - 475,000 - 475,000
234 - LACMTA MEASURE M MAT TOTAL - - - 475,000 - 475,000 4200-000 Sales & Use Tax 353,424 372,719 452,515 441,516 441,516 541,615 Sales Tax 353,424 372,719 452,515 441,516 441,516 541,615 4800-000 Interest Income 21,705 15,422 4,907 7,000 27,956 35,619 4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 300 1,096 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 11,190 (11,090) - - - - Use of Money & Property 33,195 5,428 4,907 7,000 27,956 35,619 236 - MEASURE M TOTAL 386,619 378,147 457,422 448,516 469,472 577,234 5070-000 State Gas Tax - SB1 454,560 474,939 523,795 585,093 584,802 666,557 Sales Tax 454,560 474,939 523,795 585,093 584,802 666,557 4800-000 Interest Income 23,442 8,169 2,748 7,000 19,631 25,012 4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 338 515 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 12,606 (5,210) - - - -
Use of Money & Property 36,386 3,474 2,748 7,000 19,631 25,012 490,946 478,413 526,543 592,093 604,433 691,569
5071-014 MSRC Grant - - 20,000 - - 246,925
Revenue From Other Agencies - - 20,000 - - 246,925
238 - MSRC GRANT TOTAL - - 20,000 - - 246,925
4800-000 Interest Income - - 439 - 4,491 5,722
Use of Money & Property - - 439 - 4,491 5,722
5071-003 Miscellaneous Grant - 273,748 253,983 251,179 254,324 252,000 Revenue From Other Agencies - 273,748 253,983 251,179 254,324 252,000 239 - MEASURE W TOTAL - 273,748 254,423 251,179 258,815 257,722 4200-000 Sales & Use Tax - - - 250,000 - 250,000
Sales Tax - - - 250,000 - 250,000
240 - MEASURE M MSP TOTAL - - - 250,000 - 250,000
5230-007 Homeless Outreach Service 12,394 24,056 43,473 - 18,000 18,500 Revenue From Other Agencies 12,394 24,056 43,473 - 18,000 18,500 241 - MEASURE H TOTAL 12,394 24,056 43,473 - 18,000 18,500 5071-003 Miscellaneous Grants - 204,264 - - - -
5071-007 Misc. Federal Grants - - 7,672 - 180,188 -
Revenue From Other Agencies - 204,264 7,672 - 180,188 - 242 - PROP C EXCHANGE TOTAL - 204,264 7,672 - 180,188 - 5071-003 LACMTA Measure R MIP - - - - - 475,000
Revenue From Other Agencies - - - - - 475,000
243 - MEASURE R - MSP TOTAL - - - - - 475,000
4800-000 Interest Income 0 75 - - - -
4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments - 8 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss - (83) - - - -
Use of Money & Property 0 0 - - - -
5035-000 SB 821 State Grants 48,280 - - 24,172 - 31,103 Revenue From Other Agencies 48,280 - - 24,172 - 31,103
48,280 0 - 24,172 - 31,103
237 - ROAD MAINT. & REHAB. ACCT. TOTAL
245 - BIKE & PEDESTRIAN PATHS TOTAL
4 - 41

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA REVENUE DETAIL
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 39
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Acct Account Title 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 5071-010 SGVCOG Grants - - - - - 45,000
Revenue From Other Agencies - - - - - 45,000
247 - SGVCOG GRANTS TOTAL - - - - - 45,000
5071-017 Mission St. Bikeway-BTA Grant - - - - - -
Revenue From Other Agencies - - - - - -
248 - BTA GRANTS TOTAL - - - - - -
5071-045 MSRC Grant - Golden Streets - - - - - -
5077-045 Metro Grant - Golden Streets - 332,000 - - - - Revenue From Other Agencies - 332,000 - - - -
249 - OPEN STREETS GRANT TOTAL - 332,000 - - - -
4800-000 Interest Income 12,354 6,617 1,759 - 8,537 10,877 4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 157 445 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 5,848 (4,508) - - - -
Use of Money & Property 18,360 2,554 1,759 - 8,537 10,877 5215-000 Growth Requirement - Resident 27,901 58,207 36,362 40,000 30,000 50,000 5216-000 Growth Requiremnt - Comm/ Indus 6,303 - 1,233 - 10,000 10,000 Charges for Current Services 34,205 58,207 37,595 40,000 40,000 60,000 255 - CAPITAL GROWTH TOTAL 52,564 60,761 39,354 40,000 48,537 70,877 5075-032 Sr. Program - D99575 - 42,708 18,383 26,281 - - 5075-049 ADA Sidewalk - - - 105,126 - 407,782
5075-055 CDBG-CV Grant - 53,000 20,321 105,126 - -
Revenue From Other Agencies - 95,708 38,704 236,533 - 407,782 5501-003 Donations - Senior Meals 30,719 20,579 24,354 28,000 - 19,599 5550-000 Prior Year Adjustment - - - - - -
Other Revenue 30,719 20,579 24,354 28,000 - 19,599
260 - CDBG TOTAL 30,719 116,287 63,058 264,533 - 427,381 4800-000 Interest Income 1,394 2,465 669 - 3,278 4,177
4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 38 181 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 1,408 (1,832) - - - -
Use of Money & Property 2,839 814 669 - 3,278 4,177
5075-001 Asset Forfeiture - DOJ 140,941 76,501 30,813 - - - Revenue From Other Agencies 140,941 76,501 30,813 - - - 270 - ASSET FORFEITURE TOTAL 143,780 77,315 31,482 - 3,278 4,177 4800-000 Interest Income 8,017 4,723 1,279 2,500 7,116 9,066 4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 110 298 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 4,105 (3,013) - - - -
Use of Money & Property 12,231 2,008 1,279 2,500 7,116 9,066 5005-000 State Grant - COPS (AB3229) 155,948 156,727 161,285 100,000 220,000 224,500 Revenue From Other Agencies 155,948 156,727 161,285 100,000 220,000 224,500 272 - POLICE GRANTS - STATE TOTAL 168,179 158,735 162,564 102,500 227,116 233,566 4800-000 Interest Income - - - - - -
4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments - - - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss - - - - - -
Use of Money & Property - - - - - -
- - - - - -
4800-000 Interest Income 67 - - - - -
Use of Money & Property 67 - - - - -
5036-000 Homeland Security Grant - - - 44,369 - -
Revenue From Other Agencies - - - 44,369 - -
67 - - 44,369 - -
4800-000 Interest Income 9,414 3,831 2,675 6,000 11,582 14,757 Use of Money & Property 9,414 3,831 2,675 6,000 11,582 14,757 5200-008 Park Impact Fees 187,167 164,527 103,108 160,000 100,000 160,000 Charges for Current Services 187,167 164,527 103,108 160,000 100,000 160,000 275 - PARK IMPACT FEE 187,167 164,527 103,108 160,000 111,582 174,757 273 - POLICE SUBVENTIONS - CLEEP TOTAL
274 - HOMELAND SECURITY GRANT TOTAL
4 - 42

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA REVENUE DETAIL
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 40
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Acct Account Title 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 4800-000 Interest Income 78 24 13 - 79 101
Use of Money & Property 78 24 13 - 79 101
5071-015 Historic Preservation Grant - - 40,000 - - -
Revenue From Other Agencies - - 40,000 - - -
78 24 40,013 - 79 101
5071-016 HSIP Grant - 2,090 163 554,365 69,397 307,862
Revenue From Other Agencies - 2,090 163 554,365 69,397 307,862 277 - HSIP GRANT TOTAL - 2,090 163 554,365 69,397 307,862 5071-001 Miscellaneous Grant - State - - - - - 4,000
Revenue From Other Agencies - - - - - 4,000
278 - HOUSING ELEMENT GRANT TOTAL - - - - - 4,000
5071-000 Miscellaneous Grant - State - - - - - 368,445
Revenue From Other Agencies - - - - - 368,445
281 - CA STATE LIBRARY BUILDING GRANT TOTAL - - - - - 368,445 4800-000 Interest Income 154 29 - 2,000 - -
4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 2 2 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 71 (18) - - - -
Use of Money & Property 227 13 - 2,000 - -
5275-001 Green Fees / Mini Golf 642,207 1,111,553 945,801 963,000 696,000 997,500 5275-002 Range 312,210 564,930 359,545 540,000 478,000 536,000 5275-003 Golf Shop 51,627 43,937 50,203 86,700 65,000 71,850 5275-004 Food 41,475 36,750 25,987 33,200 28,000 31,700 5275-005 Filming 27,364 9,964 8,767 9,700 12,000 12,600 Charges for Current Services 1,074,883 1,767,133 1,390,303 1,632,600 1,279,000 1,649,650 1,075,110 1,767,146 1,390,303 1,634,600 1,279,000 1,649,650 4800-000 Interest Income - - - - - -
4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments - - - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss - - - - - -
Use of Money & Property - - - - - -
- - - - - -
4800-000 Interest Income 9,453 6,969 - - - -
4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments 291 759 - - - -
4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss 10,839 (7,682) - - - -
Use of Money & Property 20,583 46 - - - -
20,583 46 - - - -
4800-000 Interest Income 29,375 26,394 77,718 70,000 333,291 607,678 4802-000 Gain / Loss on Investments - 2,824 (4,019) - - - 4805-000 Unrealized Gain / Loss (5,938) (28,576) (312,648) - - - Use of Money & Property 23,437 642 (238,949) 70,000 333,291 607,678 5320-000 Water Sales 10,816,540 11,508,051 12,102,176 12,572,000 9,296,044 12,572,000 5325-000 Standby Service Charge 26,097 129,569 67,649 74,800 42,389 74,800 5370-000 Penalty - Water/Rubbish 16,256 - - - - -
5327-000 Efficiency Fee 103,157 (9) - - - -
5330-000 Private Fire Service 47,294 42,444 37,491 46,795 31,332 30,000 5335-000 Water Impact Fees - - - - - -
Charges for Current Services 11,009,343 11,680,055 12,207,315 12,693,595 9,369,765 12,676,800 5360-000 Rubbish Clearing (10,122) - (8) - - -
5400-000 Sale of Property - - - - - -
5430-000 Damage to City Property - - - - - -
5505-000 Miscellaneous 596,727 - 9,302,561 - - -
5510-000 Misc Service Revenue 13,037 22,001 15,408 5,000 11,287 8,500 5525-000 Yard Waste - - - - - -
5530-000 Rubbish Billing Fees - - - - - -
5540-000 Service Fees 13,449 2,735 (81) 10,000 2,167 10,000 5550-000 Prior Year Adjustment - - - - - -
5560-000 Sewer Billing Fees 23,006 - - 30,000 - 30,000
Other Revenue 636,096 24,736 9,317,881 45,000 13,453 48,500 5071-007 Water Quality Authority - - - - - -
5071-019 Federal Grant - EPA 90,833 - - - - -
5071-020 Prop 68 Groundwater Remediation Grant - - - 2,200,000 - 2,200,000 5586-000 Loan Proceeds - - - - - -
Revenue From Other Agencies 90,833 - - 2,200,000 - 2,200,000 500 - WATER TOTAL 11,759,710 11,705,433 21,286,247 15,008,595 9,716,510 15,532,978 276 - HISTORIC PRESERVATION GRANT TOTAL
295-ARROYO SECO GOLF COURSE TOTAL
310 - SEWER CAPITAL PROJECTS TOTAL
327 - 2000 TAX ALLOCATION BONDS TOTAL
4 - 43

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA REVENUE DETAIL
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 41
4 - 44
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Acct Account Title 2019120 2020/21 2021122 2022123 2022123 2023124 13,883 4,100 2,714 13,467 17,158
13,883 4,100 2,714 13,467 17,158
105,232 215,966 203,565 225,000 148,817 225,000
105.232 215.966 203.565 225.000 148.817 225.000
Miscellane-ous Grants 30,604 40,000 40,000
30,604 40.000 40.000
503 - \/ATER EFFICIENCY FUND 119,115 250.670 206.280 265.000 162.284 282.158 : 4800-000 lnte-rest Income 2,793 197
2,799 197

2. 799 - 197 - - -
: 4800-000 Interest Income 23,940 29,030 18,063
Use of Monez & Proi1;er1~
t1•141;li •M:C•il;llllt·i 23.940 29.030 18.063 - - -

23.940 29.030 18.063
: 4800-000 lnte-rest Income 13,182 4,262 3,133 10,000 15,047 19,172 : 4802-000 Gain I Loss on lnve-s:tments
: 4805-000 Unrealized Gain I Loss
Use of Mone, & Propen,.._ _____________ __.. 13.182 .._.= ____ ...._. 4.262 ==-----==3.139 ..__ __ 10.000 15.047 19.172 5335-000 \.later Impact Fees (25,355) 121,331 66,383 180,000 57,051 180,000 5336-000 Sew er Impact Fees 17,252 5,112 6,975 10,000 3,604 10,000 Charges for Current Services (8,703) 126.443 73.358 190.000 60.655 190.000 5550-000 Prior Year Ad·ustment
Other Revenue
510- \/ATER & SE\IER IMPACT FEES TOTAL 4.479 130.705 76.496 200.000 75.702 209.172 : 4800-000
: 4802-000
Interest Income
Gain I Loss on ln"Jestments
1,842 7

1.842 7

1.842 - 7 - - -
: 4800-000 Interest Income 1,987 196,500 196,600
Use of Mone, & Pro en,__ _____________ 1~•cc9_,, 8""7 _______________________ 1"-'9'-'6'-'.-"5-"0"' 0 ___ .,_19=-6=c.,_,6'-"0'-"' 0 4000-000 Propert~_T_a_s_-_c_u_rr_e_n_tS_e_c_u_re_d _______ r-:-:1:-:3,..3=,7=0=0---r::c2:-:8::-5>':,,,84:-:3:------==1=72,c,=-c3::-8::-3-----,,::,13=-6--=,:-: 50:-:0--------------- Pro.e!_rtl!_ T aH 193,700 285,849 172,383 196,500
Fti6;@•li!i•1•1 t€filt l:~il•Jf·i 195,687 285,849 172,383 196,500 196,500 196,600 CITY\IIDE TOTAL 50 126,258 59,990 586 71,050,222 75 456,389 64,212 502 73,558,624

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA EXPENDITURE BY FUND
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 42
Expenditure Summary by Fund
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Fd Category/Fund 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 101 Wages & Benefits 19,457,515 22,108,355 25,216,188 24,289,564 24,177,311 27,102,511 101 Operations & Maintenance 6,677,254 5,875,483 7,495,907 12,678,219 11,177,997 12,270,055 101 Capital Outlay 95,613 39,802 13,005 305,400 155,900 258,000 101 Other Expenses - - - - - -
101 Transfer Out - - - - - -
101 Capital Projects - - - 795,000 170,000 -
101 - General Fund Total 26,230,381 28,023,640 32,725,100 38,068,183 35,681,208 39,630,567 103 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
103 Operations & Maintenance 2,941,009 2,167,385 4,276,759 2,596,111 4,686,289 3,566,267 103 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
103 Other Expenses - - - - - -
103 Transfer Out - - - - - -
103 Capital Projects - - - - - -
103 - Insurance Fund Total 2,941,009 2,167,385 4,276,759 2,596,111 4,686,289 3,566,267 104 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
104 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
104 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
104 Other Expenses - - - - - -
104 Transfer Out - - - - - -
104 Capital Projects 998,213 150,934 15,491 2,298,445 55,183 - 104 - Street Improvements
Program Total 998,213 150,934 15,491 2,298,445 55,183 - 105 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
105 Operations & Maintenance (12,802) - - 143,000 120,000 531,502 105 Capital Outlay 42,645 77,691 942 120,000 - -
105 Other Expenses - - - - - -
105 Transfer Out - - - - - -
105 Capital Projects 458 493,994 102,245 1,011,000 111,853 - 105 - Facilities & Equip.

Replacement Total 30,301 571,685 103,187 1,274,000 231,853 531,502 108 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
108 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
108 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
108 Other Expenses - - - - - -
108 Transfer Out - - - - - -
108 Capital Projects - - - 338,483 100,000 -
108 - SR110 General Fund
Reserve Total - - - 338,483 100,000 -
110 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
110 Operations & Maintenance - - - 1,000 1,000 1,000
110 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
110 Other Expenses - - - - - -
110 Transfer Out - - - - - -
110 Capital Projects - - - - - -
110 - OPEB Trust Fund Total - - - 1,000 1,000 1,000
205 Wages & Benefits 236,150 187,334 220,062 481,713 377,255 594,528 205 Operations & Maintenance 107,328 63,453 57,560 135,741 124,000 301,041 205 Capital Outlay - 64,500 - 176,600 169,999 -
205 Other Expenses - - - - - -
205 Transfer Out - - - - - -
205 Capital Projects - - - - 24,995 -
205 - Prop "A" Total 343,478 315,286 277,622 794,054 696,249 895,569 4 - 45

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA EXPENDITURE BY FUND
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 43
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Fd Category/Fund 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 206 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
206 Operations & Maintenance - - - 5,547,392 2,277,911 3,498,717 206 Capital Outlay - - - 282,608 282,608 -
206 Other Expenses - - - - - -
206 Transfer Out - - - - - -
206 Capital Projects - - - - - -
206 - SLFRF Fund Total - - - 5,830,000 2,560,519 3,498,717 207 Wages & Benefits 177,463 200,295 157,583 201,462 152,849 2,866 207 Operations & Maintenance 76,298 82,684 116,730 106,323 87,400 - 207 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
207 Other Expenses - - - - - -
207 Transfer Out - - - - - -
207 Capital Projects - 11,460 21,090 322,450 36,550 -
207 - Prop "C" Total 253,761 294,439 295,403 630,235 276,799 2,866 208 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
208 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
208 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
208 Other Expenses - - - - - -
208 Transfer Out - - - - - -
208 Capital Projects 223,956 125,801 18,100 - - -
208 - TEA/Metro Total 223,956 125,801 18,100 - - -
210 Wages & Benefits 455,309 424,165 420,465 527,144 481,228 586,758 210 Operations & Maintenance 146,680 74,703 410,511 664,222 354,922 653,922 210 Capital Outlay 18,806 77,123 - - - -
210 Other Expenses 354,601 46,183 242,092 - - -
210 Transfer Out - - - - - -
210 Capital Projects 17,370 473,091 - 570,000 - -
210 - Sewer Total 992,767 1,095,266 1,073,068 1,761,366 836,150 1,240,680 213 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
213 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
213 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
213 Other Expenses - - - - - -
213 Transfer Out - - - - - -
213 Capital Projects - - - 160,000 50,000 -
213 - SB2 Planning Grant Total - - - 160,000 50,000 -
214 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
214 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
214 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
214 Other Expenses - - - - - -
214 Transfer Out - - - - - -
214 Capital Projects - 3,211 - - - -
214 - Rogan HR5394 Grant
Total - 3,211 - - - -
215 Wages & Benefits 163,405 199,179 207,461 258,831 157,933 237,782 215 Operations & Maintenance 669,453 682,020 970,666 1,412,450 1,140,350 1,447,900 215 Capital Outlay - - 15,923 30,000 30,000 30,000
215 Other Expenses - - - - - -
215 Transfer Out - - - - - -
215 Capital Projects 50,000 50,000 75,000 - - -
215 - Street Light & Landscape
Total 882,858 931,199 1,269,049 1,701,281 1,328,283 1,715,682 4 - 46

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA EXPENDITURE BY FUND
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 44
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Fd Category/Fund 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 218 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
218 Operations & Maintenance 73 - - - - -
218 Capital Outlay 55,038 35,924 - - - -
218 Other Expenses - - - - - -
218 Transfer Out - - - - - -
218 Capital Projects - - - - - -
218 - Clean Air Act Total 55,111 35,924 - - - -
219 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
219 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
219 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
219 Other Expenses - - - - - -
219 Transfer Out - - - - - -
219 Capital Projects - - - - - -
219 - CalRecycle Local Asst.

Grant Total - - - - - -
220 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
220 Operations & Maintenance 109,500 107,000 105,500 112,000 112,000 110,500 220 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
220 Other Expenses - - - - - -
220 Transfer Out - - - - - -
220 Capital Projects - - - - - -
220 - Business Improvement
Tax Total 109,500 107,000 105,500 112,000 112,000 110,500 226 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
226 Operations & Maintenance 8,987 9,650 9,052 15,000 9,100 15,000 226 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
226 Other Expenses - - - - - -
226 Transfer Out - - - - - -
226 Capital Projects - - - - - -
226 - Mission Meridian Public
Garage Total 8,987 9,650 9,052 15,000 9,100 15,000
227 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
227 Operations & Maintenance 55,222 51,743 44,493 196,500 200,193 200,600 227 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
227 Other Expenses - - - - - -
227 Transfer Out - - - - - -
227 Capital Projects - - - - - -
227 - Successor Agency to CRA
Total 55,222 51,743 44,493 196,500 200,193 200,600
228 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
228 Operations & Maintenance 15,199 10,361 373 11,700 11,700 16,200 228 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
228 Other Expenses - - - - - -
228 Transfer Out - - - - - -
228 Capital Projects - - - - - -
228 - Housing Authority Total 15,199 10,361 373 11,700 11,700 16,200 4 - 47

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA EXPENDITURE BY FUND
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 45
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Fd Category/Fund 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 230 Wages & Benefits 443,708 469,132 497,374 679,918 603,075 925,061 230 Operations & Maintenance 128,122 88,920 115,888 362,500 233,100 358,700 230 Capital Outlay - 25,185 - 65,000 - 65,000
230 Other Expenses - - - - - -
230 Transfer Out - - - - - -
230 Capital Projects - - - 200,000 - -
230 - State Gas Tax Total 571,830 583,237 613,262 1,307,418 836,175 1,348,761 232 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
232 Operations & Maintenance 42,632 27,957 54,329 106,000 61,500 118,000 232 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
232 Other Expenses - - - - - -
232 Transfer Out - - - - - -
232 Capital Projects - - - - - -
232 - County Park Bond Total 42,632 27,957 54,329 106,000 61,500 118,000 233 Wages & Benefits - - - 71,376 44,927 78,472
233 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - 50,000
233 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
233 Other Expenses - - - - - -
233 Transfer Out - - - - - -
233 Capital Projects 270,116 343,453 31,773 300,000 - - 233 - Measure R Total 270,116 343,453 31,773 371,376 44,927 128,472 234 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
234 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
234 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
234 Other Expenses - - - - - -
234 Transfer Out - - - - - -
234 Capital Projects - - - 475,000 - -
234 - LACMTA Measure M MAT
Total - - - 475,000 - -
236 Wages & Benefits - - - 71,376 44,927 78,472
236 Operations & Maintenance - - - 100,000 35,000 150,000 236 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
236 Other Expenses - - - - - -
236 Transfer Out - - - - - -
236 Capital Projects 86,000 - - 250,000 72,435 -
236 - Measure M Total 86,000 - - 421,376 152,362 228,472 237 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
237 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
237 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
237 Other Expenses - - - - - -
237 Transfer Out - - - - - -
237 Capital Projects 462,291 451,157 - 585,093 - -
237 - Road Maint. & Rehab.

Acct. Total 462,291 451,157 - 585,093 - -
238 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
238 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
238 Capital Outlay 20,000 - - - - -
238 Other Expenses - - - - - -
238 Transfer Out - - - - - -
238 Capital Projects 121,567 1,151 - - 4,550 -
238 - MSRC Grant Total 141,567 1,151 - - 4,550 -
4 - 48

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA EXPENDITURE BY FUND
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 46
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Fd Category/Fund 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 239 Wages & Benefits 35,811 26,481 21,886 35,270 30,608 57,138 239 Operations & Maintenance 51,641 16,074 72,809 255,000 255,000 256,000 239 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
239 Other Expenses - - - - - -
239 Transfer Out - - - - - -
239 Capital Projects 21,335 - - 5,000 - -
239 - Measure W Total 108,787 42,555 94,695 295,270 285,608 313,138 240 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
240 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
240 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
240 Other Expenses - - - - - -
240 Transfer Out - - - - - -
240 Capital Projects - - - 250,000 - -
240 - Measure M MSP Total - - - 250,000 - -
241 Wages & Benefits 77,957 38,582 50,982 57,083 - -
241 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
241 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
241 Other Expenses - - - - - -
241 Transfer Out - - - - - -
241 Capital Projects - - - - - -
241 - Measure H Total 77,957 38,582 50,982 57,083 - -
242 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
242 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
242 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
242 Other Expenses - - - - - -
242 Transfer Out - - - - - -
242 Capital Projects 148,350 44,618 8,076 - 17,093 -
242 - Prop C Exchange Funds
Total 148,350 44,618 8,076 - 17,093 -
243 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
243 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
243 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
243 Other Expenses - - - - - -
243 Transfer Out - - - - - -
243 Capital Projects - - - - - -
243 - LACMTA Measure M MAT
Total - - - - - -
245 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
245 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
245 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
245 Other Expenses - - - - - -
245 Transfer Out - - - - - -
245 Capital Projects 38,041 10,252 - 25,000 - -
245 - Bike & Pedestrian Paths
Total 38,041 10,252 - 25,000 - -
4 - 49

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA EXPENDITURE BY FUND
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 47
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Fd Category/Fund 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 247 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
247 Operations & Maintenance - - - 50,000 - 45,000
247 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
247 Other Expenses - - - - - -
247 Transfer Out - - - - - -
247 Capital Projects - - - - - -
247 - SGVCOG Grant Total - - - 50,000 - 45,000
248 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
248 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
248 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
248 Other Expenses - - - - - -
248 Transfer Out - - - - - -
248 Capital Projects 163,178 7,830 - - - -
248 - BTA Grants Total 163,178 7,830 - - - -
249 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
249 Operations & Maintenance - 10,745 301,052 - - -
249 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
249 Other Expenses - - - - - -
249 Transfer Out - - - - - -
249 Capital Projects - - - - - -
249 - Golden Streets Grant
Total - 10,745 301,052 - - -
255 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
255 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
255 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
255 Other Expenses - - - - - -
255 Transfer Out - - - - - -
255 Capital Projects - - - 450,000 100,000 -
255 - Capital Growth Total - - - 450,000 100,000 -
260 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
260 Operations & Maintenance 31,026 62,980 65,950 26,281 - 19,599 260 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
260 Other Expenses - - - - - -
260 Transfer Out - - - - - -
260 Capital Projects - - - 321,723 - -
260 - CDBG Total 31,026 62,980 65,950 348,004 - 19,599
270 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
270 Operations & Maintenance - - 20,100 10,000 10,000 10,000 270 Capital Outlay - - - 50,000 50,000 50,000
270 Other Expenses - - - - - -
270 Transfer Out - - - - - -
270 Capital Projects - - - - - -
270 - Asset Forfeiture Total - - 20,100 60,000 60,000 60,000 4 - 50

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA EXPENDITURE BY FUND
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 48
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Fd Category/Fund 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 272 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
272 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
272 Capital Outlay 24,100 24,478 136,767 130,000 130,000 178,011 272 Other Expenses - - - - - -
272 Transfer Out - - - - - -
272 Capital Projects - - - - - -
272 - Police Grants - State
(COPS) Total 24,100 24,478 136,767 130,000 130,000 178,011 273 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
273 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
273 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
273 Other Expenses - - - - - -
273 Transfer Out - - - - - -
273 Capital Projects - - - - - -
273 - Police Subventions -
CLEEP Total - - - - - -
274 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
274 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
274 Capital Outlay - - 125,360 1,240 - -
274 Other Expenses - - - - - -
274 Transfer Out - - - - - -
274 Capital Projects - - - - - -
274 - Homeland Security Grant
Total - - 125,360 1,240 - -
275 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
275 Operations & Maintenance - 18,050 15,035 - - -
275 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
275 Other Expenses - - - - - -
275 Transfer Out - - - - - -
275 Capital Projects - - - 876,255 51,255 -
275 - Park Impact Fees Total - 18,050 15,035 876,255 51,255 - 277 Wages & Benefits 270 - - - - -
277 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
277 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
277 Other Expenses - - - - - -
277 Transfer Out - - - - - -
277 Capital Projects - - - 554,365 372,256 -
277 - HSIP Grant Total 270 - - 554,365 372,256 -
278 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
278 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
278 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
278 Other Expenses - - - - - -
278 Transfer Out - - - - - -
278 Capital Projects - - - - - -
278 - Housing Element Grant
Total - - - - - -
4 - 51

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA EXPENDITURE BY FUND
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 49
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Fd Category/Fund 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 295 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
295 Operations & Maintenance 976,192 1,077,602 1,259,720 1,298,815 1,317,475 1,245,087 295 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
295 Other Expenses 54,372 53,791 50,784 - - -
295 Transfer Out - - - - - -
295 Capital Projects - - - 750,000 19,407 -
295 - Arroyo Seco Golf Course
Total 1,030,564 1,131,393 1,310,504 2,048,815 1,336,882 1,245,087 310 Wages & Benefits - 0 - - - -
310 Operations & Maintenance 196,987 184,839 183,383 425,808 425,808 425,808 310 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
310 Other Expenses - - - - - -
310 Transfer Out - - - - - -
310 Capital Projects - - - - - -
310 - Sewer Capital Projects
Total 196,987 184,839 183,383 425,808 425,808 425,808
327 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
327 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
327 Other Expenses - - - - - -
327 Transfer Out - - - - - -
327 Capital Projects - - - - - -
327 - 2000 Tax Allocation Bonds
Total - - - - - -
400 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
400 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
400 Other Expenses - - - - - -
400 Transfer Out - - - - - -
400 Capital Projects - - - - - 16,128,868
400 - Capital Improvement
Projects Fund - - - - - 16,128,868
500 Wages & Benefits 1,649,908 1,710,650 1,905,784 2,079,506 1,926,984 2,219,369 500 Operations & Maintenance 3,046,082 3,293,633 3,787,602 5,982,111 5,051,471 6,874,551 500 Capital Outlay 56,579 32,708 18,379 460,000 - 720,000 500 Other Expenses 1,915,651 999,203 1,840,220 - - -
500 Transfer Out - - - - - -
500 Capital Projects 188,163 10,061 (49,624) 2,958,000 55,000 - 500 - Water Total 6,856,382 6,046,255 7,502,362 11,479,617 7,033,455 9,813,920 502 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
502 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
502 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
502 Other Expenses - - - - - -
502 Transfer Out - - - - - -
502 Capital Projects - - - - - -
502 - Water Rate Stabilization
Fund Total - - - - - -
4 - 52

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA EXPENDITURE BY FUND
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 50
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Fd Category/Fund 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 503 Wages & Benefits 107,314 102,376 135,019 51,196 98,768 165,242 503 Operations & Maintenance 20,909 25,678 24,737 159,200 75,425 159,200 503 Capital Outlay - - - - - 40,000
503 Other Expenses - - - - - -
503 Transfer Out - - - - - -
503 Capital Projects 31,453 50,839 - 120,000 - -
503 - Water Efficiency Fund
Total 159,676 178,893 159,756 330,396 174,193 364,442
505 Operations & Maintenance 1,622,075 1,595,899 1,571,200 2,501,050 2,500,300 2,501,050 505 Transfer Out - - - - - -
505 - 2016 Water Revenue
Bonds Total 1,622,075 1,595,899 1,571,200 2,501,050 2,500,300 2,501,050 506 Operations & Maintenance 33,229 104,607 101,869 264,966 264,966 264,966 506 Transfer Out - - - - - -
505 - 2016 Water Revenue
Bonds Total 33,229 104,607 101,869 264,966 264,966 264,966 510 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
510 Operations & Maintenance - - - - - -
510 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
510 Other Expenses - - - - - -
510 Transfer Out - - - - - -
510 Capital Projects - - - - - -
510 - Water & Sewer Impact
Fees Total - - - - - -
550 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
550 Operations & Maintenance 145,642 129,376 117,376 531,676 531,676 529,276 550 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
550 Other Expenses - - - - - -
550 Transfer Out - - - - - -
550 Capital Projects - - - - - -
550 - Public Financing Authority
Total 145,642 129,376 117,376 531,676 531,676 529,276
927 Wages & Benefits - - - - - -
927 Operations & Maintenance - - - - 196,500 196,600
927 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
927 Other Expenses - - - - - -
927 Transfer Out - - - - - -
927 Capital Projects - - - - - -
927 - Redev. Oblig. Retirement
Total - - - - 196,500 196,600
CITYWIDE TOTAL 45,351,443 44,931,828 52,677,028 79,734,166 61,416,031 85,334,618 4 - 53

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA REVENUE SUMMARY
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 51
General Fund Revenue Summary
4 - 54
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Revenue Cate o 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 Property Taxes 15,491,557 16,773,318 17,906,070 18,140,368 18,537,792 19,700,384 Assessments & Special Taxes 342,237 347,931 364,223 360,000 360,000 375,149 Sales Taxes 2,864,474 5,132,645 6,096,613 6,346,000 6,311 ,321 6,478,033 Utility Users Taxes 3,445,454 3,738,531 3,875,268 4,299,703 4,063,103 4,352,462 Franchise Fees 950,130 1,200,408 1,289,532 1,217,000 1,217,000 1,271,477 License & Permits 861,697 808,280 814,081 903,280 764,777 796,200 Fines & Forfeitures 264,601 143,449 52,291 140,000 56,500 58,000 Use of Money & Property 989,984 4,788,970 (495,381) 508,500 894,109 1,345,014 other Agencies 64,239 955,205 179,525 6,489,295 235,634 475,500 Current Services 2,985,842 3,079,621 3,836,129 3,877,200 3,624,263 4,141,520 All Other Revenues 74,367 183,717 250,501 84,500 40,743 46,508 Reimbursement From other Funds 483 384 483 384 483 384 483 384 483 384 483 384 Total GF Revenues 2818171965 3716351460 3416521238 4218491230 3615881626 3915231631

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA EXPENDITURE SUMMARY
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 52
General Fund Expenditure Summary
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Department/Program Exp 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 City Council 45,401 35,890 45,446 49,194 71,388 81,903
City Manager 1,512,868 1,577,656 1,815,368 1,201,339 1,116,593 1,274,785 Management Services
Management Services - - 6,615 480,230 415,995 496,105
City Clerk 113,311 115,512 - 470,283 389,517 447,319
Elections 185,743 76,843 93,242 166,000 110,809 63,900
Human Resources 324,830 350,761 - 898,923 905,818 915,553 Transportation Planning 12,835 287 90 - - -
Legal Services 492,566 607,285 572,032 895,140 895,140 500,000 Information Systems 573,881 541,110 - 833,200 889,657 1,151,511 Finance
Finance 755,116 871,011 1,040,325 1,203,880 1,144,568 1,050,473 City Treasurer 9,211 8,444 9,993 8,752 8,752 9,239
Non-Dept/Overhead 1,060,512 996,366 2,264,416 2,694,140 2,669,105 2,539,444 Police 9,171,740 10,400,998 11,384,907 11,032,589 11,020,087 11,512,034 Fire
Fire 5,435,419 6,315,749 7,716,685 6,670,340 7,198,725 7,300,602 Emergency Preparedness 91,913 31,932 46,904 55,000 51,000 55,000 Public Works - - - - - -
Admin & Engineering 586,534 618,493 572,717 924,621 526,444 1,243,249 Environmental Services 54 653 55,009 304,980 140,241 207,480 Park Maintenance 497,591 476,793 581,680 1,086,294 504,755 975,901 Facilities Maintenance 799,206 826,985 901,702 1,171,959 907,533 1,344,778 Community Development 1,876,257 1,819,769 2,428,641 3,622,199 3,047,629 4,152,225 Library 1,525,685 1,608,369 1,839,131 1,932,290 1,866,927 2,211,234 Community Services
Senior Services 330,809 202,374 237,957 431,985 390,480 540,765 Community Services 172,667 217,223 276,302 356,440 421,305 466,119 Recreation and Youth Services 656,232 323,135 835,939 783,405 818,737 1,090,949 Capital Projects - - - - 170,000 -
Total GF Expenditures 26,230,381 28,023,640 32,725,100 37,273,183 35,681,208 39,630,567 4 - 55

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 53
Capital Improvement Projects
FY 2022-23 FY 2022-23 FY 2022-23 FY 2023-24 FY 2023-24
Project No. Project Name Budget Projected Carryovers Additions Budget General Building & Facilities
9206 825 Mission Yard Security Gate 160,000 - 160,000 - 160,000 9224 Citywide Facility Repair 150,000 33,729 116,271 250,000 366,271 9226 FD Front Bay Door Replacement 80,000 - 80,000 - 80,000 9229 PD Locker/Restroom Improvement 180,000 - 180,000 10,000 190,000 9230 PD Improvements 16,000 - 16,000 1,000 17,000
9231 PD Briefing Room Update 18,000 - 18,000 1,000 19,000 9232 PD1st Floor Inter Paint/Drywal 12,000 - 12,000 1,000 13,000 9242 War Memorial Audio/Vis. Equipm 50,000 - 50,000 (50,000) - 9269 War Memorial HVAC Repairs 25,000 - 25,000 - 25,000 9273 Rec. Facilities Key System 75,000 - 75,000 (75,000) - 9404 Citywide Facilities Assessment/ Security Enhancement 200,000 73,124 126,876 100,000 226,876 New FD Diesel Exhaust System Replacement - - - 50,000 50,000 New Senior Center Flooring - - - 60,000 60,000
Subtotal General Building & Facilities 966,000 106,853 859,147 348,000 1,207,147 Housing Authority
New 308 San Pascual Residence Improvements - - - 30,000 30,000 Subtotal Housing Authority - - - 30,000 30,000
Information Technology
9149 VoiP Phone System Installation 200,000 20,000 180,000 - 180,000 9186 CD Permit Management Software 310,000 50,000 260,000 - 260,000 9187 CD Record Scan & Doc Managmnt 45,000 - 45,000 (45,000) - 9407 CMMS/Work Order System/GIS 120,000 5,000 115,000 - 115,000 New Agenda Management System - - - 50,000 50,000
New City Website System & Design - - - 60,000 60,000
Subtotal Information Technology 675,000 75,000 600,000 65,000 665,000 Library
9301 Library HVAC Repairs 25,000 5,000 20,000 234,100 254,100 9322 Library ADA Ramp, Light. & Imp 20,000 - 20,000 - 20,000 9405 Library Security Camera System 20,000 - 20,000 - 20,000 New Library Facility Improvements - - 100,514 100,514
New Library Roof - - 291,781 291,781
New Library Master Plan - - - -
Subtotal Library 65,000 5,000 60,000 626,395 686,395
Community Services & Parks
9033 Grevalia&Berkshire Pocket Park 876,255 51,255 825,000 - 825,000 9157 Golf Course Netting Replacemen 750,000 19,407 730,593 - 730,593 9263 Pocket Park Construction - - - - -
New Parks Master Plan - - - 150,000 150,000
New Snake Trail Improvements - - - 50,000 50,000
Subtotal Community Services & Parks 1,626,255 70,662 1,555,593 200,000 1,755,593 Sewer
9408 Sewer Sys. Rep., Rehab&Replace 500,000 25,000 475,000 - 475,000 Subtotal Sewer 500,000 25,000 475,000 - 475,000
Stormwater
9364 Rio Hondo LRS Alham, Wash Trtm 5,000 - 5,000 - 5,000 New Huntington Drive Green Street - - - 250,000 250,000 New City Hall Stormwater Project 500,000 - 500,000 - 500,000 New Arroyo Seco San Rafael & San Pascual Projects - - - 437,500 437,500 Subtotal Stormwater 505,000 - 505,000 687,500 1,192,500 Streets
9203 Street Repairs - 2023 3,958,538 72,435 3,886,103 - 3,886,103 9264 ADA Sidewalk Repairs 321,723 25,000 296,723 111,059 407,782 Subtotal Streets 4,280,261 97,435 4,182,826 111,059 4,293,885 Sustainability
9188 City/Civic EV Charging System 350,000 100,000 250,000 102,700 352,700 9189 Arroyo Park EV Charging System 50,000 50,000 - - - 9402 EV Charging Station (MSRC) 13,650 13,650 - - -
9410 Climate Action Plan 120,000 - 120,000 - 120,000
Subtotal Sustainability 533,650 163,650 370,000 102,700 472,700 4 - 56

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 54
FY 2022-23 FY 2022-23 FY 2022-23 FY 2023-24 FY 2023-24
Project No. Project Name Budget Projected Carryovers Additions Budget Transportation & Traffic
9102 Fremont/Huntington MAT Project 475,000 - 475,000 - 475,000 9161 North-South Corridor ITS Dploy 788,483 200,000 588,483 640,365 1,228,848 9192 Fair Oaks Traffic Signal Const 482,568 469,526 13,042 - 13,042 9278 Fair Oaks ITS Project - - - - -
9290 Grevelia/Fair Oaks Int. Imprv 50,000 - 50,000 - 50,000 9350 Pedestrian Crossing Devices 200,000 - 200,000 - 200,000 9351 Rect. Rapid Flashing Beacons 260,915 27,450 233,465 31,497 264,962 New Fremont/Huntington MIP Project - - - 475,000 475,000 Subtotal Transportation & Traffic 2,256,966 696,976 1,559,990 1,146,862 2,706,852 Water
9300 Ann. Water Main Repairs 2,000,000 - 2,000,000 - 2,000,000 9348 Water Facil. Site Improvements 88,000 - 88,000 - 88,000 9349 Advanced Metering Infr. (AMI) 150,000 - 150,000 - 150,000 9409 Westside Reservoir 550,000 25,000 525,000 - 525,000 9411 Elevated Tanks-Raymond/Bilikie 120,000 - 120,000 - 120,000 Subtotal Water 2,908,000 25,000 2,883,000 - 2,883,000
Totals $ 14,316,132 $ 1,265,576 $ 13,050,556 $ 3,317,516 $ 16,368,072 4 - 57

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET| FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 55
4 - 58
t
City of South Pasadena t) Capital Improvement Projects
I General Building & Facilit ies FY 23-- 24 Total: SL207,147 s 859,147 : $ 348,000 Total 5-Year S 3,432,147 1 5140 9206 825 Mi ssion Yard Security Gat es I 160,000 160,000 : 160,000 5139 9224 Citywi de Faci lit i es Repairs 150,000 33,729 116,271 250,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,366,271 5178 9226 FD Fire St at ion Front Bay Apparatus Door Re 80,000 80,000 80,000 5175 9229 PD Locker Room Remod el 180,000 180,000 10,000 190,000 ,-
5174 9230 PD Front Counter/Lobby Remodel I 16,000 16,000 1,000 - 17,000 ,-5176 9231 PD Bri efi ng/Training Room Updat e 18,000 - 18,000 1,000 - 19,000 5177 9232 PD lst Floor Interior Pai nt, Drywall, & Millw c 12,000 12,000 1,000 B ,000 5159 9242 War Memorial Soun d Syst em 50,000 - 50,000 (50,000) 50,000 - 50,000 5141 9269 War Memorial HVAC Repairs I 2.5,000 - 25,000 25,000 5160 9273 Recreat io n Facilit ies Key Syst em 75,000 75,000 (75,000) 75,000 75,000 5138 9404 Citywi de Faci lit i es Assessment/ Security Ent 200,000 73,124 126,876 100,000 100,000 326,876 TBD New FD Di esel Exhaust System Replacement 50,000 50,000 TBD New Seni or Center Floori ng I : 60,000 60,000 -
966,000 106,853 859,147 348,000 725,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 3,432,147 I Hou.sing Authority FY 23--24 Total: $30,000 s - ;S 30,000 Total 5-Year S 150.000 I TBD New 308 San Pascu al Residence Improvements 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 150,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 150,000
I Informat ion Technology FY 23--24 Total: $665,000 s 600,000 : S 65,000 Total 5-Yea.r S 940.000 I 5144 9149 Voice- over Intern et Prot ocol (VoIP) Phone/ No 200,000 20,000 180,000 250,000 430,000 5142 9186 CD Permit Management Software 310,000 50,000 260,000 260,000 5143 9187 CD Digit al Records Scanning & Docu ment Me 45,000 45,000 (45,000) - + 5137 9407 Computerized Mai ntenance Mgmt Syst em (C 120,000 5,000 115,000 ,- 115,000 5146 New Ag enda Management System 50,000 - 50,000 TBD New City Websit e Syst em & Design t - - 60,000 60,000 5145 Future Cust omer Care Syst em 25,000 25,000 675,000 75,.000 600,.000 65,000 275,000 940,000

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET| FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 56
4 - 59
City of South Pasadena Capital Improvement Projects
5148 9301 Library HVAC Repa irs 25,000 5,000 20,000 234, 100 I 254, 100 5150 - bie,a~ II\ ~!\Cl BF CAil ~.,eR 's FlBBFR r
5149 9322 Library North.east Ramp Lighting and lmp,rovE 20,000 20,000 53,0 55 73,0 55 5147 9321 Library Se.cur ityCam.er a Sy stem 20,000 20,000 r 20,000 TSO New Li brary Facility lmproverne-nts 100, 514 100, 514 5151 - b: iBrary Rep air and JHater13resf G·l=l il 8ren1'.: ReE r
TSO New Li bra ry Roof 291,781 291,781
5152 Future Library Rad io Fre.quency ldentificat io11 (RFIDj r
160,000 160,000
5153 Future Library Ex:terio r Pa r k Lighting 169,000 169,000 5154 Future Li brary Pu'b lic Restrooms E>c:pansion/ RemDde + 4 50 ,000 4 50,000 5155 Future Library Emer gency Bad cup & St or age System 500,000 500,000 TSO Future Library M ast er Plan I TSO Future Library Fir-e Alarm Contro l System r 64,0 33 r t 64,0 33 TSO Future Libr ary Electric al Distribut ion E,qu ipm ent 38,115 38,11 5 TSO Future Library Se.cur ity & Saf ety lm,pr ov em e-nts 1.20, 698 120,69•8 TSO Future Library Ex:ter io r Pa int and Prot-e,ctiv e Coat ing, 74,960 7 4,960 TSO Future Library Ch ild re-n'sAm,ph ith.e-at re W ing 2,800,000 2,800,000 65,.000 5,000 626,3:95 435; 901 243,:960 450,000 3;300,.000 5, 116,.256 I CommunitySen,ic,es ,& Parks FY23-24 Total: $1,7 55,593 s 1,55.5,593 : S 200,000 Total 5-Year S 5,730,,%7 1 5157 9033 Grevali a ,& Be-ck.shire Pocket Pa rk.s 876,2 55 51,255 82 5,000 - - - - - 825,000 - 9263 i>eiel,et F'a rl, CeRstF~ Et i BR - - - - - - - - - + r
5153 9157 G·olfCou r.se/ Driving Range Netting Replac e.mt 7 50,000 19,407 7 30, 593 - - - - - 7 30, 593 5161 TSO Pa rk.s M aste,r Plan - - - 150 ,000 - - - - 150,000 r 5162 TSO Snake Trail lmprovern ents - - - 50 ,000 300,000 - - - 350,000 TSO Future Arroyo Se-co M aster Plan - - - - - - - - - + : r 5163 Future Garfield Pa rk Fitness Eq uipm ent - - - - 100,000 - - - 100,000 5164 Future Arroyo Pa rk Fit ness Equ ipme,nt - - - - 100,000 - - - 100,000 + 5165 Future Edd ie Pa rk Restroom s - - - - 100,000 - - - 100,000 + TSO Future Edd ie, Pa rk Ho us e lm,provem e,nts - - - - 156, 1:94 156,194 156, 1:94 156, 1.94 624,774 5166 Future OrangeGrove Ga2el>o - - - - - 150 ,000 - - 150,000 5167 Future Orange Grove· Pa rk Playground Re,placem en t - - - - - 200,000 - - I 200,000 5168 Future Garfie-ld Pa rk Playground Replac,em.e-nt - - - - - 200,000 150 ,000 - 350,000 : + 5169 Future Arroyo W alking Trail - - - - - 200,000 - 200,000 5170 Future Garfi eld Ga,el>o - - - - - 200,000 - 200,000 ' : + r 5171 Future Eddie-P,ark Playgro und Replacem en t - - - - - 150 ,000 - 150,000 5172 Future Arroyo Pa rkSports Com,plex Renovat io n,s - - - - - - - 7 50 ,000 7 50,000 517 3 Future Or ange Grove Sports Com.pl ex Ren ov at io n,s - - - - - - - 750,000 750,000 1,626,255 70,,662 1,55.5,593 200,000 75·6, 1:94 706,1.94 8 56, 1:94 1,,65 6,1.94 5,730,3·67

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 57
475,000 $ - $ Total 5-Year 3,997,500 $
5179 9408 Sewer System Repair, Rehabilitation, & Replcm 500,000 25,000 475,000 - 810,000 878,000 820,000 1,014,500 3,997,500 500,000 25,000 475,000 - 810,000 878,000 820,000 1,014,500 3,997,500 505,000 $ 687,500 $ Total 5-Year 49,663,586 $
5181 9364 Rio Hondo Load Redctn (LRS) Alhambra Wsh Tr 5,000 - 5,000 - 50,000 - - - 55,000 5182 TBD Huntington Drive Green Street - - - 250,000 595,000 5,570,500 5,570,500 - 11,986,000 TBD New City Hall Stormwater Project 500,000 - 500,000 - - - - - 500,000 5180 New Arroyo Seco San Rafael & San Pascual Projects - - - 437,500 - - - - 437,500 5183 Future Lower Arroyo Seco Projects - - - - 2,305,000 8,723,362 8,723,362 14,433,362 34,185,086 5184 Future Camino Verde Pocket Park - - - - 100,000 600,000 900,000 900,000 2,500,000 505,000 - 505,000 687,500 3,050,000 14,893,862 15,193,862 15,333,362 49,663,586 4,182,826 $ 111,059 $ Total 5-Year 12,773,885 $
5185 9203 Street Repavement & Repairs 3,958,538 72,435 3,886,103 - 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 11,886,103 5186 9264 Sidewalk Replacement & Repairs 321,723 25,000 296,723 111,059 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 887,782 4,280,261 97,435 4,182,826 111,059 2,120,000 2,120,000 2,120,000 2,120,000 12,773,885 370,000 $ 102,700 $ Total 5-Year 1,022,700 $
5103 9188 Civic Center/City Hall EV Charging Systems 350,000 100,000 250,000 102,700 - - - - 352,700 5188 9189 Arroyo Park EV Charging Systems 50,000 50,000 - - - - - - - 5200 9410 Climate Action Plan 120,000 - 120,000 - 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 520,000 TBD 9402 EV Charging Stating (Fire Spt Lot) 13,650 13,650 - - - - - - - 5187 TBD Civic Center/Mound Solar Panel Installation - - - - - - - - - 5189 TBD Urban Forest Master Plan - - - - 150,000 - - - 150,000 533,650 163,650 370,000 102,700 250,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 1,022,700 1,559,990 $ 1,146,862 $ Total 5-Year 30,710,351 $
2008 9102 Fremont/Huntington (MAT) Mobility Active Tr 475,000 - 475,000 - 1,214,580 3,149,702 1,216,878 - 6,056,160 2002 9161 North-South Corridor (Fair Oaks) ITS Deployme 788,483 200,000 588,483 640,365 4,662,358 4,662,358 - - 10,553,563 TBD 9192 Fair Oaks Traffic Signal Const 482,568 469,526 13,042 - - - - - 13,042TBD 9278 Fair Oaks ITS Project - - - - - - - - - 5129 9290 Grevelia Street and Fair Oaks Avenue 50,000 - 50,000 - 150,000 - - - 200,000 5130 9350 Pedestrian Crossing Devices 200,000 - 200,000 - 122,624 - - - 322,624 1512 9351 Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (Mission & 260,915 27,450 233,465 31,497 - - - - 264,962 TBD New Fremont/Huntington (MIP) Mobility Improvem - - - 475,000 1,025,000 4,500,000 4,000,000 - 10,000,000 5131 TBD Garfield Avenue and Monterey Road Traffic Sig - - - - 100,000 300,000 - - 400,0005132 TBD Columbia Street Striping and Signals - - - - 300,000 - - - 300,000 5133 TBD Orange Grove Avenue Project - - - - 150,000 350,000 - - 500,000 5135 TBD Citywide Mobility / Active Transport Plan Upda - - - - 150,000 - - - 150,000 2007 9311 Fair Oaks SR-110 Interchange On/Off-Ramps - - - - 300,000 500,000 - - 800,000 5134 TBD Mission-Merdian-El Centro Bollard System - - - - - 50,000 200,000 - 250,000 5136 TBD Traffic Signal Controller & Cabinet Replaceme - - - - - 300,000 300,000 300,000 900,000 2,256,966 696,976 1,559,990 1,146,862 8,174,562 13,812,060 5,716,878 300,000 30,710,351 Sewer Stormwater Streets
FY 23-24 Total: $475,000
FY 23-24 Total: $1,192,500FY 23-24 Total: $4,293,885
Sustainability Transportation & Traffic FY 23-24 Total: $2,706,852 FY 23-24 Total: $472,700
4 - 60
f
-----
- - -

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 58
2,883,000 $ - $ Total 5-Year 25,713,000 $
5190 9300 Water Main Pipeline Repairs 2,000,000 - 2,000,000 - 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 6,000,000 5192 9348 Water Facility Site Improvements 88,000 - 88,000 - 50,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 888,000 5193 9349 Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) 150,000 - 150,000 - 300,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 - 2,450,000 5110 9409 Westside Reservoir Design/Construction 550,000 25,000 525,000 - 2,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 - 15,525,000 5191 9408 Raymond & Bilikie Elevated Tanks Study & Imp 120,000 - 120,000 - - 80,000 200,000 - 400,000 5194 Future SCADA Upgrade - - - - 150,000 150,000 150,000 - 450,000 2,908,000 25,000 2,883,000 - 3,500,000 9,480,000 8,600,000 1,250,000 25,713,000 Water FY 23-24 Total: $2,883,000
4 - 61

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 59
CIP by Funding Source
FY 2022-23 Carryover Balance FY 2024 FY 2024
Project No. Project Name Projected Bdgt Balance Additions 9033 Grevalia&Berkshire Pocket Park 51,255 825,000 - 825,000 9102 Fremont/Huntington MAT Project - 475,000 - 475,000 9149 VoiP Phone System Installation 20,000 180,000 - 180,000 9157 Golf Course Netting Replacemen 19,407 730,593 - 730,593 9161 North-South Corridor ITS Dploy 200,000 588,483 640,365 1,228,848 9186 CD Permit Management Software 50,000 260,000 - 260,000 9187 CD Record Scan & Doc Managmnt - 45,000 (45,000) -
9188 City/Civic EV Charging System 100,000 250,000 102,700 352,700 9189 Arroyo Park EV Charging System 50,000 - - -
9192 Fair Oaks Traffic Signal Const 469,526 13,042 - 13,042 9203 Street Repairs - 2023 72,435 3,886,103 - 3,886,103 9206 825 Mission Yard Security Gate - 160,000 - 160,000 9224 Citywide Facility Repair 33,729 116,271 250,000 366,271 9226 FD Front Bay Door Replacement - 80,000 - 80,000
9229 PD Locker/Restroom Improvement - 180,000 10,000 190,000 9230 PD Improvements - 16,000 1,000 17,000
9231 PD Briefing Room Update - 18,000 1,000 19,000
9232 PD1st Floor Inter Paint/Drywal - 12,000 1,000 13,000 9242 War Memorial Audio/Vis. Equipm - 50,000 (50,000) - 9263 Pocket Park Construction - - - -
9264 ADA Sidewalk Repairs 25,000 296,723 111,059 407,782 9269 War Memorial HVAC Repairs - 25,000 - 25,000
9273 Rec. Facilities Key System - 75,000 (75,000) -
9278 Fair Oaks ITS Project - - - -
9290 Grevelia/Fair Oaks Int. Imprv - 50,000 - 50,000
9300 Ann. Water Main Repairs - 2,000,000 - 2,000,000
9301 Library HVAC Repairs 5,000 20,000 234,100 254,100
9322 Library ADA Ramp, Light. & Imp - 20,000 - 20,000
9348 Water Facil. Site Improvements - 88,000 - 88,000
9349 Advanced Metering Infr. (AMI) - 150,000 - 150,000
9350 Pedestrian Crossing Devices - 200,000 - 200,000
9351 Rect. Rapid Flashing Beacons 27,450 233,465 31,497 264,962 9364 Rio Hondo LRS Alham, Wash Trtm - 5,000 - 5,000
9402 EV Charging Station (MSRC) 13,650 - -
9404 Citywide Facilities Assessment/ Security Enh. 73,124 126,876 100,000 226,876 9405 Library Security Camera System - 20,000 - 20,000
9407 CMMS/Work Order System/GIS 5,000 115,000 - 115,000 9411 Elevated Tanks-Raymond/Bilikie - 120,000 - 120,000 9408 Sewer Sys. Rep., Rehab&Replace 25,000 475,000 - 475,000 9409 Westside Reservoir 25,000 525,000 - 525,000
9410 Climate Action Plan - 120,000 - 120,000
FD Diesel Exhaust System Replacement - 50,000 50,000
308 San Pascual Residence Improvements - 30,000 30,000
Agenda Management System - 50,000 50,000
City Website System & Design - 60,000 60,000
Library Facility Improvements - 100,514 100,514
Library Roof - 291,781 291,781
Library Master Plan - - -
Parks Master Plan - 150,000 150,000
Snake Trail Improvements - 50,000 50,000
Senior Center Flooring - 60,000 60,000
Arroyo Seco San Rafael & San Pascual Projects - 437,500 437,500 Huntington Drive Green Street - 250,000 250,000
City Hall Stormwater Project 500,000 500,000
Fremont/Huntington MIP Project - 475,000 475,000
Totals $ 1,265,576 13,050,556 3,317,516 $ 16,368,072
4 - 62
t

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 60

101 104 105 108 207
Project No. Project Name General
Fund
Street
Improvemen
t Program
Facil. &
Equip.

Replacement
SR 110 Gen
Fund
Reserve
Prop C
9033 Grevalia&Berkshire Pocket Park - - - - -
9102 Fremont/Huntington MAT Project - - - - -
9149 VoiP Phone System Installation 180,000 - - - -
9157 Golf Course Netting Replacemen - - - - -
9161 North-South Corridor ITS Dploy - - - 70,474 -
9186 CD Permit Management Software 125,000 - - - -
9187 CD Record Scan & Doc Managmnt - - - - -
9188 City/Civic EV Charging System 250,000 - - - -
9189 Arroyo Park EV Charging System - - - - -
9192 Fair Oaks Traffic Signal Const - - - - -
9203 Street Repairs - 2023 - 2,298,445 - - 300,000
9206 825 Mission Yard Security Gate - - 160,000 - -
9224 Citywide Facility Repair - - 366,271 - -
9226 FD Front Bay Door Replacement - - 80,000 - -
9229 PD Locker/Restroom Improvement - - 190,000 - -
9230 PD Improvements - - 17,000 - -
9231 PD Briefing Room Update - - 19,000 - -
9232 PD1st Floor Inter Paint/Drywal - - 13,000 - -
9242 War Memorial Audio/Vis. Equipm - - - - -
9263 Pocket Park Construction - - - - -
9264 ADA Sidewalk Repairs - - - - -
9269 War Memorial HVAC Repairs - - 25,000 - -
9273 Rec. Facilities Key System - - - - -
9278 Fair Oaks ITS Project - - - - -
9290 Grevelia/Fair Oaks Int. Imprv - - - - -
9300 Ann. Water Main Repairs - - - - -
9301 Library HVAC Repairs - - 109,263 - -
9322 Library ADA Ramp, Light. & Imp - - 20,000 - -
9348 Water Facil. Site Improvements - - - - -
9349 Advanced Metering Infr. (AMI) - - - - -
9350 Pedestrian Crossing Devices - - - - -
9351 Rect. Rapid Flashing Beacons - - - - -
9364 Rio Hondo LRS Alham, Wash Trtm - - - - -
9402 EV Charging Station (MSRC) - - - - -
9404 Citywide Facilities Assessment/ Security Enh - - 226,876 - - 9405 Library Security Camera System - - 20,000 - -
9407 CMMS/Work Order System/GIS - - - - -
9411 Elevated Tanks-Raymond/Bilikie - - - - -
9408 Sewer Sys. Rep., Rehab&Replace - - - - -
9409 Westside Reservoir - - - - -
9410 Climate Action Plan - - - - -
FD Diesel Exhaust System Replacement - - 50,000 - -
308 San Pascual Residence Improvements - - - - -
Agenda Management System 50,000 - - - -
City Website System & Design 60,000 - - - -
Library Facility Improvements - - 43,221 - -
Library Roof - - 125,466 - -
Library Master Plan - - - - -
Parks Master Plan - - - - -
Snake Trail Improvements - - - - -
Senior Center Flooring - - 60,000 - -
Arroyo Seco San Rafael & San Pascual Proje - - - - -
Huntington Drive Green Street - - - - -
City Hall Stormwater Project - - - - -
Fremont/Huntington MIP Project - - - - -
Totals $665,000 $ 2,298,445 $ 1,525,097 $ 70,474 $300,000 4 - 63
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 61
210 213 214 228 230
Project No. Project Name Sewer SB2
Planning
Grant
Rogan
HR5294
Grant
Housing
Authorit
y
Gas Tax
9033 Grevalia&Berkshire Pocket Park - - - - -
9102 Fremont/Huntington MAT Project - - - - -
9149 VoiP Phone System Installation - - - - -
9157 Golf Course Netting Replacemen - - - - -
9161 North-South Corridor ITS Dploy - - 1,087,899 - -
9186 CD Permit Management Software - 135,000 - - -
9187 CD Record Scan & Doc Managmnt - - - - -
9188 City/Civic EV Charging System - - - - -
9189 Arroyo Park EV Charging System - - - - -
9192 Fair Oaks Traffic Signal Const - - - - -
9203 Street Repairs - 2023 - - - - 200,000
9206 825 Mission Yard Security Gate - - - - -
9224 Citywide Facility Repair - - - - -
9226 FD Front Bay Door Replacement - - - - -
9229 PD Locker/Restroom Improvement - - - - -
9230 PD Improvements - - - - -
9231 PD Briefing Room Update - - - - -
9232 PD1st Floor Inter Paint/Drywal - - - - -
9242 War Memorial Audio/Vis. Equipm - - - - -
9263 Pocket Park Construction - - - - -
9264 ADA Sidewalk Repairs - - - - -
9269 War Memorial HVAC Repairs - - - - -
9273 Rec. Facilities Key System - - - - -
9278 Fair Oaks ITS Project - - - - -
9290 Grevelia/Fair Oaks Int. Imprv - - - - -
9300 Ann. Water Main Repairs - - - - -
9301 Library HVAC Repairs - - - - -
9322 Library ADA Ramp, Light. & Imp - - - - -
9348 Water Facil. Site Improvements - - - - -
9349 Advanced Metering Infr. (AMI) - - - - -
9350 Pedestrian Crossing Devices - - - - -
9351 Rect. Rapid Flashing Beacons - - - - -
9364 Rio Hondo LRS Alham, Wash Trtm - - - - -
9402 EV Charging Station (MSRC) - - - - -
9404 Citywide Facilities Assessment/ Security Enh - - - - - 9405 Library Security Camera System - - - - -
9407 CMMS/Work Order System/GIS 57,500 - - - -
9411 Elevated Tanks-Raymond/Bilikie - - - - -
9408 Sewer Sys. Rep., Rehab&Replace 475,000 - - - -
9409 Westside Reservoir - - - - -
9410 Climate Action Plan - - - - -
FD Diesel Exhaust System Replacement - - - - -
308 San Pascual Residence Improvements - - - 30,000 -
Agenda Management System - - - - -
City Website System & Design - - - - -
Library Facility Improvements - - - - -
Library Roof - - - - -
Library Master Plan - - - - -
Parks Master Plan - - - - -
Snake Trail Improvements - - - - -
Senior Center Flooring - - - - -
Arroyo Seco San Rafael & San Pascual Proje - - - - -
Huntington Drive Green Street - - - - -
City Hall Stormwater Project - - - - -
Fremont/Huntington MIP Project - - - - -
Totals $532,500 $135,000 $1,087,899 $30,000 $200,000
4 - 64
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
+
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ t +

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 62
233 234 236 237 238
Project No. Project Name Measure
R Local
Measure
M-MAT
Measure
M - Local
RMRA -
SB1
MSRC
Grant
9033 Grevalia&Berkshire Pocket Park - - - - -
9102 Fremont/Huntington MAT Project - 475,000 - - -
9149 VoiP Phone System Installation - - - - -
9157 Golf Course Netting Replacemen - - - - -
9161 North-South Corridor ITS Dploy - - - - -
9186 CD Permit Management Software - - - - -
9187 CD Record Scan & Doc Managmnt - - - - -
9188 City/Civic EV Charging System - - - - 102,700
9189 Arroyo Park EV Charging System - - - - -
9192 Fair Oaks Traffic Signal Const - - - - -
9203 Street Repairs - 2023 300,000 - 177,565 585,093 -
9206 825 Mission Yard Security Gate - - - - -
9224 Citywide Facility Repair - - - - -
9226 FD Front Bay Door Replacement - - - - -
9229 PD Locker/Restroom Improvement - - - - -
9230 PD Improvements - - - - -
9231 PD Briefing Room Update - - - - -
9232 PD1st Floor Inter Paint/Drywal - - - - -
9242 War Memorial Audio/Vis. Equipm - - - - -
9263 Pocket Park Construction - - - - -
9264 ADA Sidewalk Repairs - - - - -
9269 War Memorial HVAC Repairs - - - - -
9273 Rec. Facilities Key System - - - - -
9278 Fair Oaks ITS Project - - - - -
9290 Grevelia/Fair Oaks Int. Imprv - - - - -
9300 Ann. Water Main Repairs - - - - -
9301 Library HVAC Repairs - - - - -
9322 Library ADA Ramp, Light. & Imp - - - - -
9348 Water Facil. Site Improvements - - - - -
9349 Advanced Metering Infr. (AMI) - - - - -
9350 Pedestrian Crossing Devices - - - - -
9351 Rect. Rapid Flashing Beacons - - 26,497 - -
9364 Rio Hondo LRS Alham, Wash Trtm - - - - -
9402 EV Charging Station (MSRC) - - - - -
9404 Citywide Facilities Assessment/ Security Enh - - - - - 9405 Library Security Camera System - - - - -
9407 CMMS/Work Order System/GIS - - - - -
9411 Elevated Tanks-Raymond/Bilikie - - - - -
9408 Sewer Sys. Rep., Rehab&Replace - - - - -
9409 Westside Reservoir - - - - -
9410 Climate Action Plan - - - - -
FD Diesel Exhaust System Replacement - - - - -
308 San Pascual Residence Improvements - - - - -
Agenda Management System - - - - -
City Website System & Design - - - - -
Library Facility Improvements - - - - -
Library Roof - - - - -
Library Master Plan - - - - -
Parks Master Plan - - - - -
Snake Trail Improvements - - - - -
Senior Center Flooring - - - - -
Arroyo Seco San Rafael & San Pascual Proje - - - - -
Huntington Drive Green Street - - - - -
City Hall Stormwater Project - - - - -
Fremont/Huntington MIP Project - - - - -
Totals $300,000 $475,000 $204,062 $585,093 $102,700
4 - 65
t t t

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 63
239 240 245 255 260
Project No. Project Name Measure
W
Measure

M - MSP
Bike &
Pedestria
n Path
Capital
Growth
CDBG
9033 Grevalia&Berkshire Pocket Park - - - - -
9102 Fremont/Huntington MAT Project - - - - -
9149 VoiP Phone System Installation - - - - -
9157 Golf Course Netting Replacemen - - - - -
9161 North-South Corridor ITS Dploy - - - 70,474 -
9186 CD Permit Management Software - - - - -
9187 CD Record Scan & Doc Managmnt - - - - -
9188 City/Civic EV Charging System - - - - -
9189 Arroyo Park EV Charging System - - - - -
9192 Fair Oaks Traffic Signal Const - - - - -
9203 Street Repairs - 2023 - - 25,000 - -
9206 825 Mission Yard Security Gate - - - - -
9224 Citywide Facility Repair - - - - -
9226 FD Front Bay Door Replacement - - - - -
9229 PD Locker/Restroom Improvement - - - - -
9230 PD Improvements - - - - -
9231 PD Briefing Room Update - - - - -
9232 PD1st Floor Inter Paint/Drywal - - - - -
9242 War Memorial Audio/Vis. Equipm - - - - -
9263 Pocket Park Construction - - - - -
9264 ADA Sidewalk Repairs - - - - 407,782
9269 War Memorial HVAC Repairs - - - - -
9273 Rec. Facilities Key System - - - - -
9278 Fair Oaks ITS Project - - - - -
9290 Grevelia/Fair Oaks Int. Imprv - 50,000 - - -
9300 Ann. Water Main Repairs - - - - -
9301 Library HVAC Repairs - - - - -
9322 Library ADA Ramp, Light. & Imp - - - - -
9348 Water Facil. Site Improvements - - - - -
9349 Advanced Metering Infr. (AMI) - - - - -
9350 Pedestrian Crossing Devices - 200,000 - - -
9351 Rect. Rapid Flashing Beacons - - - - -
9364 Rio Hondo LRS Alham, Wash Trtm 5,000 - - - -
9402 EV Charging Station (MSRC) - - - - -
9404 Citywide Facilities Assessment/ Security Enh - - - - - 9405 Library Security Camera System - - - - -
9407 CMMS/Work Order System/GIS - - - - -
9411 Elevated Tanks-Raymond/Bilikie - - - - -
9408 Sewer Sys. Rep., Rehab&Replace - - - - -
9409 Westside Reservoir - - - - -
9410 Climate Action Plan - - - - -
FD Diesel Exhaust System Replacement - - - - -
308 San Pascual Residence Improvements - - - - -
Agenda Management System - - - - -
City Website System & Design - - - - -
Library Facility Improvements - - - - -
Library Roof - - - - -
Library Master Plan - - - - -
Parks Master Plan - - - - -
Snake Trail Improvements - - - - -
Senior Center Flooring - - - - -
Arroyo Seco San Rafael & San Pascual Proje 37,500 - - - - Huntington Drive Green Street 250,000 - - - -
City Hall Stormwater Project - - - - -
Fremont/Huntington MIP Project - - - - -
Totals $292,500 $250,000 $ 25,000 $70,474 $407,782
4 - 66
t
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
t t

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 64
275 277 281 295 500
Project No. Project Name Park
Impact
Fees
HSIP
Grant
CA State
Library
Building
Forward
Arroyo
Seco Golf
Water
9033 Grevalia&Berkshire Pocket Park 825,000 - - -
9102 Fremont/Huntington MAT Project - - - -
9149 VoiP Phone System Installation - - - -
9157 Golf Course Netting Replacemen - - 730,593 -
9161 North-South Corridor ITS Dploy - - - -
9186 CD Permit Management Software - - - -
9187 CD Record Scan & Doc Managmnt - - - -
9188 City/Civic EV Charging System - - - -
9189 Arroyo Park EV Charging System - - - -
9192 Fair Oaks Traffic Signal Const - 13,042 - -
9203 Street Repairs - 2023 - - - -
9206 825 Mission Yard Security Gate - - - -
9224 Citywide Facility Repair - - - -
9226 FD Front Bay Door Replacement - - - -
9229 PD Locker/Restroom Improvement - - - -
9230 PD Improvements - - - -
9231 PD Briefing Room Update - - - -
9232 PD1st Floor Inter Paint/Drywal - - - -
9242 War Memorial Audio/Vis. Equipm - - - -
9263 Pocket Park Construction - - - -
9264 ADA Sidewalk Repairs - - - -
9269 War Memorial HVAC Repairs - - - -
9273 Rec. Facilities Key System - - - -
9278 Fair Oaks ITS Project - - - -
9290 Grevelia/Fair Oaks Int. Imprv - - - -
9300 Ann. Water Main Repairs - - - 2,000,000
9301 Library HVAC Repairs - - 144,837 - -
9322 Library ADA Ramp, Light. & Imp - - - -
9348 Water Facil. Site Improvements - - - 88,000
9349 Advanced Metering Infr. (AMI) - - - 150,000
9350 Pedestrian Crossing Devices - - - -
9351 Rect. Rapid Flashing Beacons - 238,465 - -
9364 Rio Hondo LRS Alham, Wash Trtm - - - -
9402 EV Charging Station (MSRC) - - - -
9404 Citywide Facilities Assessment/ Security Enh - - - - 9405 Library Security Camera System - - - -
9407 CMMS/Work Order System/GIS - - - 57,500
9411 Elevated Tanks-Raymond/Bilikie - - - 120,000
9408 Sewer Sys. Rep., Rehab&Replace - - - -
9409 Westside Reservoir - - - 525,000
9410 Climate Action Plan - - - -
FD Diesel Exhaust System Replacement - - - -
308 San Pascual Residence Improvements - - - -
Agenda Management System - - - -
City Website System & Design - - - -
Library Facility Improvements - - 57,293 - -
Library Roof - - 166,315 - -
Library Master Plan - - - -
Parks Master Plan 150,000 - - -
Snake Trail Improvements 50,000 - - -
Senior Center Flooring - - - -
Arroyo Seco San Rafael & San Pascual Proje - - - -
Huntington Drive Green Street - - - -
City Hall Stormwater Project - - - -
Fremont/Huntington MIP Project - - - -
Totals $1,025,000 $251,507 $ 368,445 $730,593 $2,940,500 4 - 67

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 65
503 243 101
Project No. Project Name Water
Efficiency
Measure

R - MIP
Reserves
9033 Grevalia&Berkshire Pocket Park - - -
9102 Fremont/Huntington MAT Project - - -
9149 VoiP Phone System Installation - - -
9157 Golf Course Netting Replacemen - - -
9161 North-South Corridor ITS Dploy - - -
9186 CD Permit Management Software - - -
9187 CD Record Scan & Doc Managmnt - - -
9188 City/Civic EV Charging System - - -
9189 Arroyo Park EV Charging System - - -
9192 Fair Oaks Traffic Signal Const - - -
9203 Street Repairs - 2023 - - -
9206 825 Mission Yard Security Gate - - -
9224 Citywide Facility Repair - - -
9226 FD Front Bay Door Replacement - - -
9229 PD Locker/Restroom Improvement - - -
9230 PD Improvements - - -
9231 PD Briefing Room Update - - -
9232 PD1st Floor Inter Paint/Drywal - - -
9242 War Memorial Audio/Vis. Equipm - - -
9263 Pocket Park Construction - - -
9264 ADA Sidewalk Repairs - - -
9269 War Memorial HVAC Repairs - - -
9273 Rec. Facilities Key System - - -
9278 Fair Oaks ITS Project - - -
9290 Grevelia/Fair Oaks Int. Imprv - - -
9300 Ann. Water Main Repairs - - -
9301 Library HVAC Repairs - - -
9322 Library ADA Ramp, Light. & Imp - - -
9348 Water Facil. Site Improvements - - -
9349 Advanced Metering Infr. (AMI) - - -
9350 Pedestrian Crossing Devices - - -
9351 Rect. Rapid Flashing Beacons - - -
9364 Rio Hondo LRS Alham, Wash Trtm - - -
9402 EV Charging Station (MSRC) - - -
9404 Citywide Facilities Assessment/ Security Enh - - - 9405 Library Security Camera System - - -
9407 CMMS/Work Order System/GIS - - -
9411 Elevated Tanks-Raymond/Bilikie - - -
9408 Sewer Sys. Rep., Rehab&Replace - - -
9409 Westside Reservoir - - -
9410 Climate Action Plan 120,000 - -
FD Diesel Exhaust System Replacement - - -
308 San Pascual Residence Improvements - - -
Agenda Management System - - -
City Website System & Design - - -
Library Facility Improvements - - -
Library Roof - - -
Library Master Plan - - -
Parks Master Plan - - -
Snake Trail Improvements - - -
Senior Center Flooring - - -
Arroyo Seco San Rafael & San Pascual Proje 100,000 - 300,000 Huntington Drive Green Street - - -
City Hall Stormwater Project 200,000 - 300,000
Fremont/Huntington MIP Project - 475,000 -
Totals $420,000 $475,000 $600,000
4 - 68
t

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CITY COUNCIL
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 66
City Council
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Snapshot
Overview
The City Council is the elected legislative body of the City. The City Council consists of a Mayor and four Councilmembers, each elected at large for four overlapping terms. The City Council represents the City’s citizens, analyzes and approves all laws and policies, authorizes all expenditures through the budget, and directs the administration of the City government through the City Manager.

Notable Changes – Wages and Benefits
No significant changes to Wages and Benefits.

Notable Changes – Operations and Maintenance
Additional postage funding for District Mailings, Carry-Over of Discretionary Funds from prior Fiscal Years, and Funding for State of the City, Community Budget Sessions, and Strategic Planning Sessions.

Capital Outlay
No items budgeted for Capital Outlay.
4 - 69

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CITY COUNCIL
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 67
City Council / 101-1010-1011
Budget Summary
Authorized Positions
Jon Primuth, Mayor
Evelyn G. Zneimer, Mayor Pro Tem
Jack Donovan, Councilmember
Janet Braun, Councilmember
Michael A. Cacciotti, Councilmember
4 - 70
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
[EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/247 Wages & Benefits 22,466 15,653 18,589 18,594 19,888 19,703 Operations & Maintenance 22,935 20,236 26,857 30,600 51,500 62,200 Capital Outlay
Total Expenses by Category 45,401 35,890 45,446 49,194 71 ,388 81 ,903 [101 -1011] City Council 45,401 35,890 45,446 49,194 71,388 81 ,903 Total Expenses by Program 45,401 35,890 45,446 49,194 71 ,388 81 ,903

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CITY COUNCIL
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 68
Budget Detail

PERSONNEL SERVICES
7000 Regular Salaries
Provides funds for monthly stipend for members of the City Council. Elected South Pasadena officials are paid a $300 monthly stipend. Includes cell phone allowance.

City Council members are subject to Medicare withholding and Workers Compensation coverage provided by the City.

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
8010 Postage
Provides funds for postage meter charges and postage for mailing City Council mail, including special mailing lists for District Town Halls (Total $8,000). 8020 Special Department Expense
Provides funds for City Council business cards, promotional items, badges, plaques, nameplates, supplies, calendars, photography ($1,000). Provides funds for proclamation and certificate supplies ($500). Provides funds for special requests for City Council meetings and unanticipated department expenses incurred to fulfill requests by City Councilmembers ($500). As well as the Annual Commissioner Congress ($8,000). (Total $12,000)
8021 Discretionary Fund Program
Discretionary funds must be used for a public purpose benefiting the City. Each Councilmember is allotted $4,000. (Total $33,700).
8060 Dues/Memberships/Subscriptions
Provides funds for individual councilmember memberships in organizations ($500) 8090 Conference and Meeting Expense
Provides funds for City Council to attend conferences and meetings, including parking and mileage. Provides funds for meals and beverages for Regular and Special City Council Meetings, receptions including State of the City, and Mayor’s Swearing-In, and Community Budget Sessions, State of the City. Provides funds for Strategic Planning Sessions: logistics, refreshments, supplies, recording.

Provides funds for purchase of meeting-related presentation materials, accessories, and supplies for tablets and related devices ($8,000). 4 - 71
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Acct Tsk Account TIUe 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 7000 000 Salaries - Permanent 5,460 2,120 7,160 18,000 18,020 7010 000 Salaries - Temp / Part 16,460 12,880 10,680 1,500 18,000 7110 000 Workers Compensation 228 163 188 333 162 252
7170 000 FICA - Medicare 318 490 561 261 206 1,450
'<WAGES & BENEFITS> 22,466 15,653 18,589 18,594 19,888 19,703 8000 000 Office Supplies
8010 000 Postage 149 206 42 100 2,000 8,000
8020 000 Special Department Expense 4,640 1,404 5,119 2,000 4,000 12,000 8021 000 Discretionary Fund Program 9,490 15,376 12,588 20,000 20,000 33,700 8060 000 Dues & Memberships 150 3,200 500 500 500
8090 000 Conference & Meeting Expense 8,507 50 9,108 8,000 25,000 8,000 <OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE> 22,935 20,236 26,857 30,600 51,500 62,200 [101-1011) City Council Total 45,401 35,890 45,446 49,194 71 ,388 81 ,903

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CITY MANAGER
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 44
City Manager
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Snapshot
Overview
The City Manager is appointed by the City Council and serves as the Chief Administrative Officer, ensuring that the policies of the Mayor and City Council are executed effectively and efficiently.

Specific areas of responsibility include oversight of seven operating departments, public information and public engagement, legislative tracking, following up on citizen concerns, providing recommendations to promote organizational efficiency and overseeing the development and presentation of the annual budget.

The City’s Economic Development Division is housed under the City Manager’s Office, and is the liaison to the business community, focused on efforts to strengthen and grow the local economy, and serves as a liaison to business affairs at City Hall. The Division oversees the communications and engagement efforts of the City, including marketing, branding social media and the City’s website.

Notable Changes – Wages and Benefits
Due to organizational restructuring, City Manager has become its own department and is now separated from Management services. City Manager has 5 FTEs for Fiscal Year 2022-23. One part-time management intern has been added.

Notable Changes – Operations and Maintenance
Funding included for Annual Social Services and Social Justice Forum, Social Services Resource Guide, Executive Team Engagement, Veteran Events, mailings of State, Regional, and Legislative correspondence in line with the adopted Legislative Platform, GoGov Citywide Mobile App, Holiday Lighting Décor, and Guide to Doing Business brochure.

Capital Outlay
No items budgeted for Capital Outlay.
4 - 72

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CITY MANAGER
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 45
Budget Summary
Authorized Positions
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 Wages & Benefits 1,350,983 1,363,498 1,670,242 896,731 881,155 1,059,376 Operations & Maintenance 271,386 321,158 250,626 416,608 347,438 325,910 Capital Outlay - - - - - -
Total Expenses by Category 1,622,368 1,684,656 1,920,868 1,313,339 1,228,593 1,385,285 [101-2011] City Manager 1,457,590 1,577,395 1,815,368 1,103,231 1,021,485 1,224,510 [101-2012] Economic Development 55,278 261 - 98,108 95,108 50,275 [220-2301] Community Promotion 109,500 107,000 105,500 112,000 112,000 110,500 Total Expenses by Program 1,622,368 1,684,656 1,920,868 1,313,339 1,228,593 1,385,285 4 - 73
'
'-
City Manager \.

I
I I
' /'
Administrative Deputy CM Secretary \..

I
Assistant to the
City Manager
\...

Full Time Employees: 5
Part Time: 1
I
r
'-
/'
'-
'
I
'
Management
Analyst
I '\
Management
Intern (PT)

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CITY MANAGER
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 46
City Manager / 101-2010-2011
Budget Detail
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Acct Tsk Account Title 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 7000 000 Salaries - Permanent 879,831 815,286 910,988 606,976 589,285 693,542 7010 000 Salaries - Temp / Part 96,744 219,067 179,156 35,000 20,819 35,128 7011 000 Salaries - PT Stipend - - - - - -
7020 000 Overtime 187 2,929 26,069 - 4,797
7040 000 Holiday 8,103 14,082 10,090 - - 8,847
7055 000 IOD - Non Safety - - - - -
7070 000 Leave Buyback 2,987 - 26,622 27,000 2,879 25,608 7100 000 Retirement 251,744 185,649 432,904 144,439 141,862 73,787 7100 010 CalPERS UAL - - 110,175
7108 000 Deferred Compensation 7,438 36,687 (23,868) 4,542 6,073 6,820 7110 000 Workers Compensation 12,017 12,311 13,586 11,569 10,418 8,081 7120 000 Disability Insurance - - - - 14,509
7130 000 Group Health Insurance 63,472 51,707 62,786 53,112 62,414 73,170 7140 000 Vision Insurance 1,586 1,247 1,534 1,080 1,280 1,048 7150 000 Dental Insurance 5,025 4,432 5,282 4,050 4,107 3,911 7160 000 Life Insurance 745 592 719 446 624 515
7170 000 FICA - Medicare 15,630 17,509 18,375 8,517 16,088 12,744 7180 000 Car/Uniform Allowance 5,475 2,000 6,000 - 6,000 6,000 <WAGES & BENEFITS> 1,350,983 1,363,498 1,670,242 896,731 881,155 1,059,376 8000 000 Office Supplies 5,640 4,428 21,283 10,000 10,000 10,000 8010 000 Postage 803 370 45 4,000 2,000 4,000
8020 000 Special Department Expense 7,615 1,630 13,813 20,800 13,812 8,500 8050 000 Printing/Duplicating 98 126 698 6,000 5,275 6,000 8060 000 Dues & Memberships 1,115 1,025 2,097 47,500 44,100 44,437 8090 000 Conference & Meeting Expense 2,088 494 15,143 16,750 15,143 17,198 8100 000 Vehicle Maintenance 1,965 1,498 2,041 750 - -
8110 000 Equipment Maintenance - - - 700 - -
8150 000 Telephone - - - - - -
8170 000 Professional Services 45,221 77,806 77,336 40,000 40,000 40,000 8180 000 Contract Services 42,063 116,518 - 10,000 10,000 10,000 8200 000 Training Expense - - - - - -
8272 000 CM Emergency - 10,000 12,670 50,000 - 25,000
<OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE> 106,608 213,897 145,126 206,500 140,330 165,135 [101-2011] City Manager Total 1,457,590 1,577,395 1,815,368 1,103,231 1,021,485 1,224,510 4 - 74

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CITY MANAGER
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 47
Budget Detail

PERSONNEL SERVICES
7000 Salaries – Regular Employees
Provides the partial compensation for the City Manager, Deputy City Manager, Assistant to the City Manager, Management Analyst, and Administrative Secretary. Refer to the Appendix for a detailed allocation list. 7010 Salaries – Part-Time
Provides compensation for non-salaried part-time employee (Management Intern) and partial compensation for non-salaried Interim City Manager and Interim Assistant City Manager.
7070 Leave Buyback
Provides funds to employees who opt to sell back hours of their leave balances.

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
8000 Office Supplies
Ordinary office supplies for the City Manager’s Office (City Manager, Deputy City Manager, Assistant to the City Manager, Management Analyst, Administrative Secretary and Management Intern), and meeting supplies. (Total $10,000) 8010 Postage
Provides funds for postal expenses for City mailings, including public notice mailings, legal printing of notices, and Legislative support/opposition letters. (Total $4,000)
8020 Special Department Expense
Provides funds for miscellaneous department supplies and services not considered office supplies, Executive Team engagement, , furniture, kitchen equipment, copier paper (for City Hall second floor), Annual Social Services and Social Justice Forum, Veteran Events, Social Services Working Group (food, supplies, table cloths, etc.) , and outreach (Social Services Resource Guide printing and annual revisions), and hosting gatherings with regional and partner agencies or elected dignitaries on-site. (Total $8,500) 8050 Printing and Duplication
Provides funds for the printing and duplication of materials, including City information brochures, foam boards and A Frames, translation services, printed surveys, electronic survey providers, brochures, stationary, and business cards, and name badges. (Total $6,000)
8060 Dues, Memberships, and Subscriptions
Provides funds for San Gabriel Valley City Manager’s Association dues, San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, International City Manager’s Association, California City Management Foundation, Municipal Management Association of Southern California, City memberships in League of California Cities League of California Cities-LA County San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, California 4 - 75

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CITY MANAGER
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 48
Contract Cities, Southern California Association of Governments, CAPIO, and subscriptions to newspapers and professional publications. (Total $44,437) 8090 Conference and Meeting Expense
Provides funds to attend professional and training meetings, conference registrations including the League of California Cities Annual Conference, League of California Cities City Manager’s Conference, League of California Cities City Leaders Summit, San Gabriel Valley Economic Partnership (SGVEP) Legislative Action Day, SGVEP Economic Forecast Summit, Municipal Management Association of Southern California (MMASC) Annual Conference, MMASC Summer Session, MMASC Winter Session, San Gabriel Valley City Manager’s Association Meetings, CAPIO, CalEd Intro to Economic Development, and International Shopping Centers Conference. (Total$17,198) 8170 Professional Services
Provides funds for consultant services, such as operational studies and other professional services ($20,000), and citywide operations ($20,000). (Total $40,000)
8180 Contract Services
Provides funds for City Manager Office to enter in contracts services for mission critical items (Total $10,000).
8272 City Manager Emergency Fund
Permits the City Manager to respond swiftly to emergency and unanticipated needs in any operational area of the City (Total $25,000). 4 - 76

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CITY MANAGER
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 49
Economic Development / 101-2020-2012
Budget Detail

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
8050 Printing and Duplication
Funds the printing and duplication of materials, including Guide to Doing Business in South Pasadena ($2,000), business mailers ($1,000), informational brochures ($500), flyers and newsletters ($2,000), promotional street banners ($2,000) and translation services ($500) (Total $8,000)
8060 Dues and Memberships
Funds membership dues for the San Gabriel Valley Economic Partnership (Total $3,275).
8190 Community Engagement
Funds business networking events ($4,000), holiday lighting and décor ($15,000), and tabling at the community events for outreach ($1,000). (Total $20,000) 8220 Communications - Special Department Expense
Funds contract services including Constant Contact citywide email marketing tool, ($2,000), GoGov Citywide Annual App Fee ($15,000), and promotional materials for launch of new website ($2,000). (Total $19,000)
4 - 77
Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Ace Ts ccoun 9/20 022123 022123 023124
8050 000 Printing/Duplicating 8,328 8,328 8,000
8060 000 Dues & Memberships 3,000 3,275
8190 000 Community Engagement 71,200 71,200 20,000
8220 000 Communications Spec. Dept Expense 125 261 7,180 7,180 19,000 8230 000 Communications Prof Services 55,153 8,400 8,400 <OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE> 55,278 261 98,108 95,108 50,275 [101-2012] Economic Development Total 55,278 261 98,108 95,108 50,275

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CITY MANAGER
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 50
Community Promotion / 220-2010-2301
Budget Detail

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
8185 Chamber of Commerce
Funds are allocated by contract with the South Pasadena Chamber of Commerce (Total $105,500). (Placeholder from FY22-23. Pending City Council Direction on funding level for FY23-24)
8255 Public Events Promotion
Public events promotion (Total $5,000).

Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Acct Tsk Account Title 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 8060 000 Dues & Memberships 1,500 1,500 - - - -
8185 000 Chamber of Commerce 105,500 105,500 105,500 105,500 105,500 105,500 8255 000 Public Events Promotion 2,500 - - 6,500 6,500 5,000 <OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE> 109,500 107,000 105,500 112,000 112,000 110,500 [220-2301] Community Promotion Total 109,500 107,000 105,500 112,000 112,000 110,500 4 - 78

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CITY MANAGER
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 51
Key Performance Indicators
The City Manager’s Team is focused on improving the quality of life for residents, businesses and employees. With the move of Economic Development to the City Manager’s Office, the City Manager’s team is redefining community outreach and engagement, business support and service. A commitment to Strategic Plan goals and active legislative efforts ensure furthering the community’s priorities while protecting and preserving quality of life in South Pasadena.

Public Engagement/ Community Outreach
Continue to establish and explore best practices in conducting community outreach, including:
• 150-300 new photos of the City, Departments and staff for marketing and documents for FY2023.
• 1,000 new followers across social media by the end of FY2023. • Develop and launch new City website to the community. • Work with Departments and Divisions to ensure community engagement is prioritized including use of surveys, workshops, input sessions and other engagement and engagement tools.

Economic Development
Continue to establish and explore best practices in Economic Development:
• Visit 100 businesses in the community.
• Explore enhanced branding plan for City’s Downtown District. • Continue hosting quarterly business networking events. • Establish City Council sub-committee on Economic Development. • Establish program to welcome new businesses to the City.

Establish and Prioritize Healthy Workplace Culture
• Establish City-wide internship and professional shadowing programs. • Host quarterly Mid Manager’s Meetings.
• Lead and bolster Employee Engagement Team (EET) and citywide efforts. • Review and implement the USC Capstone Team Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Implementation Plan.

Social Services
Continue to prioritize providing Social Services outreach and resources to the community:
4 - 79

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA CITY MANAGER
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 52
• Establish Veterans Census to plan for Veteran specific outreach. • Host a Veteran’s Appreciation Day by FY2023.

Legislation
• Establish Legislative Tracking program by FY2023.
• Continue to participate in and network with legislative partners 4 - 80

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MANAGEMENT SERVICES
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 44
Management Services
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget Snapshot
Overview
Mission
The Management Services Department is committed to being a collaborative and innovative partner in delivering essential services to our internal and external customers in a way that is helpful, caring, and responsive. We accomplish this through the innovative use of skills, knowledge, technology, and an investment in human capital.

Core Values
• Teamwork
• Inclusivity
• Integrity
• Pride
• Transparency
• Stewardship
• Innovation
• Respect
• Wellness
• Attitude
Core Services
• Management Services: Innovation and Technology (IT), Grants Management, and Special Projects
• Human Resources and Risk Management: Human Resources Management, Recruitment, Employee Training, Labor Relations, Safety, and Risk Management • City Clerk: Records Management, Elections, Boards, Commissions, and City Council Support
Notable Changes—Wages and Benefits
There is an increase in wages and benefits, as the Department is adding three full time positions (Senior Human Resources Analyst, Human Resources Analyst and Human Resources Specialist). It should be noted that the Senior Human Resources Analyst and Human Resources Analyst positions are reclassifications of two management analyst positions in the Human Resources Division.

Notable Change—Operations and Maintenance
For Fiscal Year 2023-2024, the City Clerk Division will be accounting for advertisement costs for all departments, and all innovation and technology items have also been moved to the Innovation and Technology funds.

Capital Outlay
Funds are included to begin to phase out end of life technology equipment citywide, and begin a replacement cycle to create and maintain effective operations.

4 - 81

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MANAGEMENT SERVICES
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 45
Ongoing Initiatives, Goals, and Objectives
Innovation and Technology (IT)
• Modernize and maximize the business value and resiliency of technology services. • Work with departments to identify ways technology can improve efficiency. • Advance IT-managed service delivery by improving oversight and focusing on operational excellence.
• Secure the City’s data and technology and improve our cyber security posture. • Educate and train staff regarding possible cybersecurity threats by implementing a program to comprehensively train city technology users, provide baseline testing, and mitigate potential risks associated with phishing attacks.

Human Resources
• Continue to attract, develop, and retain a well-qualified and diverse workforce, and fill vacancies in a timely manner.
• Continue to seek and implement efficiencies that will improve the way we deliver services to employees and customer departments.
• Continue to offer citywide training and development opportunities and take full advantage of our new learning management system to link training to core competencies better. • Continue employee engagement efforts, and develop a plan aimed at reducing employee turnover and increasing job satisfaction.

City Clerk
• Provide customers with accurate and thorough information and access to city council meetings and election resources.
• Embrace cutting-edge technology and industry best practices to increase efficiency, transparency, and accessibility.

Adhere to state and local mandates and deadlines related to city government. • Streamline public records act requests processing and implement a public records request management program.
• Improve the City’s record retention practices and implement a comprehensive records management program.
• Work to provide all Commission and elected officials relevant training, including Brown Act and ethics training (AB 1234 and AB1661).
4 - 82

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MANAGEMENT SERVICES
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 46
Budget Summary
Authorized Positions

Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
EXPENDITURE SUMMARY 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 Wages & Benefits 6,764 30,959 6,615 1,144,286 1,088,369 1,118,897 Operations & Maintenance 1,627,845 1,647,496 665,364 2,499,490 2,418,567 2,258,490 Capital Outlay 68,556 91,035 7,495 100,000 100,000 197,000 Total Expenses by Category 1,703,165 1,769,490 679,474 3,743,776 3,606,936 3,574,387 [101-2033] City Clerk 113,311 115,512 - 470,283 389,517 447,319 [101-1022] Elections 185,743 76,843 93,242 166,000 110,809 63,900 [101-2034] Human Resources 324,830 350,761 - 898,923 905,818 915,553 [101-2021] Transportation Planning 12,835 287 90 - - -
[101-2031] Management Services - - 6,615 480,230 415,995 496,105 [101-2032] Information Services 573,881 541,110 - 833,200 889,657 1,151,511 [101-2501] Legal Services 492,566 607,285 572,032 895,140 895,140 500,000 [105-3032] Information Services - 77,691 7,495 - - -
Total Expenses by Program 1,703,165 1,769,490 679,474 3,743,776 3,606,936 3,574,387 4 - 83
Human Resources
/ Risk Mgmt
Human Resources, Labor Relations,
Employee Development/Training, General
Liability,
Workers' Comp. and Loss Prevention
HR/Risk
Manager
Senior HR
Analyst
Senior HR
Analyst
HR Specialist
Director of
Management Services
Management
Services
Information Technology,
Grants and Special Projects
Senior
Management
Analyst
Management
Assistant
IT Contract
(Acorn)
Full Time Employees: 9
Part Time Employees: 0
City Clerk
City Clerk, Council, Commission
Support, Elections, Records Mgmt, AN
support
Chief City Clerk
Deputy
City Clerk

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MANAGEMENT SERVICES
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 47
Management Services / 101-2030-2031
Budget Detail
Actual Actual Actual Budgeted Estimated Proposed
Acct Tsk Account Title 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2022/23 2023/24 7000 000 Salaries - Permanent - - 5,730 243,499 200,724 170,781 7010 000 Salaries - Temp / Part - - - 95,000 116,075 78,000 7011 000 Salaries - PT Stipend - - - - - -
7020 000 Overtime - - - 5,000 -
7040 000 Holiday - - - - - -
7055 000 IOD - Non Safety - - - - - -
7070 000 Leave Buyback - - - 15,000 - 3,146
7100 000 Retirement - - 665 61,369 46,572 22,646
7100 010 CalPERS UAL - - - - 50,376
7108 000 Deferred Compensation - - 57 1,527 1,530 1,708 7110 000 Workers Compensation - - 80 4,229 2,042 2,392
7120 000 Disability Insurance - - - - -
7130 000 Group Health Insurance - - - 9,348 5,986 7,979 7140 000 Vision Insurance - - - 415 117 153
7150 000 Dental Insurance - - - 1,557 432 567
7160 000 Life Insurance - - - 171 70 92
7170 000 FICA - Medicare - - 83 3,315 2,646 6,263
7180 000 Car/Uniform Allowance - - - - - -
<WAGES & BENEFITS> - - 6,615 440,430 376,195 344,105
8000 000 Office Supplies - - - 16,000 16,000 15,000
8010 000 Postage - - - 300 300 300
8020 000 Special Department Expense - - - - - 1,000
8050 000 Printing/Duplicating - - - 2,000 2,000 500
8060 000 Dues & Memberships - - - 2,000 2,000 700
8090 000 Conference & Meeting Expense - - - 4,000 4,000 4,000 8100 000 Vehicle Maintenance - - - - - -
8110 000 Equipment Maintenance - - - 500 500 -
8150 000 Telephone - - - - - -
8170 000 Professional Services - - - 15,000 15,000 10,000 8180 000 Contract Services - - - - - 120,000
8200 000 Training Expense - - - - - 500
<OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE> - - - 39,800 39,800 152,000
[101-2031] Management Services Total - - 6,615 480,230 415,995 496,105 4 - 84

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA MANAGEMENT SERVICES
PROPOSED BUDGET | FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 48
Budget Detail

PERSONNEL
7000 Salaries – Regular Employees
Funds the Management Services Director and Senior Management Analyst salaries.
7010 Salaries – Part-Time
Funds non-salaried part-time employees (Management Assistant) and temporary staff for special projects.
7070 Leave Buyback
Funds employees who opt to sell back hours of their leave balances.

OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
8000 Office Supplies
General office supplies from Staples (per the City’s contract with Staples) for the Management Services Department (Total $15,000). 8010 Postage
Provides funds for as-needed postal expenses for City mailings, including public notice mailings, and legal printing of notices (Total $300). 8020 Special Department Expense
Funds for department apparel for staff for community events and conference and training attendance (Total $1,000).
8050 Printing and Duplication
Provides funds for the printing and duplication of materials, including City information brochures for front counter (as-needed) for Departmental efforts (Total $500).
8060 Dues, Memberships, and Subscriptions
Provides funds for International City Manager’s Association dues for Department Director and Senior Management Analyst ($400), and three staff memberships to the Municipal Management Association of Southern California ($300). (Total $700).
8090 Conference and Meeting Expense
Provides funds for travel and lodging for one staff member to attend the Municipal Management Association Southern California (MMASC) Annual Conference ($1,500), and funds for travel and lodging for one staff member to attend the International City Manager’s Association ($2,500). (Total $4,000).
4 - 85