Agenda packet — Vallejo City Council, July 12, 2022 (part 3 of 3)

community, such as addressing homelessness, blight and illegal dumping, fire protection, and crime prevention services, are significantly underfunded and have been identified as a priority for the community. On June 7, 2022, City Council received the results of a community survey, which indicated the potential viability of a local revenue measure. If enacted, the measure would establish a seven-eighths (0.875%) sales tax and generate approximately 18 million dollars annually, which can be allocated to maintain and improve city infrastructure and critical services.

Specifically, staff recommends advisory spending priorities but NOT an advisory voter measure. Unfortunately, in other cities, such as the case with Redding and Paso Robles, in recent years the placement of two measures on the ballot can be confusing for voters, which resulted in an outcome of a “yes” vote on the advisory measure and a “no” vote on the base funding measure itself, rendering the outcome moot. However, staff do not recommend the adoption of a resolution by the City Council setting forth the spending priorities which would have been part of the advisory measure. Such a resolution is included herein as an option for the Council’s consideration.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
On June 7, 2022, the City Council received an update on recent independent public opinion research assessing the community’s priorities, as well as gauging interest in a potential local revenue measure. Key findings of the research were presented to the Council, including feedback from participants regarding priority services.

In addition to questions regarding priorities for funding, the viability of a local revenue measure was assessed, with results indicating marginal viability, specifically for a general purpose measure. The language of the measure, which has been reviewed by the City Attorney, is as follows:

City of Vallejo Safe Streets and Essential Services Measure. To maintain critical city services, such as keeping public spaces healthy/safe/clean; maintaining fire protection/emergency medical response/crime prevention; addressing homelessness/blight/dumping; repairing deteriorating neighborhood streets/roads/sidewalks; and for general government use; shall the City of Vallejo adopt a measure establishing a 0.875% sales tax, providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring audits, independent citizen oversight, and all funds legally required to be spent locally?

Community Priorities

The following outlines the needs and priorities identified by the Vallejo community for the use of additional local funding if the City Council places a local revenue measure on the November 2022 ballot. The City would use this information to guide its spending allocations, should the measure be enacted:

Community Identified Needs and Priorities

Quality of Life/Public Safety
Fire Protection & Emergency Response
Maintain essential fire protection, emergency medical response, and crime prevention programs.

Address emergency response times that have exceeded national standards in recent years.

Addressing Homelessness
Continue to maintain the navigation center for people experiencing homelessness, including veterans and seniors, and connect them with the services, shelter and support they need while ensuring our Date: July 12, 2022
Subject: ACTIONS RELATED TO THE INCREASE OF SEVEN-EIGHTHS (0.875) OF ONE CENT TRANSACTION AND USE TAX ON THE NOVEMBER 8, 2022 BALLOT INCLUDING INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3.09 OF THE VALLEJO MUNICIPAL CODE AND THE NECESSARY ASSOCIATED RESOLUTIONS

Page 3 ends

local businesses, neighborhoods, and public areas are safe and secure for everyone.

Keep Public Spaces Healthy, Safe, and Clean
Prevent blight and maintain public spaces such as parks that have become rundown, and which provide areas for illegal activities and dumping of trash.

Safe Streets
Repairing Streets
Repair deteriorating neighborhood streets, roads and sidewalks to prevent costly damage to cars, further road deterioration, and increase community safety and quality of life.

Safe Streets for All
Fix potholes, crumbling sidewalks, dangerous intersections, and crosswalks to provide safe routes to schools, better accessibility for seniors and people living with disabilities, and safer streets for all drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians.

Fiscal Stewardship
Make essential road repairs on over 400 lane miles of local roads identified by independent experts as among the worst in the Bay Area, before they become more hazardous and more expensive to fix.

Timeline
 July 26, 2022 – Adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 3.09 of the Vallejo Municipal Code establishing a seven-eights (0.875) cent transaction and use tax for general purposes, subject to the approval of the voters on the November 8, 2022 ballot
 August – October, 2022 – Public education on proposed ballot measure  August 2022 – Ballot arguments & rebuttals due; City Attorney prepares impartial analysis; Board of Supervisors approval of resolution consolidating election.  November 8, 2022 – Election Day.

Public Education

Staff would anticipate a permissible public information program to inform the community about the measure.

Information would likely be disseminated via City online communication vehicles, water bill inserts, direct mail, digital platforms and presentations by City executive team members and managers to professional and neighborhood associations, as well as community groups. Additionally, as is the current practice, updates would be provided in regular City communications via the website, social media, etc.

FISCAL IMPACT
A seven-eighths (0.875) cent sales tax measure is expected to generate $18 million per year going forward, though it may rise or fall depending on the state of the economy. Revenues are used to support community services based on current taxable sales volume in Vallejo. The cost of placing this measure on the November 8, 2022 ballot is estimated at $100,000, which includes the $16,669 cost quoted by the Registrar of Voters to place a measure on the ballot, as well as cost for voter information, all of which can be paid from the adopted FY 22-23 General Fund election costs budget.

If approved by voters on November 8, 2022, it is estimated that the tax would become effective on April 1, Date: July 12, 2022
Subject: ACTIONS RELATED TO THE INCREASE OF SEVEN-EIGHTHS (0.875) OF ONE CENT TRANSACTION AND USE TAX ON THE NOVEMBER 8, 2022 BALLOT INCLUDING INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3.09 OF THE VALLEJO MUNICIPAL CODE AND THE NECESSARY ASSOCIATED RESOLUTIONS

Page 4 ends

2023.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a project which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, pursuant to CEQA Guideline section 15378.

ATTACHMENTS

1. 3.09 Calling and Ordering Submission FINAL

2. Resolution For Filing For FINAL

3. Resolution for Rebuttals FINAL

4. Resolution of Spending Authority FINAL

5. Resolution for Advisory Measure FINAL

6. Resolution Advisory Measure For FINAL

7. Resolution for Advisory Measure Council Arguments FINAL

8. Resolution of Advisory Measure Rebuttal FINAL

9. 2022 Vallejo Ballot Measure Survey - Public Summary

CONTACT
Terrance Davis, Assistant City Manager (707) 648-4301
[email protected]
RESOLUTION NO. 20-______ N.C.

A RESOLUTION CALLING AND ORDERING THE SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS

OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO A MEASURE RELATING TO A PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3.09 OF THE VALLEJO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO VALLEJO SAFE STREETS AND ESSENTIAL SERVICES MEASURE. TO MAINTAIN CITY SERVICES, SUCH AS KEEPING PUBLIC SPACES HEALTHY/SAFE/CLEAN, ADDRESSING HOMELESSNESS/BLIGHT/DUMPING;

REPAIRING DETERIORATING NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS/ROADS/SIDEWALKS, AND FOR GENERAL GOVERNMENT USE; SHALL THE CITY OF VALLEJO ADOPT A MEASURE ESTABLISHING A SEVEN-EIGHTS (.875) ¢ SALES TAX UNTIL ENDED BY VOTERS, PROVIDING APPROXIMATELY $18,000,000 ANNUALLY, REQUIRING INDEPENDENT AUDITS, AND ALL

FUNDS SPENT IN VALLEJO
City of Vallejo Safe Streets and Essential Services Measure. To maintain critical city services, such as keeping public spaces healthy/safe/clean; maintaining fire protection/emergency medical response/crime prevention; addressing homelessness/blight/dumping; repairing deteriorating neighborhood streets/roads/sidewalks; and for general government use; shall the City of Vallejo adopt a measure establishing a 0.875% sales tax, providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring audits, independent citizen oversight, and all funds legally required to be spent locally?
WHEREAS, the City needs to effectively address our own unique local needs and community priorities; and
WHEREAS, the proposed measure includes strict accountability requirements including independent financial audits and public expenditure reports, with no funding that could be taken by the State; and WHEREAS, the community has indicated repairing and repaving roads, keeping public spaces healthy, clean and safe; enforcing city ordinances, retaining and attracting local jobs and businesses, and addressing homelessness are important priorities; and
WHEREAS, in recent years, pavement conditions have deteriorated to failing standards and created hazardous conditions; and
WHEREAS, in response to the growing homelessness crisis the City has secured one-time funding to establish a navigation center to help people experiencing homelessness – including seniors and veterans – get access to services, shelter and support; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to continue addressing homelessness in a compassionate manner and continue operating the navigation center while keeping the City safe; and WHEREAS, Vallejo has some of the worst roads in the Bay Area, with half of the roads rating poor or very poor; and
WHEREAS, essential road repairs are needed immediately or they will only get more expensive to fix and more dangerous for residents, including first responders who need to reach people that need help quickly; and;
WHEREAS, a General Municipal election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, was adopted by resolution on July 12, 2022; and
WHEREAS, on July 12, 2020, the City Council introduced and held the first reading of an Ordinance Amending Vallejo Municipal Code Chapter 3.09 related to City of Vallejo Local Road and Essential Services Measure. To maintain critical city services, such as repairing, paving, and maintaining deteriorating local roads, city buildings, fire protection, code enforcement, and youth programs; address homelessness; and for general government use shall the City of Vallejo adopt a measure establishing a

0.875% sales tax, providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring yearly audits, citizen oversight, and all funds legally required to be spent locally and WHEREAS, the tax provided for by the proposed Ordinance shall be enacted solely to raise revenue for general purposes, and shall be placed into the City’s General Fund, and is not intended for regulation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires, to submit to the voters at the November 8, 2022, General Municipal election a measure proposing a .875 percent transactions and use tax for general purposes; and WHEREAS, if enacted, the Measure would provide a local revenue source and would increase the General Fund to provide services including, but not limited to, homelessness services; improved code enforcement; repairing potholes, local streets, public buildings and keeping public areas clean, well- maintained and free of graffiti and economic development; and WHEREAS, Section 7285.9 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code authorizes any city to levy, increase or extend a transactions and use tax for general purposes at a rate of 0.125 percent, or a multiple thereof, subject to approval by a two-third vote of all members of the City Council and by a majority of the qualified voters of the City voting in an election on the issue; and WHEREAS, Article XIIIC, section 2(b) of the California Constitution requires that an election be held when a City council seeks voter approval of a new general tax and that said election be consolidated with a regularly scheduled general election for members of the City Council; and WHEREAS, this Resolution proposes to the electorate the amendment of an ordinance which, if approved, would impose a tax on retail transactions involving sale and use of personal property. The tax rate would be an increase of (.875%) of the sales price of the property. The tax revenue would be collected by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration and remitted to the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS, THAT:

SECTION 1. The City Council pursuant to its right and authority, does order to be submitted to the voters at the November 8, 2022 General Municipal election the following question:

THE VALLEJO SALES TAX MEASURE
YES
City of Vallejo Safe Streets and Essential Services Measure. To maintain critical city services, such as keeping public spaces healthy/safe/clean; maintaining fire protection/emergency medical response/crime prevention; addressing homelessness/blight/dumping; repairing deteriorating neighborhood streets/roads/sidewalks; and for general government use; shall the City of Vallejo adopt a measure establishing a 0.875% sales tax, providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring audits, independent citizen oversight, and all funds legally required to be spent locally?
NO
SECTION 2. The proposed measure submitted to the voters is as attached in Exhibit 1 to this Resolution, which is incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 3. In all particulars not recited in this Resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections.

SECTION 4. Notice of the time and place of holding the election is given and the City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to give further or additional notice of the election, in time, form and manner as required by law.

SECTION 5. The City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the Solano County Board of Supervisors and the Solano County Registrar of Voters.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Vallejo at a regular meeting held on July 12, 2022 with the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________________
ROBERT H. MCCONNELL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________________
DAWN G. ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK

EXHIBIT A
Proposed Amended Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO. N.C. (2d)
A PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3.09 OF THE VALLEJO

MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO VALLEJO SAFE STREETS AND ESSENTIAL SERVICES MEASURE. TO MAINTAIN CRITICAL CITY SERVICES, SUCH AS KEEPING PUBLIC SPACES HEALTHY/SAFE/CLEAN; MAINTAINING FIRE
PROTECTION/EMERGENCY MEDICAL RESPONSE/CRIME PREVENTION; ADDRESSING HOMELESSNESS/BLIGHT/DUMPING; REPAIRING DETERIORATING NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS/ROADS/SIDEWALKS; AND FOR GENERAL
GOVERNMENT USE; SHALL THE CITY OF VALLEJO ADOPT A MEASURE ESTABLISHING A 0.875% SALES TAX, PROVIDING $18,000,000 ANNUALLY UNTIL

ENDED BY VOTERS, REQUIRING AUDITS, INDEPENDENT CITIZEN OVERSIGHT,

AND ALL FUNDS LEGALLY REQUIRED TO BE SPENT LOCALLY
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 3.09.020 of the Vallejo Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

3.09.020 - Definitions.

For the purposes of this chapter the following terms shall have the meanings given in this section:

A. "City" means the incorporated territory of the city.

B. "Operative date" means the first day of the first calendar quarter commencing more than one hundred ten days after the adoption of this chapter and the approval by the voters of the city of a measure approving the imposition of a transaction and use tax; provided, that if the city shall not have contracted with the state board of equalization California Department of Tax and Fee Administration as required by Section 3.09.040 prior to such date, the city shall nevertheless so contract and in such a case the operative date shall be the first day of the first calendar quarter following the execution of such a contract.

SECTION 2. Section 3.09.030 of the Vallejo Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

3.09.030 - Purpose.

The city council hereby declares that this chapter is adopted to achieve the Commented [ES1]: 75 words counting "City of Vallejo" as one word and including title
following, among other purposes, and directs that the provisions hereof be interpreted in order to accomplish those purposes:

A. To impose a retail transactions and use tax in accordance with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and Section 7285.9 of Part 1.7 of Division 2 which authorizes the city to adopt this tax ordinance which shall be operative if a majority of the electors voting on the measure vote to approve the imposition of the tax at an election called for that purpose.

B. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that incorporates provisions identical to those of the sales and use tax law of the State of California insofar as those provisions are not inconsistent with the requirements and limitations contained in Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

C. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that imposes a tax and provides a measure therefor that can be administered and collected by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration in a manner that adapts itself as fully as practicable to, and requires the least possible deviation from, the existing statutory and administrative procedures followed by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration in administering and collecting the California State Sales and Use Taxes.

D. To adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance that can be administered in a manner that will be, to the greatest degree possible, consistent with the provisions of Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, minimize the cost of collecting the transactions and use taxes, and at the same time, minimize the burden of recordkeeping upon persons subject to taxation under the provisions of this ordinance.

SECTION 3. Section 3.09.040 of the Vallejo Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

3.09.40 – Contract with State
Prior to the operative date, the city shall contract with the state board of equalization California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to perform all functions incident to the administration and operation of this chapter.

SECTION 4. Section 3.09.055 of the Vallejo Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows:

3.09.055 - Imposition of additional transaction tax, transaction tax rate.

For the privilege of selling tangible personal property at retail, in addition to section 3.09.50 of this chapter, an additional tax is hereby imposed upon all retailers in the city at the rate of seven-eighths cent (.875%) of the gross receipts of any retailer from the sale of all tangible personal property sold at retail in said territory on and after the operative date.

SECTION 5. Section 3.09.060 of the Vallejo Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

3.09.060 - Place of sale.

For the purposes of this chapter, all retail sales are consummated at the place of business of the retailer unless the tangible personal property sold is delivered by the retailer or his agent to an out-of-state destination or to a common carrier for delivery to an out-of-state destination. The gross receipts from such sales shall include delivery charges, when such charges are subject to the state sales and use tax, regardless of the place to which delivery is made. In the event a retailer has no permanent place of business in the state or has more than one place of business, the place or places at which the retail sales are consummated shall be determined under rules and regulations to be prescribed and adopted by the state board of equalization California Department of Tax and Fee Administration.

SECTION 6. Section 3.09.075 of the Vallejo Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows:

3.09.075 - Imposition of use tax, use tax rate.

In addition to section 3.09.70 of this chapter, an additional excise tax is hereby imposed on the storage, use or other consumption in the city of tangible personal property purchased from any retailer on and after the operative date and before the termination date for storage, use or other consumption in said territory at the rate of seven-eighths cent (.875%) of the sales price of the property. The sales price shall include delivery charges when such charges are subject to state sales or use tax regardless of the place to which delivery is made.

SECTION 7. Section 3.09.090 of the Vallejo Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

3.09.090 - Limitations on the adoption of state law and collection of use taxes.

In adopting the provisions of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code:

A. Wherever the state of California is named or referred to as the taxing agency, the name of the city shall be substituted therefor. However, the substitution shall not be made when:

1. The word "State" is used as a part of the title of the State Controller, State Treasurer, State Board of Control, State Board of Equalization, State Treasury, California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, or the Constitution of the State of California;

2. The result of that substitution would require action to be taken by or against this city or any agency, officer, or employee thereof rather than by or against the state board of equalization California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, in performing the functions incident to the administration or operation of this chapter.

3. In those sections, including, but not necessarily limited to, sections referring to the exterior boundaries of the state of California, where the result of the substitution would be to:
a. Provide an exemption from this tax with respect to certain sales, storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property which would not otherwise be exempt from this tax while such sales, storage, use or other consumption remain subject to tax by the state under the provisions of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code; or
b. Impose this tax with respect to certain sales, storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property which would not be subject to tax by the state under the said provision of that code.

4. In Sections 6701, 6702 (except in the last sentence thereof), 6711, 6715, 6737, 6797 or 6828 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

B. The word "city" shall be substituted for the word "State" in the phrase "retailer engaged in business in this State" in Section 6203 and in the definition of that phrase in Section 6203.

SECTION 8. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

SECTION 9. CONSTRUCTION. To the extent the provisions of the Vallejo Municipal code as amended by this Ordinance are substantially the same as the provisions of that Code as it read earlier, those provisions shall be read as continuations of earlier enactments and not as new enactments.

SECTION 10. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be
submitted to the voters at an election to be held on November 8, 2022. Upon approval by a majority of the voters of the City voting on this Ordinance, this Ordinance shall take effect 10 days after the City Council certifies the result of the election, as provided by Elections Code section 9217, and the Transactions and Use Tax shall be increased as provided for in this Ordinance.

RESOLUTION NO. 20- N.C.

A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF BALLOT ARGUMENTS FOR A CITY MEASURE AMENDING CHAPTER 3.09 OF THE VALLEJO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ESTABLISHING A SEVEN-EIGHTHS (0.875) CENT TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX

FOR GENERAL PURPOSES AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN

IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS
WHEREAS, a General Municipal election is to be held in the City of Vallejo on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, at which there will be submitted to the voters of said City a measure in substantially the following form:

I
YES
City of Vallejo Safe Streets and Essential Services Measure. To maintain critical city services, such as keeping public spaces healthy/safe/clean; maintaining fire protection/emergency medical response/crime prevention programs; addressing homelessness/blight/dumping; repairing deteriorating neighborhood streets/roads/sidewalks; and for general government use; shall the City of Vallejo adopt a measure establishing a 0.875% sales tax, providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring audits, independent citizen oversight, and all funds legally required to be spent locally?
NO
WHEREAS, Elections Code section 9280 authorizes the City Council to order the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis of the city measure qualifying for a place on the ballot; and WHEREAS, Elections Code section 9282 authorizes the filing of written arguments for and against measures placed on the ballot by the legislative body, individual voter, or bona fide association of citizens, or combination of voters and associations, or individual voters who are eligible to vote on the measure, pursuant to Elections Code section 9287., and in accordance with the Elections Code of the State of California, Section 9280, et seq., and may be changed until and including the date fixed by the City Clerk, after which no arguments for or against the measure may be submitted to the City Clerk.

SECTION 2. That, in accordance with Elections Code section 9286(b), the deadline for submitting arguments for or against the proposed ordinance shall be as established by the Registrar of Voters for the November 8, 2022 election, which is customarily seventy-eight (78) days prior to the election. The arguments shall be filed with the City Clerk, signed, with the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the author(s) submitting it, or if submitted on behalf of an organization, the name of the organization, and the printed name and signature of at least one of its principal officers who is the author of the argument.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby directs the City Clerk to transmit a copy of the City Measure to the City Attorney. The City Attorney shall cause to be prepared an impartial analysis of the measure showing the effect of the measure on the existing law and the operation of the measure pursuant to Elections Code section 9289.

Adopted by the Council of the City of Vallejo at a regular meeting held on July 12, 2022 with the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ROBERT H. MCCONNELL, MAYOR
ATTEST:

DAWN G. ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK

Vallejo Voter Attitudes
Toward Potential
Finance Measures
Key Findings of a Citywide Survey
Conducted May 19‐26, 2022
220‐6345

Survey Specifics and Methodology
Dates May 19‐26, 2022
Survey Type Dual‐mode Voter Survey
Research Population Likely November 2022 Voters in the City of Vallejo Total Interviews 564
Margin of Sampling Error ±4.9% at the 95% Confidence Level (Full Sample) ±6.9% at the 95% Confidence Level (Half Sample)
Contact Methods Telephone Email Text
Calls Invitations Invitations
Data Collection Modes Telephone Online
Interviews Interviews
Languages English, Spanish and Tagalog
(Note: Not All Results Will Sum to 100% Due to Rounding) 2 Views of Life in
Vallejo
3 4
Pessimists about Vallejo’s direction
outnumber optimists four to one, though
still at nowhere near the levels of 2010.

Would you say that things in the City of Vallejo have been moving in the right direction, in the wrong direction, or have not changed much over the last 2 years? Right Direction Have Not Changed Much/Don't Know Wrong Direction 2022
2020
2019
*2018
2016
2010
2009
2007
*Tracked from a Community Survey; Wording Slightly Different in Previous Survey July
2020
54%17%29%
67%18%16%
84%8%8%
40%18%42%
20%43%37%
28%32%40%
42%44%14%
44%45%11%
5 Few respondents expressed favorable
opinions of city government...

I would like to ask your impressions of some organizations in public life. Please tell me whether your impression of that organization is generally favorable or unfavorable.

Very Fav. Smwt. Fav. Smwt. Unfav. Very Unfav. HO/Can't Rate NHO/Don't Know Total Fav.

Total
Unfav.

The Vallejo City Council
Vallejo City government,
overall
14% 60%
14% 67%
11% 33% 27% 19% 7%
12% 34% 33% 14% 5%
6 …views that have declined in recent years.
(Total Favorable)
Organization *2018 2020 2022 Difference
(2020‐2022)
Vallejo City
government, overall 34% 28% 14% ‐14%
I would like to ask your impressions of some organizations in public life. Please tell me whether your impression of that organization is generally favorable or unfavorable. *Tracked from a Community Survey
7 Top concerns focused on homelessness, public
dumping, and issues related to public safety.

Ext. Ser. Prob. Very Ser. Prob. Smwt. Ser. Prob. Not Too Ser. Prob. Don't Know Homelessness
Crime, gangs, and drugs
Public dumping and trash
^A lack of community safety

The condition of local streets
and roads
The quality of City of Vallejo
public safety services
The City’s financial stability
^Not Part of Split Sample
Ext./Very
Ser. Prob.
80%
79%
79%
75%
69%
68%
68%
50% 30% 14%
52% 27% 10% 7%
50% 29% 17%
45% 29% 19% 6%
42% 27% 21% 7%
39% 29% 17% 11%
35% 33% 18% 12%
I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Vallejo that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem in Vallejo. ^Not Part of Split Sample 8 The cost of living, government waste, and
public infrastructure are second-tier concerns.

Ext. Ser. Prob. Very Ser. Prob. Smwt. Ser. Prob. Not Too Ser. Prob. Don't Know Too little growth and
development
The cost of living
Waste and inefficiency in
city government
The quality of Vallejo’s
public infrastructure
Jobs and the local economy
The cost of housing
^Excessive use of force towards
unarmed people
Ext./Very
Ser. Prob.
65%
64%
63%
59%
59%
55%
54%
36% 29% 18% 10% 6%
33% 31% 23% 10%
34% 29% 17% 5% 15%
29% 31% 27% 6% 7%
25% 33% 25% 8% 8%
29% 26% 28% 12% 5%
37% 17% 18% 16% 12%
I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Vallejo that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem in Vallejo. ^Not Part of Split Sample 9 Concerns are low about city traffic and congestion;
majorities do not think growth and development is a
serious problem.

Ext. Ser. Prob. Very Ser. Prob. Smwt. Ser. Prob. Not Too Ser. Prob. Don't Know ^The economic impacts of the
coronavirus outbreak
Bike, pedestrian and
road safety
^The health impacts of the
coronavirus outbreak
The burden of public
employee pensions
The amount people pay in
City taxes
Traffic and congestion
Too much growth
and development
Ext./Very
Ser. Prob.
49%
42%
38%
35%
31%
17%
9%
46%36%7%10%
23%34%24%18%
12%
19%
17%
18% 31% 32% 13% 6%
21% 28% 27% 7%
16% 23% 13% 28%
18% 29% 24% 17%
5% 14% 65% 12%
*Tracked from a Community Survey
10 Concerns about the cost of living and community
safety have increased notably since 2020.
(Extremely/Very Serious Problem)
Problem 2009 2010 2016 *2018 2019 2020 2022 Difference
(2020‐2022)
The cost of living ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 42% 49% 40% 64% +24%
^A lack of community safety ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 58% 75% +17% The quality of City of Vallejo
public safety services ‐‐ 55% 47% 53% 52% 57% 68% +11%
Crime, gangs, and drugs ‐‐ 82% 74% 76% 63% 69% 79% +10% The City’s financial stability ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 56% 60% 59% 68% +9% The quality of Vallejo’s
public infrastructure ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 50% 53% 59% +6%
The cost of housing ‐‐ ‐‐ 41% 46% 48% 50% 55% +5%
Homelessness ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 77% 80% +3%
Waste and inefficiency in
city government 65% 74% 48% 49% 47% 61% 63% +2%
Traffic and congestion ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 23% 22% 16% 17% +1%
I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Vallejo that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem in Vallejo. ^Not Part of Split Sample *Tracked from a Community Survey
11 While majorities expressed a gut feeling that
the City needs additional funding, that perception
is less strongly held than it was in prior years.

In your personal opinion, do you think there is a great need, some need, a little need, or no real need for additional funds to provide the level of City services that Vallejo residents need and want? Great/ A Little/
Great Need Some Need A Little Need No Real Need Don’t Know Some No Real Need Need
2022 46% 24% 10% 8% 11% 71% 18%
2020 61% 20% 6% 7% 6% 81% 13%
2019 48% 34% 5% 10% 82% 15%
*2018 44% 32% 11% 6% 7% 76% 16%
Initial Reactions
to a Potential
Funding Measure
12 13
Measures Assessed in this Survey
•All survey respondents were asked how they would vote on two hypothetical

0.875% sales tax measures.
One would dedicate funds exclusively for streets and roads (two‐thirds vote threshold).
One would provide fund for the City’s general fund (majority vote threshold). •Measures were rotated in the initial vote to mitigate against any bias associated with the order in which they were heard or read.
•Respondents were also asked to react to a variety of ways that funds generated by either measure could be spent.
•Later in the survey, respondents were presented with a set of statements supporting, and then a set of statement criticizing, the measure they heard or read first.
•Respondents were asked how they would vote on the measure after being presented with each set of statements to determine hypothetical ceilings and floors of support.

Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 14 Hypothetical Special-Purpose
Measure Language
(Reviewed by the City Attorney; two‐thirds vote threshold for passage) City of Vallejo Safe Streets and Pothole Repair Measure.

To maintain/improve local roads, sidewalks, and neighborhood/ residential streets, provide safe routes to school;
repair potholes/streets/crumbling sidewalks and prevent future deterioration; and enhance senior/disabled accessibility shall the City of Vallejo adopt a measure establishing a 0.875% sales tax, providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring yearly audits, independent citizen oversight, and all funds legally required to be spent locally only on Vallejo streets and not for any other purpose?
Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 15 Initial reactions to the special-purpose
measure funding streets and roads were
near its two-thirds vote threshold but within the
margin of error.

Def. Yes Prob. Yes Und., Lean Yes Undecided Und., Lean No Prob. No Def. No Total Yes
Total
No
Asked First
Asked Second
Total
69% 29%
64% 29%
66% 29%
37% 27% 11% 15%
38% 23% 7% 9% 19%
38% 25% 5% 10% 17%
Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 16 Hypothetical General-Purpose
Measure Language
(Reviewed by the City Attorney; majority vote threshold for passage) City of Vallejo Fiscal Stability and Essential Services Measure. To maintain critical city services, such as fire protection, emergency medical response, crime prevention/investigation, street maintenance, and youth programs; address homelessness;
enhance police transparency/accountability and recruit/retain qualified police officers; and for general government use shall the City of Vallejo adopt a measure establishing a 0.875% sales tax, providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring yearly audits, citizen oversight, and all funds legally required to be spent locally?
Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 17 Initial reactions to the general-purpose measure
were above it’s majority vote threshold.

Def. Yes Prob. Yes Und., Lean Yes Undecided Und., Lean No Prob. No Def. No Total Yes
Total
No
Asked First
Asked Second
Total
53% 40%
63% 30%
58% 35%
30% 18% 5% 7% 12% 25%
38% 18% 7% 7% 7% 21%
34% 18% 6% 7% 9% 23%
18 Support was particularly intense
for addressing homelessness.

Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Keeping public places healthy, safe,
and clean
Maintaining fire protection and
emergency medical response services
^Attracting and retaining businesses
and jobs in the City
Maintaining crime prevention and
investigation services
Preventing dumping and blight
Repairing streets to prevent damage
to cars and trucks
Ext./Very
Impt.
92%
91%
88%
86%
85%
85%
85%
52% 40% 7%
54% 37% 7%
53% 35% 10%
62% 24% 9%
55% 30% 10%
13%39%46%
13%32%53%
Addressing homelessness
19 ^Not Part of Split Sample
20 Respondents prioritized a variety of ways funds
could be spent to improve roads at similar levels.

Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Maintaining streets and roads to
prevent future deterioration
Repairing neighborhood streets
Maintaining the City’s fiscal stability
^Providing safe routes to school
for children
Repairing the conditions of local
streets, roads, and sidewalks 5
Repairing streets officially designated
as “failed” by independent experts
Resurfacing deteriorated streets
Ext./Very
Impt.

I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source. Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, 48% 33% 12%
44% 37% 13% 81%
44% 36% 17% 80%
37% 48% 12% 85%
40% 43% 14% 83%
45% 37% 13% 82%
81%
46% 34% 14% % 81%
21 somewhat important, or not important. ^Not Part of Split Sample 22 Many other public safety, roads, and community
services were also seen as important.

Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Enhancing police transparency
and accountability
Maintaining anti‐gang and
anti‐drug programs
Repairing potholes
Recruiting and retaining qualified
police officers
Providing a navigation center where
people experiencing homelessness
can access services
Maintaining community health
programs and services
Improving local streets, roads,
and sidewalks
Ext./Very
Impt.
75%
75%
74%
I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source. Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, 44% 30% 16% 8%
19%38%38%
52% 26% 13% 6%
55% 21% 13% 9%
43% 31% 21%
56% 23% 13% 5% 79%
78%
46% 33% 18% 78%
76%
23 somewhat important, or not important. Split Sample
Improvements for bicycling and
24 sidewalks were also seen as important by
many, but to a slightly lesser degree.

Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Repairing crumbling sidewalks
Enhancing safety and access for
emergency response vehicles
Preparing for natural disasters and
public health emergencies
^Requiring independent
citizen oversight
Enhancing safety for pedestrians,
bicyclists and drivers
Improving pedestrian, bicyclist, and
driver safety
Rebuilding cracked and
deteriorating sidewalks
Ext./Very
Impt.

I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source. Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, 39% 35% 20% 5%
36% 33% 22% 6%
33% 35% 18% 6% 8%
31% 37% 26% 5%
26% 41% 23% 8%
38% 28% 25% 7%
74%
69%
35% 34% 23% 6% 69%
68%
67%
67%
66%
Improvements for bicycling and
25 somewhat important, or not important. ^Not Part of Split Sample Addressing traffic and the old police station are not
26 viewed as very or extremely important by a majority
of respondents.

Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Enhancing senior and disabled access
Improving sidewalks to make
them more accessible to people
with disabilities
Maintaining public landscaping,
including street medians
Providing a safe, modern
police station
Reducing traffic
Replacing the old, out‐of‐date
police station
Improving commute times
Ext./Very
Impt.
66%
65%
55%
49%
40%
32%
32%
I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source. Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, 32% 34% 24% 6%
31% 34% 26% 5%
23% 31% 34% 11%
27% 21% 27% 23%
16% 23% 37% 20%
16% 15% 25% 35% 8%
15% 17% 34% 26% 8%
Addressing traffic and the old police station are not
27 somewhat important, or not important. Split Sample
The Impact of
Additional
Information
23 24
Positive and Negative Statements
•Possible positive statements included quantifying road repair needs; highlighting the experience of driving on Vallejo’s streets; noting the relationship between increased 911 response times and closed fire stations; noting that funds could support keeping public places clean and safe, youth programs, improved disability access, providing safe routes to schools, implementing police reforms, operating the new homeless navigation center, and modernizing the unsafe police station; and that funds would be subject to various accountability provisions. •Possible negative statements included that the gas tax should already pay for road repairs; that Vallejo voters have tax fatigue; that sales taxes are regressive; that the City has demonstrated poor financial management and should spend funds more efficiently; that the high cost of living and inflation make higher taxes even more untenable; that they City spends too much on claims against the Police Department and on employee pensions; that a special purpose measure only on roads would generate opposition given the City’s public safety needs.

Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 25 47%
29% 27% 42%
Support for the special-purpose roads measure
did not increase after positive statements and fell
well below the threshold after negative statements.

Road Repair Measure (two‐thirds vote threshold)
Initial Vote After Positives After Negatives
Total Yes
Total No
Undecided
69% 66%
7%
3%
11%
41% without
those
“leaning yes”

Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 26 Support for the general-purpose measure
did go up slightly after positive statements but fell to 50% after negative statements.

General‐Purpose Measure (majority vote threshold)
Initial Vote After Positives After Negatives
Total Yes
Total No
Undecided
57%
53% 50%
40%
34%
38%
7% 9% 12%
43% without
those
“leaning yes”

Conclusions
27 28
Views of Life in Vallejo
•After rebounding in the latter part of the prior decade, views of life in Vallejo and of City government are at their lowest levels since the Great Recession and Vallejo’s
bankruptcy.
•Concerns about homelessness, public dumping, and public safety are particularly acute.
•There is also strong sentiment that local street conditions are poor and many are not confident in the City’s financial management.
•However, majorities also believe the City needs additional funding for services.
29 Ballot Measure Viability
•Initial support for a potential special‐purpose sales tax measure funding roads was at its two‐thirds vote threshold but within the margin of error.

Negative arguments dropped that support significantly below 50%. •Initial support for a potential general‐purpose sales tax measure was slightly above its majority vote threshold, though it fell to 50% after critical statements, relying upon a notable number of very tentative supporters to hold at that level in addition to factoring in a margin of error of 6.9%. •Voters see a need for funding, but misgivings about the City’s management and the cost of living suggest that voters are not committed in their support and may easily be convinced to oppose a measure. •While these results are only a snapshot in time and cannot predict the future, they do indicate that a two‐thirds measure is not viable this November and a majority vote measure would likely fail. 1999 Harrison St., Suite 2020
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone (510) 451‐9521
Fax (510) 451‐0384
Curt Below
[email protected]
Lucia Del Puppo
[email protected]
For more information,
contact:

RESOLUTION NO. 20- N.C.

A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS WITH RESPECT TO A CITY MEASURE AMENDING CHAPTER 3.09 OF THE VALLEJO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ESTABLISHING A SEVEN-EIGHTHS (.875) CENT

TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX FOR GENERAL PURPOSES TO BE SUBMITTED

TO THE VOTERS AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2022
WHEREAS, Section 9285 of the California Elections Code authorizes the City Council, by majority vote, to adopt provisions for the filing of rebuttal arguments for city measures submitted at municipal elections;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 9285 of the California Elections Code, when the elections official has selected the arguments for and against the measure which will be printed and distributed to the voters, the elections official shall send a copy of an argument in favor of the measure to the authors of any argument against the measure, and a copy of an argument against the measure to the authors of any argument in favor of the measure immediately upon receiving the arguments.

The author or a majority of the authors of an argument relating to a City measure may prepare and submit a rebuttal argument not exceeding 250 words or may authorize in writing any other person or persons to prepare, submit, or sign the rebuttal argument.

A rebuttal argument may not be signed by more than five persons.

The rebuttal arguments shall be filed with the City Clerk, signed, with the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the author(s) submitting it, or if submitted on behalf of an organization, the name of the organization, and the printed name and signature of at least one of its principal officers, not more than 10 days after the final date for filing arguments. The rebuttal arguments shall be accompanied by the Declaration by Author(s) form to be supplied by the City Clerk.

Rebuttal arguments shall be printed in the same manner as the direct arguments. Each rebuttal argument shall immediately follow the direct argument which it seeks to rebut.

SECTION 2.
, are authorized to draft and file rebuttal arguments related to the proposed ordinance enacting a transactions and use tax, pursuant to Elections Code section 9285.

SECTION 3. All previous resolutions providing for the filling of rebuttal arguments for City measures, if any, are repealed.

SECTION 4. The provisions of Section 1 shall apply only to the General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, and shall then be of no further force and effect.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Vallejo at a regular meeting held on July 12, 2022 with the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ROBERT H. MCCONNELL, MAYOR
ATTEST:

DAWN G. ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK

RESOLUTION NO. 20-______ N.C.

A RESOLUTION APPROVING SPENDING PRIORITIES RELATED TO REVENUES DERIVED FROM THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SEVEN-EIGHTHS (0.875) OF ONE

CENT GENERAL PURPOSE REVENUE MEASURE
WHEREAS, the City Council intends to submit the Vallejo Safe Streets and Essential Services Measure (the “Measure”) to the voters at the November 8, 2022 general municipal election; and
WHEREAS, the Measure, if approved by the voters, will provide approximately $18 million annually paid to the City’s General Fund; and
WHEREAS, the citizens of the City of Vallejo have expressed their desires about how such revenue should be prioritized in the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the desires of the citizens are important to the safety, wellbeing, and economic development of the City of Vallejo; and WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to set spending priorities for the use of the revenues generated by the Measure.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS, THAT:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby directs staff to prioritize the following uses of revenue generated by the Measure:

1. Maintain critical city services such as keeping public spaces healthy, safe and clean;

2. Maintain fire protection;

3. Maintain emergency medical response;

4. Maintain crime prevention;

5. Address homelessness;

6. Address blight;

7. Address dumping;

8. Repair deteriorating neighborhood streets, roads and sidewalks; SECTION 2. Any proposed uses of revenues generated by the Measure not set forth herein shall be submitted by staff to the City Council for consideration. In order to utilize funds on priorities not set forth herein, the City Council shall amend this resolution setting forth the new priorities.

SECTION 3. The City Council does hereby direct and order that this resolution may only be amended or rescinded by the affirmative vote of five (5) or more Council Members.

The Mayor, if voting affirmatively, shall be considered as one of the five or more required votes of Council Members.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Vallejo at a regular meeting held on July 12, 2022 with the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
ROBERT H. MCCONNELL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________________
DAWN G. ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 20-______ N.C.

A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR AND ORDERING THE SUBMISSION TO THE

QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO AN ADVISORY MEASURE

RELATING TO SPENDING PRIORITIES FOR REVENUES DERIVED FROM THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SEVEN-EIGHTHS (0.875) OF ONE CENT GENERAL

PURPOSE REVENUE MEASURE SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE VOTERS ON THE NOVEMEBER 8, 2022
WHEREAS, a Measure amending Section 3.09 of the Vallejo Municipal Code related to the Vallejo Safe Streets and Essential Services Measure has been ordered submitted to the voters by Resolution ____ for a General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to submit to the voters at the election a question related to the designation of funding priorities for the Vallejo Safe Streets and Essential Services Measure; and

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS, THAT:

SECTION 1. The City Council pursuant to its right and authority, does order to be submitted to the voters at the November 8, 2022 General Municipal election the following question:

THE VALLEJO COMMUNITY PRIORITIES MEASURE
YES
Should the City of Vallejo primarily use revenues generated from the Vallejo Safe Streets and Essential Services Measure to maintain critical city services such as keeping public spaces healthy/safe/clean; maintaining fire protection/emergency medical response/crime prevention; addressing homelessness/blight/dumping; repairing deteriorating neighborhood streets/roads/sidewalks? NO
SECTION 2. That the full text of the proposed measure submitted to the voters is attached as Exhibit A.

SECTION 3. In all particulars not recited in this Resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections.

SECTION 5. The City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the Solano County Board of Supervisors and the Solano County Registrar of Voters.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Vallejo at a regular meeting held on July 12, 2022 with the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
ROBERT H. MCCONNELL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________________
DAWN G. ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK

EXHIBIT A
Proposed Full Text
The city's roads and facilities are in a dilapidated state and require significant repair. In addition, other quality of life services, such as code enforcement and support for the unhoused, are significantly underfunded and have been identified as a priority for the community.

The City of Vallejo City Council desires to seek input from voters on how to best proceed with addressing these issues. They pose the following question:

AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS WHEREAS, a General Municipal election is to be held in the City of Vallejo on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, at which there will be submitted to the voters of said City a measure in substantially the following form:

VALLEJO SAFE STREETS AND ESSENTIAL SERVICES MEASURE I
YES
City of Vallejo Safe Streets and Essential Services Measure. To maintain critical city services, such as keeping public spaces healthy/safe/clean; maintaining fire protection/emergency medical response/crime prevention programs; addressing homelessness/blight/dumping; repairing deteriorating neighborhood streets/roads/sidewalks; and for general government use; shall the City of Vallejo adopt a measure establishing a 0.875% sales tax, providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring audits, independent citizen oversight, and all funds legally required to be spent locally?
NO
WHEREAS, Elections Code section 9280 authorizes the City Council to order the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis of the city measure qualifying for a place on the ballot; and WHEREAS, Elections Code section 9282 authorizes the filing of written arguments for and against measures placed on the ballot by the legislative body, individual voter, or bona fide association of citizens, or combination of voters and associations, or individual voters who are eligible to vote on the measure, pursuant to Elections Code section 9287, and in accordance with the Elections Code of the State of California, Section 9280, et seq., and may be changed until and including the date fixed by the City Clerk, after which no arguments for or against the measure may be submitted to the City Clerk.

SECTION 2. That, in accordance with Elections Code section 9286(b), the deadline for submitting arguments for or against the proposed ordinance shall be as established by the Registrar of Voters for the November 8, 2022 election, which is customarily seventy- eight (78) days prior to the election. The arguments shall be filed with the City Clerk, signed, with the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the author(s) submitting it, or if submitted on behalf of an organization, the name of the organization, and the printed name and signature of at least one of its principal officers who is the author of the argument.

Adopted by the Council of the City of Vallejo at a regular meeting held on July 12, 2022 with the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________________
ROBERT H. MCCONNELL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
______________________________________
DAWN G. ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK
Approved as to form:

By:

RESOLUTION NO. 20-______N.C.

A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF BALLOT ARGUMENTS FOR A

CITY MEASURE RELATING TO AN ADVISORY MEASURE ON SPENDING

PRIORITIES FOR REVENUES DERIVED FROM THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SEVEN-EIGHTHS (0.875) OF ONE CENT GENERAL PURPOSE REVENUE

MEASURE AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL

ANALYSIS
WHEREAS, a General Municipal election is to be held in the City of Vallejo on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, at which there will be submitted to the voters of said City a measure in substantially the following form:

THE VALLEJO COMMUNITY PRIORITY MEASURE I
YES
Should the City of Vallejo primarily use revenues generated from the Vallejo Safe Streets and Essential Services Measure to maintain critical city services such as keeping public spaces healthy/safe/clean; maintaining fire protection/emergency medical response/crime prevention; addressing homelessness/blight/dumping; repairing deteriorating neighborhood streets/roads/sidewalks?
NO
WHEREAS, Elections Code section 9280 authorizes the City Council to order the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis of the city measure qualifying for a place on the ballot; and WHEREAS, Elections Code section 9282 authorizes the filing of written arguments for and against measures placed on the ballot by the legislative body, with priority given to arguments by the City Council, acting either as a whole or through individual City Council members authorized to file written arguments on the Council’s behalf, pursuant to Elections Code section 9287.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS, THAT:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby authorizes Councilmember______________, _____________, Councilmember __________________, and Councilmember ________________ to file with the City Clerk the written argument in favor accompanied by the printed names(s) and signature(s) of the author(s), not exceeding 300 words, and in accordance with the Elections Code of the State of California, Section 9280, et seq., and may be changed until and including the date fixed by the City Clerk, after which no arguments for or against the measure may be submitted to the City Clerk.

Adopted by the Council of the City of Vallejo at a regular meeting held on July 12, 2022 with the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________________
ROBERT H. MCCONNELL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
______________________________________
DAWN G. ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK
Approved as to form:

By:

RESOLUTION NO. 20-_________ N.C.

A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS WITH

RESPECT TO A CITY MEASURE RELATING TO SPENDING PRIORITIES TO BE

SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2022
WHEREAS, Section 9285 of the California Elections Code authorizes the City Council, by majority vote, to adopt provisions for the filing of rebuttal arguments for city measures submitted at municipal elections;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

A rebuttal argument may not be signed by more than five persons.

Rebuttal arguments shall be printed in the same manner as the direct arguments. Each rebuttal argument shall immediately follow the direct argument which it seeks to rebut.

SECTION 2. That the City Council or Council Member _______________, Council Member ______________, are authorized to draft and file rebuttal arguments related to the proposed ordinance enacting a transactions and use tax, pursuant to Elections Code section 9285.

SECTION 3. All previous resolutions providing for the filling of rebuttal arguments for City measures, if any, are repealed.

SECTION 4. The provisions of Section 1 shall apply only to the General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, and shall then be of no further force and effect.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Vallejo at a regular meeting held on July 12, 2022 with the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________________
ROBERT H. MCCONNELL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
______________________________________
DAWN G. ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK
Vallejo Voter Attitudes
Toward Potential
Finance Measures
Key Findings of a Citywide Survey
Conducted May 19‐26, 2022
220‐6345

2 Dates May 19‐26, 2022
Survey Type Dual‐mode Voter Survey
Research Population Likely November 2022 Voters in the City of Vallejo Total Inter views 564
Margin of Sampling Error ±4.9% at the 95% Confidence Level (Full Sample) ±6.9% at the 95% Confidence Level (Half Sample)
Contact Methods
Data Collection Modes
Languages English, Spanish and Tagalog
(Note: Not All Results Will Sum to 100% Due to Rounding) Survey Specifics and Methodology
Text
Invitations
Telephone
Calls
Email
Invitations
Telephone
Interviews
Online
Interviews

3 Views of Life in
Vallejo
4 *Tracked from a Community Survey; Wording Slightly Different in Previous Survey 11%
14%
40%
37%
42%
8%
16%
29%
45%
44%
32%
43%
18%
8%
18%
17%
44%
42%
28%
20%
40%
84%
67%
54%
2022
2020
2019
*2018
2016
2010
2009
2007
Right Direction Have Not Changed Much/Don't Know Wrong Direction Would you say that things in the City of Vallejo have been moving in the right direction, in the wrong direction, or have not changed much over the last 2 years? Pessimists about Vallejo’s direction
outnumber optimists four to one, though
still at nowhere near the levels of 2010.

July
2020
5 Total
Fav.

Total
Unfav.
14% 60%
14% 67%
I would like to ask your impressions of some organizations in public life.  Please tell me whether your impression of that organization is generally favorable or unfavorable. 11%
12%
33%
34%
27%
33%
19%
14%
7%
5%
The Vallejo City Council
Vallejo City government,
overall
Very Fav. Smwt. Fav. Smwt. Unfav. Very Unfav. HO/Can't Rate NHO/Don't Know Few respondents expressed favorable
opinions of city government...
6 I would like to ask your impressions of some organizations in public life.  Please tell me whether your impression of that organization is generally favorable or unfavorable. *Tracked from a Community Survey
Organization *2018 2020 2022 Difference
(2020‐2022)
Vallejo City
government, overall 34% 28% 14% ‐14%
(Total Favorable)
…views that have declined in recent years.
7 Ext./Very
Ser. Prob.
80%
79%
79%
75%
69%
68%
68%
50%
52%
50%
45%
42%
39%
35%
30%
27%
29%
29%
27%
29%
33%
14%
10%
17%
19%
21%
17%
18%
7%
6%
7%
11%
12%
Homelessness
Crime, gangs, and drugs
Public dumping and trash
^A lack of community safety
The condition of local streets
and roads
The quality of City of Vallejo
public safety services
The City’s financial stability
Ext. Ser. Prob. Very Ser. Prob. Smwt. Ser. Prob. Not Too Ser. Prob. Don't Know Top concerns focused on homelessness, public
dumping, and issues related to public safety.
^Not Part of Split Sample
I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Vallejo that other people have mentioned.  Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem in Vallejo. 8 Ext./Very
Ser. Prob.
65%
64%
63%
59%
59%
55%
54%
36%
33%
34%
29%
25%
29%
37%
29%
31%
29%
31%
33%
26%
17%
18%
23%
17%
27%
25%
28%
18%
10%
10%
5%
6%
8%
12%
16%
6%
15%
7%
8%
5%
12%
Too little growth and
development
The cost of living
Waste and inefficiency in
city government
The quality of Vallejo’s
public infrastructure
Jobs and the local economy
The cost of housing
^Excessive use of force towards
unarmed people
Ext. Ser. Prob. Very Ser. Prob. Smwt. Ser. Prob. Not Too Ser. Prob. Don't Know The cost of living, government waste, and
public infrastructure are second-tier concerns.

I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Vallejo that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem in Vallejo. ^Not Part of Split Sample 9 Ext./Very
Ser. Prob.
49%
42%
38%
35%
31%
17%
9%
18%
18%
17%
19%
12%
10%
31%
24%
21%
16%
18%
7%
5%
32%
34%
28%
23%
29%
36%
14%
13%
23%
27%
13%
24%
46%
65%
6%
7%
28%
17%
12%
^The economic impacts of the
coronavirus outbreak
Bike, pedestrian and
road safety
^The health impacts of the
coronavirus outbreak
The burden of public
employee pensions
The amount people pay in
City taxes
Traffic and congestion
Too much growth
and development
Ext. Ser. Prob. Very Ser. Prob. Smwt. Ser. Prob. Not Too Ser. Prob. Don't Know Concerns are low about city traffic and congestion;
majorities do not think growth and development is a
serious problem.

I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Vallejo that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem in Vallejo. ^Not Part of Split Sample 10 Problem 2009 2010 2016 *2018 2019 2020 2022 Difference (2020‐2022)
The cost of living ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 42% 49% 40% 64% +24%
^A lack of community safety ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 58% 75% +17% The quality of City of Vallejo
public safety services ‐‐ 55% 47% 53% 52% 57% 68% +11%
Crime, gangs, and drugs ‐‐ 82% 74% 76% 63% 69% 79% +10% The City’s financial stability ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 56% 60% 59% 68% +9% The quality of Vallejo’s
public infrastructure ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 50% 53% 59% +6%
The cost of housing ‐‐ ‐‐ 41% 46% 48% 50% 55% +5%
Homelessness ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 77% 80% +3%
Waste and inefficiency in
city government 65% 74% 48% 49% 47% 61% 63% +2%
Traffic and congestion ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ 23% 22% 16% 17% +1%
(Extremely/Very Serious Problem)
Concerns about the cost of living and community
safety have increased notably since 2020.

I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Vallejo that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or not too serious a problem in Vallejo. ^Not Part of Split Sample *Tracked from a Community Survey
11 *Tracked from a Community Survey
In your personal opinion, do you think there is a great need, some need, a little need, or no real need for additional funds to provide the level of City services that Vallejo residents need and want? 46%
61%
48%
44%
24%
20%
34%
32%
10%
6%
5%
11%
8%
7%
10%
6%
11%
6%
7%
2022
2020
2019
*2018
Great Need Some Need A Little Need No Real Need Don’t Know Great/ Some
Need
A Little/
No Real
Need
71% 18%
81% 13%
82% 15%
76% 16%
While majorities expressed a gut feeling that
the City needs additional funding, that perception
is less strongly held than it was in prior years.
12 Initial Reactions
to a Potential
Funding Measure
13 Measures Assessed in this Survey
• All survey respondents were asked how they would vote on two hypothetical

0.875% sales tax measures.
 One would dedicate funds exclusively for streets and roads (two‐thirds vote threshold).
 One would provide fund for the City’s general fund (majority vote threshold). • Measures were rotated in the initial vote to mitigate against any bias associated with the order in which they were heard or read.
• Respondents were also asked to react to a variety of ways that funds generated by either measure could be spent.
• Later in the survey, respondents were presented with a set of statements supporting, and then a set of statement criticizing, the measure they heard or read first.
• Respondents were asked how they would vote on the measure after being presented with each set of statements to determine hypothetical ceilings and floors of support.
14 Hypothetical Special-Purpose
Measure Language
Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? City of Vallejo Safe Streets and Pothole Repair Measure.

To maintain/improve local roads, sidewalks, and neighborhood/ residential streets, provide safe routes to school;
repair potholes/streets/crumbling sidewalks and prevent future deterioration; and enhance senior/disabled accessibility shall the City of Vallejo adopt a measure establishing a 0.875% sales tax, providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring yearly audits, independent citizen oversight, and all funds legally required to be spent locally only on Vallejo streets and not for any other purpose?
(Reviewed by the City Attorney; two‐thirds vote threshold for passage) 15 37%
38%
38%
27%
23%
25%
7%
5%
11%
9%
10%
15%
19%
17%
Asked First
Asked Second
Total
Def. Yes Prob. Yes Und., Lean Yes Undecided Und., Lean No Prob. No Def. No Total Yes
Total
No
69% 29%
64% 29%
66% 29%
Initial reactions to the special-purpose
measure funding streets and roads were
near its two-thirds vote threshold but within the
margin of error.

Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 16 Hypothetical General-Purpose
Measure Language
Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? City of Vallejo Fiscal Stability and Essential Services Measure.

To maintain critical city services, such as fire protection, emergency medical response, crime prevention/investigation, street maintenance, and youth programs; address homelessness; enhance police transparency/accountability and recruit/retain qualified police officers; and for general government use shall the City of Vallejo adopt a measure establishing a 0.875% sales tax, providing $18,000,000 annually until ended by voters, requiring yearly audits, citizen oversight, and all funds legally required to be spent locally?
(Reviewed by the City Attorney; majority vote threshold for passage) 17 30%
38%
34%
18%
18%
18%
5%
7%
6%
7%
7%
7%
12%
7%
9%
25%
21%
23%
Asked First
Asked Second
Total
Def. Yes Prob. Yes Und., Lean Yes Undecided Und., Lean No Prob. No Def. No Total Yes
Total
No
53% 40%
63% 30%
58% 35%
Initial reactions to the general-purpose measure
were above it’s majority vote threshold.

Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 18 Ext./Very
Impt.
92%
91%
88%
86%
85%
85%
85%
^Not Part of Split Sample
52%
54%
53%
62%
55%
53%
46%
40%
37%
35%
24%
30%
32%
39%
7%
7%
10%
9%
10%
13%
13%
Keeping public places healthy, safe,
and clean
Maintaining fire protection and
emergency medical response services
^Attracting and retaining businesses
and jobs in the City
Addressing homelessness
Maintaining crime prevention and
investigation services
Preventing dumping and blight
Repairing streets to prevent damage
to cars and trucks
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Support was particularly intense
for addressing homelessness.

19 Ext./Very
Impt.
85%
83%
82%
81%
81%
81%
80%
I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source.  Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. ^Not Part of Split Sample 37%
40%
45%
48%
46%
44%
44%
48%
43%
37%
33%
34%
37%
36%
12%
14%
13%
12%
14%
13%
17%
5%
Maintaining streets and roads to
prevent future deterioration
Repairing neighborhood streets
Maintaining the City’s fiscal stability
^Providing safe routes to school
for children
Repairing the conditions of local
streets, roads, and sidewalks
Repairing streets officially designated
as “failed” by independent experts
Resurfacing deteriorated streets
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Respondents prioritized a variety of ways funds
could be spent to improve roads at similar levels.
20 Ext./Very
Impt.
79%
78%
78%
76%
75%
75%
74%
I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source.  Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. Split Sample
56%
52%
46%
55%
44%
38%
43%
23%
26%
33%
21%
30%
38%
31%
13%
13%
18%
13%
16%
19%
21%
5%
6%
9%
8%
Enhancing police transparency
and accountability
Maintaining anti‐gang and
anti‐drug programs
Repairing potholes
Recruiting and retaining qualified
police officers
Providing a navigation center where
people experiencing homelessness
can access services
Maintaining community health
programs and services
Improving local streets, roads,
and sidewalks
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Many other public safety, roads, and community
services were also seen as important.
21 Ext./Very
Impt.
74%
69%
69%
68%
67%
67%
66%
I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source.  Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. ^Not Part of Split Sample 39%
36%
35%
33%
31%
26%
38%
35%
33%
34%
35%
37%
41%
28%
20%
22%
23%
18%
26%
23%
25%
5%
6%
6%
6%
5%
8%
7%
8%
Repairing crumbling sidewalks
Enhancing safety and access for
emergency response vehicles
Preparing for natural disasters and
public health emergencies
^Requiring independent
citizen oversight
Enhancing safety for pedestrians,
bicyclists and drivers
Improving pedestrian, bicyclist, and
driver safety
Rebuilding cracked and
deteriorating sidewalks
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Improvements for bicycling and
sidewalks were also seen as important by
many, but to a slightly lesser degree.
22 Ext./Very
Impt.
66%
65%
55%
49%
40%
32%
32%
I am going to read you a list of specific City projects and services that could be funded if the City had additional revenue, either from a ballot measure like the ones we have discussed or from any other source.  Please tell me how important each one is to you: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. Split Sample
32%
31%
23%
27%
16%
16%
15%
34%
34%
31%
21%
23%
15%
17%
24%
26%
34%
27%
37%
25%
34%
6%
5%
11%
23%
20%
35%
26%
8%
8%
Enhancing senior and disabled access
Improving sidewalks to make
them more accessible to people
with disabilities
Maintaining public landscaping,
including street medians
Providing a safe, modern
police station
Reducing traffic
Replacing the old, out‐of‐date
police station
Improving commute times
Ext. Impt. Very Impt. Smwt. Impt. Not Impt. Don't Know
Addressing traffic and the old police station are not
viewed as very or extremely important by a majority
of respondents.
23 The Impact of
Additional
Information
24 Positive and Negative Statements
• Possible positive statements included quantifying road repair needs; highlighting the experience of driving on Vallejo’s streets; noting the relationship between increased 911 response times and closed fire stations; noting that funds could support keeping public places clean and safe, youth programs, improved disability access,  providing safe routes to schools, implementing police reforms, operating the new homeless navigation center, and modernizing the unsafe police station; and that funds would be subject to various accountability provisions. • Possible negative statements included that the gas tax should already pay for road repairs; that Vallejo voters have tax fatigue; that sales taxes are regressive; that the City has demonstrated poor financial management and should spend funds more efficiently; that the high cost of living and inflation make higher taxes even more untenable; that they City spends too much on claims against the Police Department and on employee pensions; that a special purpose measure only on roads would generate opposition given the City’s public safety needs. 25 Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 69% 66%
47%
29% 27% 42%
3% 7% 11%
Initial Vote After Positives After Negatives
Total Yes
Total No
Undecided
Support for the special-purpose roads measure
did not increase after positive statements and fell
well below the threshold after negative statements.

Road Repair Measure (two‐thirds vote threshold)
41% without
those
“leaning yes”
26 Do you think you would vote “yes” or “no” on this measure? 53% 57%
50%
40%
34%
38%
7% 9% 12%
Initial Vote After Positives After Negatives
Total Yes
Total No
Undecided
Support for the general-purpose measure
did go up slightly after positive statements but fell to 50% after negative statements.

General‐Purpose Measure (majority vote threshold)
43% without
those
“leaning yes”
27 Conclusions
28 Views of Life in Vallejo
• After rebounding in the latter part of the prior decade, views of life in Vallejo and of City government are at their lowest levels since the Great Recession and Vallejo’s
bankruptcy.
• Concerns about homelessness, public dumping, and public safety are particularly acute.
• There is also strong sentiment that local street conditions are poor and many are not confident in the City’s financial management.
• However, majorities also believe the City needs additional funding for services.
29 Ballot Measure Viability
• Initial support for a potential special‐purpose sales tax measure funding roads was at its two‐thirds vote threshold but within the margin of error .

Negative arguments dropped that support significantly below 50%. • Initial support for a potential general‐purpose sales tax measure was slightly above its majority vote threshold, though it fell to 50% after critical statements, relying upon a notable number of very tentative supporters to hold at that level in addition to factoring in a margin of error of 6.9%. • Voters see a need for funding, but misgivings about the City’s management and the cost of living suggest that voters are not committed in their support and may easily be convinced to oppose a measure. • While these results are only a snapshot in time and cannot predict the future, they do indicate that a two‐thirds measure is not viable this November and a majority vote measure would likely fail.

For more information,
contact:
1999 Harrison St., Suite 2020
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone (510) 451‐9521
Fax (510) 451‐0384
Curt Below
[email protected]
Lucia Del Puppo
[email protected]
ACTION ITEM 8.B.

DATE: July 12, 2022
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Dawn G. Abrahamson, City Clerk
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO GREATER VALLEJO

RECREATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BEAUTIFICATION COMMISSION,

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, MCCUNE COLLECTION COMMISSION, AND THE

PLANNING COMMISSION

RECOMMENDATION
Council to take the following actions:

1. Adopt a resolution making an appointment to the Greater Vallejo Recreation District (GVRD) Board of Directors - 1 vacancy

2. Adopt a resolution making appointments to the Beautification Commission (2 vacancies); Civil Service Commission (1 vacancy); McCune Collection Commission (2 vacancies); and the Planning Commission (1 vacancy)

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
A number of vacancies and term expirations on City Commissions exist, including the GVRD Board of Directors for one member appointed by the Vallejo City Council due to a resignation. Interviews were conducted at a Special City Council meeting held June 23, 2022. With the exception of one, all applicants attended and participated in the interviews. According to the City Council's procedure for selecting commissioners, appointments shall be made at the next regular meeting following the conclusion of the special meeting, which was June 28, 2022 . Appointments were delayed to the July 12 regular Council meeting given the number of items that were before the City Council at its June 28 meeting.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
On May 13, 2022, a press release was issued to advise the public concerning a number of vacancies on City boards and commissions and for seats held by members whose terms expired on June 30, 2022. The notice was posted on the City's various social media platforms. The application filing period closed on June 3 and while the City Clerk's Office was successful in receiving applications for some of the vacancies to City Commissions and the vacant GVRD position, a number will remain vacant. Staff has reopened the application filing period for 5 City Commissions, the Solano County Library Advisory Council and the SolTrans Public Advisory Committee until a sufficient number have been received.

Applicant interviews were conducted by the Council on June 23, 2022. With the exception of one applicant, the remainder scheduled for the evening attended and participated in the interviews. Applicants must attend and be interviewed in order to be considered for appointment. Applicants who participated in the interviews are presented to the City Council for consideration. A second round of interviews will be conducted on July 7 and appointments to the Architectural Heritage & Landmarks Commission, Code Enforcement Appeals Board, Economic Vitality Commission, and the Sister City Commission will be made at the July 26 regular Council

Date: July 12, 2022
Subject: ADOPT RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO GREATER VALLEJO

RECREATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BEAUTIFICATION

COMMISSION, CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, MCCUNE COLLECTION

COMMISSION, AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION

Page 2 ends

meeting.

Copies of applications for these commissions have been provided to the Mayor and City Council and copies are available for review in the Office of the City Clerk.

Greater Vallejo Recreation District (GVRD)
Public Resources Code Section 5783.5 provides for the process of either an elected or appointed board of directors for a district that contains unincorporated territory and territory of one or more cities. GVRD Board members are appointed by the Solano County Board of Supervisors and the Vallejo City Council according to the proportionate share of the County and the City within the district. Currently, the Vallejo City Council appoints three members to the Board.

Presently there is one vacancy due to a resignation with a term expiring on December 31, 2023. This appointment shall be made by the Vallejo City Council. Two applications were received and both participated in interviews held on June 23. The two applicants are presented to the City Council for its consideration. In order for the GVRD Board of Directors to continue to function at full capacity, the City Council should make one appointment for a term to commence immediately and expire on December 31, 2023.

Beautification Commission

Chapter 2.39 of the Vallejo Municipal Code provides for a BC to consist of seven members who shall be residents of the City.

Presently there are two vacancies with both terms expiring on June 30, 2026. One application was received.

The applicant attended and participated in the interview with the City Council on June 23. This applicant is presented to the City Council for its consideration. If the City Council chooses to appoint the applicant to fill one of the two vacancies, the appointment shall be made for a term to commence from date of appointment and expire on June 30, 2026.

Civil Service Commission
Chapter 2.43 of the Vallejo Municipal Code currently provides for a Civil Service Commission to consist of five members who shall be residents of the City.

Presently there is 1 vacancy with a term expiring on June 30, 2026. One application was received and the applicant participated in the interview with the City Council on June 23. The applicant is presented to the City Council for its consideration. If the City Council chooses to make an appointment to fill the vacancy, the appointment shall be made for a term to commence from date of appointment and expire on June 30, 2026.

McCune Collection Commission
Chapter 2.51 of the Vallejo Municipal Code currently provides for a McCune Collection Commission to consist of seven members who shall be residents of the City.

Presently there are two vacancies. Three applications were received for Council consideration and two applicants attended and participated in the interviews with the City Council on June 23. Since the interviews were held, the additional applicant withdrew their application. Both applicants are presented to the City Council for its consideration. If the City Council chooses to make appointments to fill the vacancies, one appointment shall be made for a term to commence from the date of appointment and expire on June 30, 2024 and the other appointment shall commence from date of appointment and expire on June 30, 2026.

Date: July 12, 2022
Subject: ADOPT RESOLUTION MAKING APPOINTMENTS TO GREATER VALLEJO

RECREATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BEAUTIFICATION

COMMISSION, CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, MCCUNE COLLECTION

COMMISSION, AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION

Page 3 ends

Planning Commission
Chapter 2.44 of the Vallejo Municipal Code currently provides for a Planning Commission to consist of seven members who shall be residents of the City.

Presently there is one vacancy with a term expiring on June 30, 2026. Two applications were received. Both applicants attended and participated in the interviews with the City Council on June 23. Both applicants are presented to the City Council for its consideration. If the City Council chooses to appoint an applicant to fill the vacancy, the appointment shall be made for a term to commence from date of appointment and expire on June 30, 2026.

Staff will continue its efforts to solicit interested applicants for the remaining vacancies to the Beautification Commission, Design Review Board, Human Relations Commission, Participatory Budgeting Steering Committee, Housing Authority Board of Commissioners - tenant commissioner, the SolTrans Public Advisory Committe, and the Solano County Library Advisory Council - Vallejo representative.

Pursuant to the City Council's procedure for selecting commissioners, only interviews were conducted at the special meeting on June 23. Appointments to these advisory bodies are before the City Council this evening for consideration.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with filling vacancies to standing commissions.

ATTACHMENTS

1. List of Eligible Applicants for Appointment_071222

2. Appointment GVRD Boardmember short term_071222 CAO Stamp

3. Resolution Making Appointments to Various Commissions_071222 CAO STAMP

CONTACT
Dawn G. Abrahamson, City Clerk (707) 648-4527
[email protected]
*Current Commissioner
List of Eligible Applicants for Appointment

Beautification Commission – 2 vacancies (terms to expire 6/30/26) *Susan Slater
Civil Service Commission 1 – vacancy (term to expire 6/30/26) *Brenda Plechaty
McCune Collection Commission 1 vacancy (term to expire 6/30/24) & 1 vacancy (term to expire 6/30/26)
*Henry Beecher
Joel Benson
Planning Commission – 1 vacancy (term to expire 6/30/26) *Donald Douglass
Loretta Gaddies
GVRD – 1 vacancy (term to expire 12/31/23)
Wendell Quigley
Avonelle Hanley-Mills
Approved as to form:

By: for
Veronica Nebb, City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 22- N.C.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO MAKING

APPOINTMENTS TO THE GREATER VALLEJO RECREATION DISTRICT

BOARD OF DIRECTORS
WHEREAS, Public Resources Code Section 5783.5 provides for the process of either an elected or appointed board of directors for a district that contains unincorporated territory and the territory of one or more cities; and
WHEREAS, Greater Vallejo Recreation District Board members are appointed by the Solano County Board of Supervisors and the Vallejo City Council according to the proportionate share of population of the County and the City within the district, with the Vallejo City Council appointing three members to the Board; and
WHEREAS, Greater Vallejo Recreation District Policy No. 400 states that the term of office of each member appointed by the City Council and the Solano County Board of Supervisors shall be for four years, and that terms of members shall be staggered so that the number of terms expiring annually shall be approximately equal; and
WHEREAS, said policy also states that appointments become effective at the first Board meeting in January following the uneven selection years and that there is no restriction to the number of succeeding terms a member may serve; and
WHEREAS, there currently exists one vacancy on the Greater Vallejo Recreation District Board of Directors; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed applications and conducted interviews.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby appoints ____________________ to the Greater Vallejo Recreation District Board of Directors for a term to expire on December 31, 2023.

Adopted by the City Council of the City of Vallejo at a regular meeting held on July 12, 2022 with the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________________
ROBERT H. MCCONNELL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________________________
DAWN G. ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK
Approved as to form:

By: for
Veronica Nebb, City Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 22- N.C.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO MAKING

APPOINTMENTS TO VARIOUS BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITEES WHEREAS, the Vallejo City Council has established various boards and commissions and such boards may be advisory, policy, appellate and/or rule making; and WHEREAS, members of these boards, committees, and commissions shall be appointed by the City Council and vacancies shall be filled for the unexpired portion of the term in the same manner as the original appointment pursuant to the Vallejo Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, section 2.26.030 of the Vallejo Municipal Code provides that the term of office of each member appointed by the City Council shall be for four years, except as otherwise provided by ordinance or resolution, and that terms of members shall be staggered so that the number of terms expiring annually shall be approximately equal; and WHEREAS, there currently exist vacancies on the boards and commissions, and WHEREAS, pursuant to section 2.02.350 of the Vallejo Municipal Code, the City Clerk has published notices of these vacancies, received applications of interest, and delivered to the City Council all applications submitted; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the applications submitted and has conducted interviews.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS:

The following person is appointed to the Beautification Commission – 2 vacancies (terms to expire 12/31/26):

1. _________________ – term to expire 6/30/26
The following person is appointed to the Civil Service Commission – 1 vacancy (term to expire 6/30/26):

1. ____________________ – term to expire 6/30/2026
The following persons are appointed to the McCune Collection Commission – 1 member (term to expire 6/30/24 and 1 member term to expire 6/30/26):

1. __________________________ - term to expire 6/30/24

2. __________________________ – term to expire 6/30/2026 The following person is appointed to the Planning Commission – 1 member (term to expire 6/30/26):

3. __________________________ – term to expire 6/30/2026 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Vallejo at a regular meeting held on July 12, 2022 with the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________________
ROBERT H. MCCONNELL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_________________________________________
DAWN G. ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK
ACTION ITEM 8.C.

DATE: July 12, 2022
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Gillian Hayes, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

VALLEJO APPROVING A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS BY AND AMONG SYAR INDUSTRIES, INC. (“SYAR”), BLUE ROCK SPRINGS, LLC (“DEVELOPER”), AND THE CITY OF VALLEJO, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (“CITY”) AND MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (“CEQA”)

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached Resolution approving the Settlement and Release Agreement by and among Syar Industries, Inc. (Syar), Blue Rock Springs, LLC (Developer), and the City of Vallejo and making findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
In order to promote redevelopment and revitalization of the Blue Rock Springs Golf Course, staff recommends the City Council consider and approve the attached Settlement and Release Agreement (Attachment 2).

In response to the proposed redevelopment of the Golf Course adjacent to the Quarry, Syar filed a legal claim against the City and sponsored an initiative that would block the City’s ability to develop on open space zoned land within the City limits. After two years of negotiation, the parties involved have agreed to settle on specific terms in order to move a potential future project forward.

Syar, the Developer, and the City seek to enter into this settlement agreement to resolve the aforementioned disputes. Details in the Settlement and Release Agreement will resolve concerns related to the potential redevelopment of the Blue Rock Golf Course site and its proximity to Syar’s Quarry, as defined in the Use Permit approved by Solano County in 2014, and provides a path forward for all parties involved.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
The Blue Rock Springs Golf Course is a City-owned facility developed with two, 18-hole, golf courses, a small clubhouse, and related facilities. Over time, the underutilized site has resulted in an operational deficit. By 2017, the City was heavily subsidizing the site and its operations from the City’s General Fund. At that time, the City Council approved two proactive measures to address the deficit. The first was to employ a consultant to operate the site; the second was to issue an RFP to call for redevelopment of this underutilized City-owned asset.

On December 12, 2017, the City Council approved an agreement with Touchstone Golf LLC to provide management services to operate and maintain the City’s golf course and its related facilities.

During the same general time period (on August 8, 2017), the City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for revitalization of the Golf Courses and the 225 Acres that make up its environs, including a proposal for a “Public-Private Partnership, Management, Lease or Other Agreement.” The RFQ identified three goals for any revitalization project: (1) fund the design, renovation, and restoration of Blue Rock in a manner that allows for it

Date: July 12, 2022
Subject: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

Page 2 ends

to operate as an affordable public course but independent of subsidies from City; (2) fund the development of a new or renovated multi-use clubhouse and associated facilities serving both the golf course and the local community; and (3) preserve or improve the existing aesthetics, quality, property values, environment and views of the surrounding neighborhoods.

In November of 2018, the City received various proposals responsive to the RFQ including a proposal which was selected - the proposal submitted by the Developer’s predecessor-in-interest, the Greg Norman Golf Course Design Company, LLC. The proposal included a design to redevelop the City-owned property with one 18-hole Greg Norman Signature golf course, a new, larger clubhouse and associated improvements, and a new residential subdivision consisting of 615 residential units over 92 acres fronting two sides of Columbus Parkway. As depicted in Figure 1, below, 30 acres of the residential component were proposed east of the roadway and in general proximity to the Quarry owned by Syar.

The Syar Quarry is located within the jurisdiction of the County of Solano. As explained in the Settlement Agreement in more detail, Syar owns and operates the Lake Herman Quarry (Quarry), which includes an active quarry pit, an asphalt plant, a rock processing plant, a concrete batch plant, and other related operations authorized under the related 2014 Solano County Use Permit, included with the Settlement as Exhibit E.

Figure 1 – 2018 Blue Rock Springs LLC Original Residential Proposal (Note Quarry located east of the 30-acre residential component):

Date: July 12, 2022
Subject: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

Page 3 ends

Upon release of the proposed redevelopment design, Syar expressed concern regarding new residential development being placed immediately adjacent to their business operation. Syar pointed out that the residential housing would be within one half mile of the Quarry and its related business activities.

City staff began to negotiate with Syar at this time in 2018-2019 regarding the proposed development and those negotiations proved unfruitful. The failed negotiations regarding the proposed density and location of residential units spurred Syar to submit the 2020 legal claim against the City and 2020 Initiative in order to hinder the proposed development.

Proposed Initiative and Legal Claim.

Syar circulated an initiative that purports to protect open space ("Initiative"). The Initiative, entitled the “City of Vallejo Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Protection Initiative,” was submitted to the City on February 19, 2020 and includes the Blue Rock Golf Course site as one of the proposed open space locations. It is currently scheduled to be considered by the voters on November 3, 2022. Open space initiatives are typically well received by the public, even where they represent a potential for preventing the City from meeting other expected public needs such as providing housing, jobs, and operational revenue. In addition to submitting the Initiative, on June 2, 2020, Syar sent a letter to the City asserting that, should the City allow the project to move forward with the current design, it would result in violation of the terms associated with the City’s prior agreements with Syar.

After the Initiative and legal claim were filed, new City staff began negotiating with Syar in 2020 and rebuilding that relationship.

Staff requested the Developer reconsider multiple redesign options sensitive to Syar’s Quarry operational needs, but that would also implement the City’s General Plan goals and policies. The most recent revised proposal calls for the relocation of the residential component fully west of Columbus Parkway, a commercial zone east of Columbus Parkway, and a buffer area between the Quarry and the subdivision, provided that Syar agrees to withdraw its opposition to the development, the legal claim, and the Initiative. See Figure 2, below. The proposed Settlement Agreement includes these terms. Additional terms are described below and in more detail in Attachment 2.

Figure 2 – Blue Rock Springs LLC Revised Residential Proposal Date: July 12, 2022
Subject: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

Page 4 ends

Settlement Terms.

Below is a summary of the terms contained in the attached Settlement and Release Agreement (Attachment 2):

Syar Obligations:
 Affirmatively support the golf course expansion
 Withdraw its Initiative within 5 days of execution of the Settlement and Release Agreement  Waive all legal claims against the City
 Donate materials to Developer ($1M value over 4 years)

Developer Obligations:

Date: July 12, 2022
Subject: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

Page 5 ends

Submit a revised application which:

 Relocates residential development to the west side of Columbus Parkway  Observes a ½ mile buffer zone between the Quarry and the residential development (inside the buffer are the golf course, clubhouse, and a small portion of residential west of Colombus Parkway)  Enter into a collaborative use easement with Syar which provides for notice of quarry activity for all Developer property within the buffer zone

City Obligations:
 Abide by the buffer zone so long as Syar maintains its land use permit with Solano County (permit runs until 2045 and can be renewed)
 If the City approves the Developer’s application, the City must abide by the land plan for ten (10) years, including if the City transfers the property to a different developer or proposes City development in the buffer zone

Buffer Zone
The Buffer Zone was created to address Syar’s concerns with Quarry operations and the proximity to the proposed project activities. The Buffer Zone includes the following restrictions:

-No residential uses will be allowed within the Buffer Zone except in the orange-shaded area -Commercial Uses within the Buffer Zone are limited to the red-shaded area -Any future clubhouse east of Columbus Parkway will be within 300 ft. of the Parkway and no further north than the existing clubhouse
-The buffer zone will not preclude outdoor golf uses

Land Plan
The Land Plan was developed to guide the future project submittal from the Developer and consists of details the Developer and Syar agree to:

-Development of the golf course will be designed to shield outdoor activities from the Quarry. This will be accomplished by using the clubhouse or masonry walls as barriers -Commercial buildings will use engineering designs to mitigate quarry noise, vibrations, and resist rockfall -All outdoor commercial activity in the red zone (other than golfing uses) may be subject to cancellation based on the quarry’s blasting schedule
-Quarry will not blast on weekends unless in case of an emergency -In the event of an emergency, Quarry will give at least a 48-hour notice

Collaborative Use Easement
-So long as Solano County permits Syar to operate the Quarry, effects of its operations can pass over the easement area in compliance with the 2014 existing Use Permit. Examples: Noise, dust, vibrations, light -A disclosure for future residential owners in the easement area will be recorded along with the easement, Date: July 12, 2022
Subject: ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

Page 6 ends

development application, and residential deeds

Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached resolution and approve the Settlement and Release Agreement described the Attachment 2 and summarized above. Minor changes to the Agreement may be facilitated by the City Manager and the City Attorney.

Next Steps
Upon execution of the Settlement and Release Agreement, the Developer is expected to begin design and preparation for application submittals. Syar will within 5 days withdraw th initiative and withdraw its claims against the City. Negotiation of the Purchase and Sale Agreement will commence and the project and all related entitlements will return to the City Council for consideration.

At this time, neither the City nor the Developer has submitted applications for the proposed project, nor has the City begun processing the proposed project. Upon submittal of a complete application by the Developer, the City will proceed to prepare appropriate environmental review and process the proposed revised project in accordance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations.

FISCAL IMPACT
The action to approve this Settlement and Release Agreement has no fiscal impact.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action is exempt from CEQA because it is not a project which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378. At the time a revised project is submitted for entitlements, appropriate environmental review will be conducted.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution Approving Settlement and Release Agreement_CAO Stamp

2. Settlement and Release Agreement_CAO

CONTACT
Gillian Hayes, Assistant City Manager and Acting Economic Development Division Manager [email protected] (707) 648-4163
1 RESOLUTION NO. 22-_________

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO

APPROVING A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS BY AND AMONG SYAR INDUSTRIES, INC. (“SYAR”), BLUE ROCK SPRINGS, LLC (“DEVELOPER”), AND THE CITY OF VALLEJO, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (“CITY”) AND MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (“CEQA”)
WHEREAS, on August 8, 2017, City issued a Request for Qualifications (“RFQ”) for the “Revitalization of Two 18-Hole Golf Courses and 225 Acres at Blue Rock Springs Municipal Golf Course through a Public-Private Partnership, Management, Lease or Other Agreement.” The RFQ identified three goals for any revitalization project: (1) fund the design, renovation, and restoration of the Blue Rock Springs Municipal Golf Course (“City Property”) in a manner that allows for it to operate as an affordable public course but independent of subsidies from City; (2) fund the development of a new or renovated multi-use clubhouse and associated facilities serving both the golf course and the local community; and (3) preserve or improve the existing aesthetics, quality, property values, environment and views of the surrounding neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, on November 18, 2018, the City received a proposal in response to the RFQ to develop on the City Property one 8-hole Greg Norman Signature golf course and associated improvements and a new subdivision consisting of 615 residential units; and WHEREAS, Syar owns and operates the Lake Herman Quarry (“Quarry”) immediately east of the City in unincorporated Solano County, which includes an active quarry pit, an asphalt plant, a rock processing plant, a concrete batch plant, and other related operations; and WHEREAS, on February 19, 2020, Syar submitted to the City the “City of Vallejo Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Protection Initiative.” Presently, such initiative is scheduled to be considered by the voters on the November 3, 2022 ballot (“Initiative”); and WHEREAS, on June 2, 2020, Syar sent a claim letter to the City alleging that by carrying out the proposal submitted by Developer, the City would violate the terms of two agreements entered into between the City and Syar, namely, the Agreement Pertaining to Site Preparation for Expansion of the Blue Rock Springs Golf Course and Improvements to Columbus Parkway and Lake Herman Road (“Site Preparation Agreement”) and Agreement Pertaining to the Donation of Land for the Expansion of the Blue Rock Springs Golf Course (“Donation Agreement”) (“the Claim”); and WHEREAS, City disputes both the legality/validity of the Initiative and the allegations of the Claim; and

2 WHEREAS, Syar is willing to withdraw the Initiative and release the Claim and all other legal claims against the City, provided that: (1) the City confirms that the Site Preparation and Donation Agreements remain in effect; (2) the City is willing to permit the submission of an application by Developer which includes a designation of a portion of City-owned property located between the Quarry and Columbus Parkway to serve as a buffer between new development and the Quarry; and (3) Developer is willing to submit a revised proposal for development consistent with a land plan agreed upon between Developer and Syar; and
WHEREAS, Developer is willing to submit a revised proposal consistent with the agreed-upon land plan to relocate the residential subdivision component of the Project to the west side of Columbus Parkway and to designate an area between the Quarry and the subdivision to serve as a buffer, provided Syar withdraws its opposition to the Project and withdraws the Initiative; and WHEREAS, City, Developer, and Syar seek to settle and release all claims pursuant to the terms of a Settlement and Release Agreement (“Settlement Agreement”) negotiated by the parties and their attorneys. The Settlement Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Vallejo hereby finds and determines that the foregoing recitals are true and correct.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby finds that approval of the Settlement Agreement is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as set forth in the California Code of Regulations Title 14, section 15378(b)(5). CEQA applies to discretionary project approvals, and although a vote to approve the Settlement Agreement would be a discretionary act, the Settlement Agreement does not meet the definition of a “project” under the CEQA Guidelines (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15378). Under CEQA, the definition of “[p]project does not include . . . administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.” (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15378(b)(5).) The Settlement Agreement does not obligate or commit City to undertake (i) any acquisition of land, (ii) any disposition of land, or (iii) any other act or activity requiring the subsequent independent exercise of discretion by City. Nor has the Developer submitted any application for any project related to the City Property for approval or consideration by the City. The Settlement Agreement confirms that prior to the approval of any project on the City Property, appropriate environmental review will be undertaken. Accordingly, this action will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves the Settlement Agreement substantially in the form set forth herein as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference, with changes as may be approved by the City Manager and the City Attorney and authorizes the City Manager to execute same.

ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Vallejo at a regular meeting held on July 12, 2022, by the following vote:
3 AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

ROBERT H. MCCONNELL, MAYOR
ATTEST:

DAWN G. ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK
4 EXHIBIT A
[Insert Settlement and Release Agreement]
1 SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT
This Settlement and Release Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into effective July ___, 2022 (“Effective Date”), by and among SYAR INDUSTRIES, INC. ("Syar"), the CITY OF VALLEJO ("City"), and BLUE ROCK SPRINGS, LLC (“Developer”). Syar, the City, and Developer are each individually referred to as "Party" and collectively referred to as "Parties."

RECITALS
WHEREAS, Syar is the record owner of that certain real property located immediately east of the City, in the unincorporated area of Solano County which property consists of APN 0181-190-060 and portions of 181-210-030 and 181-220-040 (“Syar Property”). Syar owns and operates the Lake Herman Quarry (hereafter the “Quarry”), which includes an active quarry pit, an asphalt plant, a rock processing plant, a concrete batch plant, and other related operations authorized under a Land Use Permit from the County of Solano and located on the Syar Property (collectively the “Quarry Operations”); and
WHEREAS, City is the record owner of that certain real property consisting of approximately 225 acres of land located adjacent to the Syar Property consisting of APNs 0081-040-100; and 0081-040-110; 0081-040-120; and 0081-040-880; and 0081-191-010; and 0181-190-010; and 0181-190-070; and 0182-040-080, which is more particularly described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the “City Property”); and WHEREAS, City owns and operates on the City Property the Blue Rock Springs Golf Course, which consists of two 18-hole courses, and associated structures (“Blue Rock GC”); and WHEREAS, a portion of Blue Rock GC is located upon land that was the donated to the City by Syar pursuant to a Donation Agreement as referenced below; and WHEREAS, a portion of Columbus Parkway and a portion of Lake Herman Road, within the City limits of the City of Vallejo, are designated as truck routes pursuant to City Resolution No. 10-294 N.C.; and
WHEREAS, on November 6, 1990, City and Syar entered into that certain Agreement Pertaining to Site Preparation for Expansion of the Blue Rock Springs Golf Course and Improvements to Columbus Parkway and Lake Herman Road, which was amended on May 20, 1991 (“Site Preparation Agreement”); and
WHEREAS, on November 6, 1990, City and Syar entered into that certain Agreement Pertaining to the Donation of Land for the Expansion of the Blue Rock Springs Golf Course (“Donation Agreement”); and

2 WHEREAS, on December 4, 2014, the County of Solano (“County”) granted to Syar Land Use Permit No. U-08-09 and Reclamation Plan No. RP-08-01 (“Quarry Permit”). Said Quarry Permit was subject to a Mitigation Monitoring Plan and conditions of approval (“Conditions”) outlined in the Quarry Permit. The Quarry Permit is valid until December 4, 2049, and Syar is permitted to apply to the County for an extension of the term of the Quarry Permit at least 6 months prior to its expiration. Syar is required to submit compliance reporting information to the County by October 1 of each year; and WHEREAS, on August 8, 2017, City issued a Request for Qualifications (“RFQ”) for the “Revitalization of Two 18-Hole Golf Courses and 225 Acres at Blue Rock Springs Municipal Golf Course through a Public-Private Partnership, Management, Lease or Other Agreement.” The RFQ identified three goals for any revitalization project: (1) fund the design, renovation, and restoration of Blue Rock in a manner that allows for it to operate as an affordable public course but independent of subsidies from City; (2) fund the development of a new or renovated multi- use clubhouse and associated facilities serving both the golf course and the local community; and (3) preserve or improve the existing aesthetics, quality, property values, environment and views of the surrounding neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2018, Developer’s predecessor-in-interest, the Greg Norman Golf Course Design Company, LLC, submitted a proposal in response to the RFQ, to City to develop on the City Property one 8-hole Greg Norman Signature golf course and associated improvements and a new subdivision consisting of 615 residential units ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, Syar contends that the Project has substantial potential to create significant environmental impacts, including land use compatibility problems because the Project proposes placing residential housing within one half mile of the Quarry and the activities permitted by the Quarry Permit; and
WHEREAS, on February 19, 2020, Syar submitted to the City the “City of Vallejo Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Protection Initiative”. Presently, such initiative is scheduled to be considered by the voters on the November 3, 2022 ballot (“Initiative”); and WHEREAS, on June 2, 2020, Syar sent a letter to the City (pursuant to Gov. Code, §§ 910, 910.2 & 910.4) alleging that by “carrying out this Project in its current form, the City will violate the terms of the Site Preparation and Donation Agreements” (“Claim”); and WHEREAS, City disputes both the legality/validity of the Initiative and the allegations of the Claim; and
WHEREAS, On December 23, 2020, Syar and City entered into a Tolling Agreement to toll any applicable statute of limitations arising out of the Site Preparation Agreement or the Donation Agreement, which will expire at 11:59 p.m. on May 31, 2022; and WHEREAS, Developer has prepared a revised proposal to relocate the residential subdivision component of the Project to the west side of Columbus Parkway and to designate an 3 area of the Project Site between the Quarry and the subdivision to serve as a buffer, provided Syar withdraws its opposition to the Project and withdraws the Initiative; and WHEREAS, neither the City nor the Developer has submitted any application for any project related to the Golf Course for approval or consideration by the City, and City has not commenced environmental review for any proposal to redevelop the City Property; and WHEREAS, City is willing to enter into an agreement confirming that the Site Preparation Agreement and Donation Agreements remain in effect. City is further willing to: (1) permit the submission of an application by Developer which includes a designation of an area of the City Property between the Quarry and Columbus Parkway as a buffer zone between new development, and the Quarry; and (2) agree to the recordation of a Collaborative Use Easement providing notice of the Quarry and its operations to all land uses within the easement area provided that Syar withdraws the Initiative and releases the Claim and all other legal claims against the City and provided that the Project, as revised, is ultimately approved.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of, and in return for, the promises and covenants undertaken in this Agreement by the Parties, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows:

TERMS

1. All of the foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated by this reference.

2. The City acknowledges the existence of the Site Preparation and Donation Agreements and that such agreements remain in full force and effect as of the Effective Date of this Agreement.

3. Developer agrees that Developer will submit development applications (“Development Applications”) for a revised project (“Revised Project”). The Revised Project shall comply with and be supported by a land plan which shall illustrate the placement, location, and design of structures and associated outdoor facilities for which the Developer will submit applications for development proposed to be constructed upon the City Property. Such applications of Developer shall be in substantial conformance with the Land Plan and the Buffer Zone attached hereto as Exhibits B (“Land Plan”), Exhibit C (“Buffer Zone”), and Exhibit D (Buffer Zone Legal Description) incorporated herein by reference. The terms of this Agreement that apply to or contemplate the aforesaid Development Applications shall also apply to and contemplate any applications submitted by Developer subsequent to any approval of the Revised Project seeking, for instance, a modification of the Revised Project.

3.1. The Parties understand and agree that City retains both its authority as the owner of the City Property and its land use authority as a municipality and charter city and may approve or deny a Purchase and Sale/ Disposition Agreement relating to 4 any portion of the City Property and may likewise, approve, approve with conditions, or deny the Revised Project.

3.2. If the Revised Project is approved, and the City Property or a portion thereof is transferred to the Developer, all development on the City Property constructed by the Developer, or any successor thereto, shall be consistent with the Land Plan & Buffer Zone, both of which shall apply to the City Property for the term of the Quarry Permit and any extension to the Quarry Permit as may be approved by Solano County in the future, unless earlier terminated by the Parties, in writing.

3.3. In the event that the Developer abandons the Revised Project before it is built, withdraws its Development Applications, or otherwise abandons the Revised Project before the City has decided whether to approve or deny the Revised Project, or in the event that the City approves the Revised Project but does not transfer the City Property to the Developer, the Buffer Zone shall apply to any future development of that portion of the City Property depicted in Exhibit C and described in Exhibit D, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (“Buffer Zone”) for the term of the Quarry Permit and any extension to the Quarry Permit as may be approved by Solano County in the future.

3.4. In the event that the Developer abandons the Revised Project before construction thereof, but after approval of the Revised Project, and before transfer of the City Property to the Developer, or in the event that the City approves the Revised Project but does not transfer the City Property to the Developer, the Land Plan shall apply to any future development of the City Property either (1) for a term of 10 years from date of such abandonment, withdrawal, or any City decision not to transfer the City Property to the Developer; (2) for the term of the Quarry Permit and any extension to the Quarry Permit as may be approved by Solano County in the future; or (3) until cessation of use of the Quarry Property pursuant to the approved Quarry Permit (or any extension thereof) for a period of 365 Days, whichever is less. Said 10-year period may be extended upon the mutual written agreement of City and Syar. Notwithstanding the forgoing terms applicable to the Land Plan in Exhibit B, the Buffer Zone provisions referenced in Section

3.3, described in Section 3.5 and depicted in Exhibit C and Exhibit D shall apply continuously for the term of the Quarry Permit and any extension thereto.

3.5. The Buffer Zone as depicted in Exhibit C and described in Exhibit D affects future residential and commercial development within one-half mile of the Quarry Area throughout the term of the Quarry Permit and any extension to the Quarry Permit as may be approved by Solano County in the future. Specifically, (a) the maximum development footprint for residential uses within the one-half mile radius of the Quarry Area is depicted as the orange area shown on the Buffer Zone map (Exhibit C); (b) the maximum development footprint for commercial uses within the one-half mile radius of the Quarry Area is depicted as the red area shown on the Buffer Zone map (Exhibit C); (c) no residential uses shall be allowed east of Columbus Parkway but are not excluded from the 5 orange area west of Columbus Parkway; and (d) any future clubhouse east of Columbus Parkway shall be within 300 feet of the Parkway and no further north than the existing clubhouse. The Buffer Zone shall not in any way preclude outdoor golf uses.

4. Syar, City and Developer shall negotiate and enter into a collaborative use easement, which shall, conditioned upon and concurrent with the transfer of any portion of the City Property to Developer or any other party, be recorded in the Official Records for Solano County, and which shall be appurtenant to the Syar Property and encumber the portion of the City Property described in Exhibit E, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (“Easement Area”). The easement shall substantially comply with the form of easement appended to this Agreement as Exhibit F, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (“Easement”). The Easement shall include the following material terms:

4.1.1. The Easement shall provide that for so long as the Quarry and/or Quarry Operations are permitted and actually operated on the Syar Property, noise, dust, odor, vapors, vibration, illumination, and all other effects arising from operation under the Quarry Permit and as identified in the Environmental Impact Report supporting the Quarry Permit (or some combination thereof) shall be permitted to pass over the Easement Area, provided that such activities are in compliance with the Quarry Permit and all applicable laws and environmental restrictions.

4.1.2. The Easement shall terminate at such time as the legally permitted Quarry operations cease and/or the Quarry Permit expires, whichever occurs first, which easement termination/expiration shall be documented by a Quitclaim Deed executed by the Parties, acknowledged, and recorded in the Official Records.

4.1.3. The Easement described herein shall be appurtenant to, and shall pass with title to the Syar Property, and shall burden, and shall pass with title to, the portion of the City Property containing the Easement Area.

Each and all of the covenants, conditions and restrictions contained in the Easement: (i) shall run with the land; (ii) shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties, each owner and any person having or acquiring any interest in any portion of the City Property, containing the Easement Area or the Syar Property, and all of their respective heirs, successors, and assigns; and (iii) shall be binding upon the City Property or portion thereof, containing the Easement Area and the Syar Property.

4.1.4. Nothing in the Easement shall be construed to change or modify the existing location of the boundary between the City Property and the Syar Property. Any change to such boundary, or lot line adjustment shall 6 be accomplished only in compliance with the Subdivision Map Act or other applicable statutory scheme.

4.1.5. An agreed form of disclosure to future residential owners, if any, of any portion of the City Property shall be appended as an exhibit to the Easement (“Disclosure”), together with a copy of the staff report and Quarry Permit, which Disclosure shall be provided to prospective purchasers or tenants of any residential property located within the Easement Area.

4.1.6. In the event the Revised Project is approved for any combination of residential and commercial development, conditions of approval for the Project shall (i) identify the Easement and Disclosure as documents that shall be disclosed by Developer to prospective purchasers and tenants of the residential properties and purchasers and lessees of commercial properties in the Easement Area, and subsequent purchasers, tenants, or lessees of all of the foregoing, and (ii) require the recordation of the Easement prior to execution of a commercial lease or recordation of a subdivision map by Developer.

4.1.7. Nothing in the Easement shall limit the exercise of City’s police powers concerning health and safety issues.

5. The City agrees that, consistent with the Site Preparation Agreement, in the event the Revised Project is approved by the City and actually constructed by Developer, City will undertake or cause to be undertaken the noticing and operational provisions relating to the Golf Course portions of the Revised Project as set forth in Exhibit H, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

6. This Agreement shall not compel City to approve the Revised Project, or any other real estate development project based on the Development Applications and shall not compel Developer to pursue a Development Application, acquire any portion of the City Property, or perform any real estate development or construction activities based on the Development Applications and/or Land Plan. Rather, this Agreement provides only that if a Development Application is submitted by Developer for residential development on any portion of the City Property, such development shall be consistent with the Land Plan and the Buffer Zone. Notwithstanding anything else in this Agreement, if Developer submits a Development Application consistent with the terms of this Agreement and, based upon such Development Application, the City approves development inconsistent with the Land Plan and the terms of this Agreement, Syar shall not be bound by the terms of this Agreement; the terms of Sections 17 and 18 shall not apply and shall be deemed void ab initio; all applicable statutes of limitation shall be tolled during the time during which the entire Agreement was in full force and effect; and Syar may submit and pursue a new initiative.
7 7. The Parties acknowledge that this Agreement is not a project within the meaning of Public Resources Code Section 21065 because it is not an activity that has the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Rather, this Agreement is intended to define the terms under which a project within the City Property may be applied for by Developer, and to outline some of the components of any proposed project Developer and Syar agree shall be included in the detailed project description prepared for the Revised Project and the Development Applications that may be submitted to City for consideration of approval of the Revised Project.

8. In response to any Development Applications submitted to City, City shall prepare a comprehensive environmental review document for the Revised Project that complies with CEQA.

9. To comply with CEQA and give the public the opportunity to be aware of the environmental consequences of the Revised Project, and to fully participate in the CEQA process, the Parties acknowledge that City has no obligation to consider the Revised Project unless and until the CEQA environmental review process and any other public review and hearing processes have been completed, subject to all applicable laws, rules, regulations and governmental approvals. Consistent with the provisions of this Agreement, including the Land Use and the Buffer Zone, City shall retain discretion in accordance with applicable law before action on the Revised Project is taken by the City to (i) identify and impose mitigation measures to mitigate significant environmental impacts, (ii) select other feasible alternatives to avoid significant environmental impacts, (iii) balance the benefits of the Revised Project against any significant environmental impacts prior to taking final action if such significant impacts cannot otherwise be avoided, or (iv) determine not to proceed with the Revised Project.

10. For the avoidance of doubt, this Agreement shall not obligate or commit City to undertake (i) an acquisition of land, (ii) a disposition of land, or (iii) any other act or activity requiring the subsequent independent exercise of discretion by City. No agreement drafts, actions, deliverables, or communications arising from the performance of this Agreement shall impose any legally binding obligation on City to sell any portion of the City Property or be used as evidence of any oral or implied agreement by either City to enter into any other legally binding agreement with Developer or otherwise.

11. This Agreement does not limit in any way the discretion of City in acting on any applications for required permits or approvals for the Revised Project or any portion thereof, that may be applicable to the City Property, including the anticipated scope of the public improvements that may be associated with the Revised Project, provided however, that any such action by the City is consistent with the terms of this Agreement and its Land Use and Buffer Zone. The Parties acknowledge that compliance with CEQA will be required in connection with consideration of such 8 permits and approvals required for the Revised Project or any portion thereof, including but not limited to development of any portion of the City Property, and that City shall retain the discretion in accordance with CEQA and other applicable law before taking action on any such permits or approvals to (i) adopt or certify an environmental analysis of the Revised Project or any portion thereof, prepared in accordance with CEQA, (ii) identify and impose mitigation measures to mitigate significant environmental impacts, including the anticipated scope of required public improvements on the Revised Project, (iii) select other feasible alternatives to avoid significant environmental impacts, including the “no project” alternative, (iv) adopt a statement of overriding considerations in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) relative to any significant environmental impacts of the Revised Project or any portion thereof, prior to taking final action if such significant impacts cannot otherwise be avoided, or (v) determine not to proceed with Revised Project or any portion thereof. Any action taken by City in the exercise of its discretion relating to any analysis required by CEQA or on any application for a permit or approval required to develop and construct the Revised Project or any portion thereof, shall not constitute a default or a breach of the terms of this Agreement by City, provided that such action is consistent with the terms of this Agreement and its Land Use and Buffer Zone.

12. Within 5 calendar days of the Effective Date, Syar shall withdraw the City of Vallejo Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Protection Initiative and the Claim, and all other legal claims, if any, and Syar shall not put forward, sponsor, or financially support a similar initiative in the future.

13. In the event the Revised Project is approved, and from and after such time as the first certificate of occupancy is issued for any component of the Revised Project, Syar shall limit blasting events to weekdays unless it reasonably determines within the limits of the Quarry Permit that emergency conditions require aggregate production with blasting on a twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week schedule (e.g., the collapse of State Highway 680 or other emergencies as defined by the County of Solano, the State of California, or other agency with jurisdiction). For the avoidance of doubt, general market conditions and demand for the production of construction aggregates and /or associated products shall not constitute emergency conditions.

14. Syar shall donate to Developer, in kind, a total of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) worth of aggregate base rock material over four years to be used in connection with implementation of the Revised Project. The value of said donation shall not exceed Two Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000) in any calendar year beginning in 2022. The materials donated will be ¾” Class 2 Virgin Base Rock, 3” Minus (Black) and Pipe Bedding. The value of the materials shall be determined by the list price of SYAR in effect at the time of the delivery of materials.

15. Syar shall affirmatively support the Revised Project and not oppose residential development on the City Property, including without limitation the filing of, 9 sponsorship of, or participation in a lawsuit filed under CEQA, provided that such development is consistent with the requirements of this Agreement, including the Land Plan and Buffer Zone. The terms of this Section do not apply to any project alternatives or other development proposals submitted during administrative proceedings for the Revised Project that are inconsistent with the Land Plan or Buffer Zone, and Syar may oppose such alternatives or other development proposals without limitation.

16. City shall not oppose, delay, or otherwise object to any application that may be made by Syar to the County regarding a future expansion of the Quarry, provided however, that such expansion does not extend westerly of a north-south longitudinal line intersecting the westernmost point on the boundary of the Expanded Quarry Area from the 2014 Use Permit as shown in Exhibit G, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

17. Except as to such rights or obligations as provided herein and as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Parties and each of their representatives, agents, principals, partners, affiliates, joint venturers, attorneys, administrators, executors, successors and assigns hereby unconditionally release, acquit and forever discharge the other Parties, and each of their representatives, agents, principals, partners, affiliates, joint venturers, attorneys, administrators, executors, successors and assigns from any and all claims, including the Claim, and any and all demands, injuries, actions, causes of action, either at law or in equity, or of any kind, nature, or description, known or unknown, which any of them has had or now has against any other Party upon or relating, directly or indirectly, to the facts and legal issues regarding the matters contained herein.

18. The Parties hereto specifically and knowingly waive all rights any of them have or may have pursuant to California Civil Code section 1542, which states as follows:
“A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release and that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party.”
The Parties represent and warrant that they have been advised by their respective attorneys of the meaning of Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, and the implications of waiving the protections thereof.

19. Any disputes between the Parties concerning any alleged breach of this Agreement shall be subject to the dispute resolution procedures set forth below. The Parties covenant and agree that, if any Party believes another Party is in violation of one or more terms of this Agreement, the Party shall provide written notice to all other Parties specifying the actions or inactions it deems to be in violation of this Agreement. Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notice, the Party or Parties subject to the notice shall respond to the notice in writing. If the Parties still dispute 10 compliance with this Agreement after completing the notice process, the Parties shall meet and confer in a good faith attempt to resolve their dispute within 30 days.

20. If the Parties cannot informally resolve the dispute pursuant to the procedures set forth immediately above, any Party may seek relief in Solano County Superior Court.

In the event any Party files a complaint to enforce its rights under this Agreement, the relief the reviewing court is empowered to award is limited to injunctive relief requiring the Parties to take the relevant action(s) specified in this Agreement, and each party shall bear its own attorney’s fees and costs incurred in such a proceeding.

21. This Agreement shall be interpreted under the laws of the State of California. The Parties hereto agree that money damages may be an inadequate remedy for any breach (or threatened breach) of this Agreement and agree that the same may be enforced by a preliminary or permanent, mandatory, or prohibitory injunction, by a decree of specific performance, or other such order or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction. Each Party to this Agreement waives and releases any claim or defense that any term hereof is not enforceable and acknowledges that it is estopped to challenge the enforceability of any of its provisions.

22. Each of the persons signing this Agreement on behalf of an entity represents and warrants that he or she has actual authority and capacity to execute this Settlement and Release Agreement on behalf of the entity and to bind it to all the terms hereof.

23. This Agreement is entered into and is to be performed in Solano County, California and shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California and is binding upon the Parties.

24. The Parties and their respective counsel have carefully and fully read and reviewed this Agreement. The Parties hereby represent that the contents of this Agreement are understood and agree that this Agreement is binding on each Party or its respective members, representatives, predecessors, successors, and assigns and as described herein. This Agreement is entered into voluntarily, free of undue influence, coercion, duress, menace, or fraud of any kind. No Party, nor any member, officer, agent, employee, representative, or attorney of or for any Party, has made any statement or representation to another Party regarding any fact relied upon in entering this Agreement, and no Party to this Agreement is relying upon any statement, representation, or promise another Party, nor of any member, officer, agent, employee, representative, or attorney of or for another Party, in executing this Agreement or in making the settlement provided herein, except as expressly stated in this Agreement.

25. The provisions of this Agreement comprise all the terms, conditions, agreements, and representations of the Parties respecting the matters herein described. This Agreement may not be altered or amended, and no provision hereof may be waived, except by written agreement executed by the Parties, or their representative if notice of counsel is given, to be bound. The Parties hereby agree that the terms of this Agreement have 11 not been changed, modified, or expanded by any oral agreements or representations entered into or made prior to or at the execution of this Agreement.

26. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall evidence one and the same document.

27. This Agreement may be modified only by express written consent of all Parties to this Agreement.

28. This Agreement, and each of its provisions, including all representations, warranties, and promises contained herein, binds, and inures to the benefit of the Parties, and each of their respective representatives, officers, directors, partners, heirs, executors, assigns, present and future affiliates, subsidiaries, predecessors and successors in interest whether by merger, consolidation, or otherwise, as well as their respective representatives, agents, and administrators, past, present, and future.

29. This Agreement and its terms shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon each of the Parties hereto and each and all of their respective representatives, successors, assignees, buyers, grantees, vendees, or transferees with respect to the Project or any portion of the Project, and shall survive the transfer of the property upon which any components of the Project are located to any entity that acquires title to such property whether by sale, lease or other transfer, or contribution to partnership, joint venture or any other entity.

30. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this Agreement shall in no way affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision. If, in any action before any court or other tribunal of competent jurisdiction, any term, restriction, covenant, or promise is held to be unenforceable for any reason, then such term, restriction, covenant, or promise shall be deemed modified to the extent necessary to make it enforceable by such court or other tribunal. Any such modification or amendment in any event shall apply only with respect to the operation of this Agreement in the particular jurisdiction in which such adjudication is made. If the Agreement cannot be modified to make it enforceable by such court or other tribunal then, notwithstanding anything else in this Agreement, the Party denied the benefit of such term, restriction, covenant, or promise may enforce any and all actions, causes of action, suits, losses, liabilities, rights, debts, dues, sums of money, accounts, reckonings, obligations, costs, expenses, liens, bonds, bills, specialties, covenants, contracts, controversies, agreements, promises, variances, trespasses, damages, judgments, extents, executions, claims, and demands contemplated in Sections 17 and 18 of this Agreement, including the Claim, and all applicable statutes of limitation shall be tolled during the time during which the entire Agreement, consistent with the above, was in full force and effect. Under the aforesaid circumstances and to the extent Syar is denied the aforementioned benefits, Syar may pursue a new Initiative.

31. Except as otherwise expressly stated herein, all notices, requests, demands and other communications (collectively, “Notice”) which the Parties are required or desire to 12 serve upon or deliver to the other party shall be in writing and shall be given by nationally recognized overnight courier, by certified United States mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed as set forth below, or by electronic mail addressed as set forth below:

SYAR: Paul Aherne
Counsel for Syar Industries, Inc.

PO Box 2540
Napa, CA 94558
[email protected]
CITY: Gillian Hayes
Assistant City Manager
555 Santa Clara Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
Veronica A.F. Nebb
City Attorney
555 Santa Clara Street
Vallejo, CA 94590
[email protected]
DEVELOPER:

Blue Rock, LLC
c/o Jeb Elmore
Vice President - Acquisitions
Lewis Management Corp.
9216 Kiefer Blvd.

Sacramento, CA 95826
[email protected]
The foregoing addresses may be changed by Notice given in accordance with this paragraph. Any Notice sent by certified mail shall be deemed received on the date shown in the proof of delivery. Any Notice sent by electronic mail shall be deemed received upon electronic transmission thereof provided that the sender does not receive electronic notice of non-delivery.

Any Notice sent by overnight courier service shall be deemed received on the day of actual delivery as shown by the confirmation of delivery by the messenger or courier service. If the date of receipt of any Notice to be given hereunder falls on a weekend or legal holiday, then such date of receipt shall automatically be deemed extended to the next business day immediately following such weekend or holiday for purposes of calculating time periods commencing upon the date of service.
13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement effective as of the date written above.

Dated: July _____, 2022 SYAR INDUSTRIES, INC.

By: _________________________________
By: James M. Syar
Its: Chief Executive Officer
Dated: July _____, 2022 BLUE ROCK SPRINGS, LLC
By: _________________________________
By: Jeb Elmore
Its: Vice President - Acquisitions
Dated: July _____, 2022 CITY OF VALLEJO,
A Municipal Corporation
By: _________________________________
Michael Malone
City Manager
Approved as to form:

By: _________________________________
Veronica A.F. Nebb
City Attorney
(City Seal)
ATTEST:

By: ________________________
Dawn Abrahamson
City Clerk
14 [Append Notary Pages.]

EXHIBIT A
[Insert legal description of City Property.]

EXHIBIT B
Land Plan

1. The Land Plan shall include a buffer zone, as depicted in Exhibit C to maintain separation between the Quarry and all other future development. The Buffer Zone as depicted in Exhibit C and described in Exhibit D affects future residential and commercial development within one- half mile of the Quarry Area throughout the term of the Quarry Permit and any extension to the Quarry Permit as may be approved by Solano County in the future. Specifically, (a) the maximum development footprint for residential uses within the one-half mile radius of the Quarry Area is depicted as the orange area shown on the Buffer Zone map (Exhibit C). (b) the maximum development footprint for commercial uses within the one-half mile radius of the Quarry Area is depicted as the red area shown on the Buffer Zone map (Exhibit C); (c) No residential uses shall be allowed east of Columbus Parkway but are not excluded from the orange area west of Columbus Parkway; and (d) Any future clubhouse east of Columbus Parkway shall be within 300 feet of the Parkway and no further north than the existing clubhouse. The Buffer Zone shall not in any way preclude outdoor golf uses.

2. There shall be no residential development on the east side of Columbus Parkway; residential development may be accommodated within the Buffer Zone. west of Columbus Parkway.

3. Any clubhouse that is to be part of the Revised Project that is proposed to be sited on the east side of Columbus Parkway shall be sited no more than three hundred feet (300’) east of Columbus Parkway, and no further north than the existing clubhouse building. The clubhouse design shall avoid use of large east or northeast-facing unprotected picture windows. The Proposed Project shall include that all windows shall be constructed using safety glass and comply with recommendations of a qualified engineer.

4. The Revised Project shall be designed such that outdoor activities and gatherings involving more intensive use by people be shielded from direct exposure to the Quarry and Quarry Operations by the clubhouse building and/or reinforced masonry walls.

5. The Land Plan shall include an eight foot (8’) tall (as measured from highest adjoining grade), reinforced masonry wall or building walls with no openings, to be placed along the eastern boundary of any commercial site located east of Columbus Parkway. Unprotected windows shall not face the East or Northeast (i.e., in line with potential rock fall).

6. The design of the structures of the commercial development shall be either masonry construction or an approved alternative which is found by a qualified engineer to reduce interior noise levels to mitigate for quarry noise and be resistant to potential damage from rockfall and vibration associated with ongoing Quarry Operations.

7. All commercial use customer and employee parking shall be located westerly of the commercial buildings.

8. Developer shall include as part of the Development Application for the Revised Project conditions that require that all outdoor activity related to commercial development in the red area depicted on Exhibit C, including that on any portion of the City Property transferred to developer, such as outdoor seating, and outdoor activities associated with any clubhouse special event, subject to final center design and the placement of these sensitive uses, may be subject to cancellation based upon blasting schedules provided by the Quarry Operator, consistent with Exhibit H. The Quarry Operator is to provide a minimum of 48-hour notice to Developer of blasting events.

9.The Developer’s final application for the commercial center design shall be subject to review by the Quarry operator’s environmental planners to confirm consistency with these measures.

10. Developer’s final application shall include proposed conditions that the Developer must:
(1) ensure that commercial leases and sales include a deed restriction providing notice of Quarry Operations; and (2) a requirement that commercial uses other than the golf course, should temporarily suspend all outdoor activities during scheduled blasting events.

11. The Land Plan shall be consistent with the Buffer Zone in Exhibit C. Accommodation of either fewer residential or commercial acres than depicted by the “Maximum Development” footprint shown in Exhibit C shall be considered consistent for purposes of the Land Plan, provided that separation of such uses from the Quarry meet the specifications in Exhibit C.

EXHIBIT C
Buffer Zone

(open space and urban footprints)
Reflects Maximum Development Footprint for Residential and Commercial Uses.

No Residential Uses within (Green) Buffer Zone Boundary East of Columbus Parkway.

Any Future Clubhouse East of Columbus Parkway to be within 300 Feet of the Parkway and No Further North than the Existing Clubhouse.

EXHIBIT D
[Insert legal description/depiction of City Property affected by Buffer Zone.]

EXHIBIT E
[Insert legal description of Easement Area.]

EXHIBIT F

RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

REUBEN, JUNIUS & ROSE, LLP
One Bush Street
Suite 600
San Francisco, CA 94104
Attn: 11405.01.MDV.CAE
_____________________________________________________________________________ (Space above line for Recorder’s use only)
APN: 0081-040-100 0081-040-110 0081-040-620 0081-040-790 0081-040-880 0081-191-010 0081-630-030 0181-190-010 0181-190-070 0182-040-080 Property Address: None

COLLABORATIVE USE EASEMENT
The undersigned declares that the document to which this page is affixed and made a part of is exempt from the fee imposed by the Affordable Housing & Job Act (SB2) (GC 27388.1) and Restrictive Covenant Modification (GC 27388.2)
( ) Recorded [concurrently] in connection with a transfer of real property subject to the imposition of Documentary Transfer Tax per GC 27388.1 (a) (2) & Gov’t Code 27388.2(b). ( ) Recorded [concurrently] in connection with a transfer of real property that is residential dwelling to an owner-occupier per GC 27388.1(a)(2) & Gov’t Code 27388.2(b). ( ) Maximum fee of $225 has been reached per GC 27388.1(a)(1). ( ) Not related to real property GC 27388.1(a)(1).
( ) Transfer of real property subject to the imposition of Documentary Transfer Tax - GC 27388.1(a)(2) and 27388.2(b).
( ) Transfer of real property that is a residential dwelling to an owner-occupier - GC 27388.1(a)(2) and 27388.2(b).
( ) Document is executed or recorded by the state or any county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state – Gov’t Code 27388.1(a)(2) & Gov't Code 27388.2(b).

THIS PAGE ADDED TO PROVIDE EXEMPTION INFORMATION FOR THE BUILDING HOMES

AND JOBS ACT FEE
(SB-2; AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEE) ($3.00 Additional recording fee applies) and Restrictive Covenant Modification Fee ($2.00 Additional recording fee applies)

Page 1 ends

RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

REUBEN, JUNIUS & ROSE, LLP
One Bush Street
Suite 600
San Francisco, CA 94104
Attn: Attn: 11405.01.MDV.CAE
_____________________________________________________________________________ (Space above line for Recorder’s use only)
APN: 0081-040-100 0081-040-110 0081-040-620 0081-040-790 0081-040-880 0081-191-010 0081-630-030 0181-190-010 0181-190-070 0182-040-080 Property Address: None
The undersigned grantor(s) declare(s):

Documentary Transfer Tax is: $0.00 [Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code § 11911 [easement + consideration less than $100] ( ) computed on full value of property conveyed, or
( ) computed on full value of less of liens and encumbrances remaining at time of sale. ( ) unincorporated area: ( ) City of Vallejo
( ) Signature of Declarant
________________________________________________
By:

Its:

COLLABORATIVE USE EASEMENT
This Collaborative Use Easement is made and entered into by and between BLUE ROCK SPRINGS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Grantor”) and SYAR INDUSTRIES, INC., a California corporation (“Grantee”), is dated for reference purposes as of July ___, 2022, and shall be effective on the date it is recorded (“Effective Date”) in the Official Records for the County of Solano (“Official Records”).

Grantor and Grantee are referred to collectively herein as the “Parties;” each of Grantor and Grantee is referred to individually as a “Party.”
The Parties do hereby agree as follows:

RECITALS
A. Grantor is the record owner of that certain real property that was formerly a portion of the Blue Rock Springs golf course, commonly known as 655 Columbus Parkway, Vallejo, California, also known as Solano County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (“APN”) 0081-040-100, 0081-040-110, 0081-040-880, 0081-191- 010, 0181-190-010, 0181-190-070, 0182-040-080 (“Project Site”). A portion of the Project Site as set forth in Exhibit A, appended hereto and incorporated by this reference, is located within 2640 feet of the Quarry Property, described below and is therefore subject to this Easement (“Burdened Property”).

B. Grantee is the record owner of that certain real property located immediately east of the City, in the unincorporated area of Solano County, which property, is commonly known as 885 Lake Herman Road, Vallejo, California, consists of APN 0181-190-060 and portions of 181-210-030 and 181-220-040, California, and is further described on Exhibit B, appended hereto and incorporated by this reference (“Quarry Property”). The Quarry Property is the subject of that certain Land Use Permit No. U-08-09 and Reclamation Plan No. RP-08-01, Mitigation Monitoring Plan, and conditions of approval, issued by the County of Solano on or about December 4, 2014, as it may be amended and extended from time-to-time (collectively, “Quarry Permit”).

C. Certain activities are and will continued to be carried out in, on, and around the Quarry Property, pursuant to the Quarry Permit, including without limitation the generation of noxious odors, truck traffic, vibrations, noise, illumination, glare, dust, vapors, smoke, electrical disturbances, and other impacts at levels and during hours that residents and other occupants of the Project Site may find disturbing or harmful, or which may create difficulties with activities that include sleeping, eating, and relaxation.

D. The Project Site is intended to be developed with certain residential and commercial development, all of which is more fully described in that certain development application submitted to City of Vallejo (“City”) on or about _____[DATE].

E. The Quarry Property contains an active quarry pit, an asphalt plant, a rock processing plant, a concrete batch plant, and other related operations authorized under Land Use Permit No. U-08-09 and Reclamation Plan No. RP-08-01 issued to Grantee by the County of Solano and located on the Quarry Property (collectively the “Quarry Operations”).

F. The intent of this Agreement is to ensure and facilitate the ongoing operation of the Quarry Property in compliance with the Quarry Permit, while at the same time furthering the goals of the City of Vallejo’s General Plan, including without limitation the those goals, policies, and programs stated in the City of Vallejo’s Housing Element, e.g., (1) facilitating production of housing to accommodate Vallejo’s fair share of regional housing demand, (2) increasing home ownership opportunities; (3) providing housing choice for Vallejo residents; and (4) building and maintaining quality residential environments. More specifically, this Agreement is intended to maintain Grantee’s ability to conduct and continue to conduct the Quarry Operations and/or Industrial Activities as authorized by the Quarry Permit, while facilitating the development and occupation of residential and commercial uses by informed and consenting individuals who may wish to reside or otherwise occupy the Project notwithstanding its proximity to the Quarry Property, and despite its industrial character and effects.

G. Grantor and Grantee understand and agree that the paragraphs above are not mere recitals, but are a substantive and meaningful part of this Agreement

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:

1.Grant of Easement. Grantor hereby conveys to Grantee an easement over the Project Site, on the conditions stated in this Agreement, so that Grantee may continue to pursue Quarry Operations as allowed by the Quarry Permit, irrespective of the conduct of residential, commercial and/or other activities on the Project Site. The easement shall benefit all property now owned by Grantee on which the Quarry Operations are allowed by the Quarry Permit on the Quarry Property, as described in Exhibit B.

2.Easement Appurtenant; Binding on Successors.
a. Each and all of the covenants, conditions and restrictions contained in this Agreement (a) shall run with the land (i.e., title to the Quarry Property and Burdened Property, and each of them); (b) shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties, each owner and any person having or acquiring any interest in any portion of the Quarry Property and Burdened Property, or either of them, and all of their respective heirs, successors, and assigns; and (c) shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of the Quarry Property and Burdened Property, and each of them, and each parcel thereof, and every portion thereof and interest therein.
b. This Agreement shall be prima facie evidence that Grantor and its successors and assigns acknowledge and accept the ongoing conduct of the Quarry Operations as allowed by the Quarry Permit. It shall be admissible in any court of law, mediation and/or arbitration as a binding agreement, made based on an exchange of good and valuable consideration.

3.Covenant by Grantee; Compliance with Laws.
a. Grantee hereby covenants and agrees that Grantee shall at its sole cost and expense, comply with all conditions on the issuance of the Quarry Permit, as well as laws, rules, requirements, ordinances, orders, directions, regulations, and/or environmental restrictions of any federal, state, city, municipal or other governmental or lawful authority affecting, regulating or related to the Quarry Operations and/or the Quarry Permit (collectively, “Governmental Laws”).
b. Nothing herein shall limit the policy powers of the City of Vallejo, or any other federal, state, city, municipal or other governmental or lawful authority affecting, regulating or related to the Quarry Operations and/or the Quarry Permit.

4.Term of Easement.
a. The easement conferred by this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date.

For the avoidance of doubt, Grantor and Grantee contemplate that this Agreement shall be recorded in the Official Records prior to the recordation of any subdivision map of the Project Site by Grantor, and prior to the execution of any commercial lease for any portion of the Burdened Property. b. Grantor acknowledges that this Agreement and the easement it conveys are imposed on the Burdened Property for the direct benefit of Grantee. Accordingly, the easement shall continue for so long as the Quarry Operations are allowed by the Quarry Permit are ongoing and shall terminate at such time as the Quarry Permit expires.
c. At such time as this easement is terminated, Grantee shall execute and cause to be recorded in the Official Records a document that quitclaims Grantee’s interest in the Easement or otherwise terminates and acknowledges the termination of the easement and this Agreement, which document shall be substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit C.

5.Disclosure to Future Owners of the Burdened Property. Grantor and Grantee contemplate that the Burdened Property, and/or portions thereof shall be offered for sale to third parties for further development and/or ownership and/or occupancy of residential dwelling units and commercial structures. Accordingly, Grantor covenants and agrees that it shall provide to prospective buyers (a) a copy of this Agreement, (b) a copy of the Disclosures to Potential Buyers (appended to this Agreement as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by this reference), (c) a copy of the Quarry Permit, and (d) a copy of the December 4, 2014 Staff Report prepared by the Solano County Department of Resource Management Planning Services Division in connection with the Quarry Permit, for the benefit of the Solano County Planning Commission (“Staff Report”) (a true and correct copy of the first 18 pages of the Staff Report is appended to this Agreement as Exhibit E and incorporated herein by this reference).

6.No Change of Boundary. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to change or modify the existing location of the boundary line between the Project Site and the Quarry Property. Any change to such Boundary, or lot line adjustment shall be accomplished only in compliance with the Subdivision Map Act or other applicable statutory scheme.

7.Dispute Resolution. Any claim or controversy between the Parties which relates to or arises from this Agreement, the rights and obligations conferred thereby (“Dispute”), shall be resolved as provided herein:
a. Good Faith Negotiations. The Parties shall meet no later than twenty (20) calendar days following receipt of written request to meet signed by any Party and delivered to the other Party (the “Resolution Notice”). The Parties shall negotiate in good faith in an effort to resolve the Dispute. If the Parties cannot resolve the claim within twenty (20) calendar days following the date of the Resolution Notice or if any Party to the Dispute fails to meet as required by this Section 7, the Parties agree that the Dispute shall be submitted to mediation as provided below.
b. Mediation.
i. In the event of unsuccessful or incomplete Good Faith Negotiations, all disputes shall next be submitted to nonbinding confidential mediation by written notice by one of the Parties to another Party, and shall be treated as compromise and settlement negotiations under the standards set forth in the Federal Rules of Evidence and all applicable state counterparts, together with any applicable statutes protecting the confidentiality of mediations or settlement discussions. If the Parties cannot agree on a mediator, ADR Services, Inc. shall, at the written request of a Party, designate a mediator. The person who acts as mediator shall not act as arbitrator without the written consent of the Parties. ii. If either of the Parties (A) commences any legal action without first having attempted to resolve the Dispute through mediation, or (B) refuses to mediate after a request has been made, that Party shall not be entitled to recover attorneys’ fees incurred in connection with such Dispute, even if such recovery would otherwise be available in such action. The filing of an action to preserve a statute of limitations, to enable the recording of a notice of pending action/lis pendens, or for provisional remedies (i.e., a temporary restraining order) shall not constitute a waiver or violation of these mediation requirements. c. Judicial Reference. Any Dispute not resolved by Good Faith Negotiations and/or Mediation shall be submitted for determination by a reference proceeding, in the Superior Court of the State of California, for the County of Solano (“Court”), in accordance with the provisions of Section 638 through 645.1, inclusive of the California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”), as such statutes may be modified or amended, and Rule 244.1 of the California Rules of Court or any subsequently enacted rule, which shall constitute the exclusive procedure for the determination of any such claim, cause of action, controversy, or dispute. Any Party seeking to enforce this provision for a judicial reference shall file a petition to enforce this Section 7(c) in the Court, or if an action has already been commenced respecting any claim, civil action, controversy, or dispute, any Party seeking to enforce this Section 7(c) shall file a motion for reference pursuant to the provisions of CCP Section 638. The order granting the petition or motion shall be consistent with the provisions contained in this Section 7(c), including the provisions contained in the following subsection concerning the appointment of a referee. The Parties hereto acknowledge and agree that the Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the Parties, and each of the Parties knowingly waives and relinquishes any and all rights to seek an alternative venue or forum. Pending appointment of the referee as provided in subsection 7(c)(i), below, the Court is empowered to issue temporary and/or provisional remedies, as appropriate. i.Appointment of Referee. The Parties shall mutually agree upon the referee, who shall be a retired judge or justice of any court of the State of California. If the Parties cannot mutually agree upon the referee within ten (10) days of a request to do so, the Court, through the presiding judge or his designee, shall appoint a referee. If the referee shall be appointed by said presiding judge or his designee, then each Party shall have one preemptory challenge pursuant to CCP Section 170.6 (or any successor statutes). The referee shall be appointed to sit as a temporary judge, with all of the powers of a temporary judge, as authorized by law (including Rule 244 of the California Rules of Court or any subsequently enacted rule), and upon selection shall take and subscribe to the oath of office as provided for in Rule 244 of the California Rules of Court or any subsequently enacted rule.
ii.Procedure. The referee shall schedule an initial pre-hearing conference as soon as reasonably practicable following his or her appointment. The purpose of the pre-hearing conference is to attempt to reach agreement on procedural matters, arrange for the exchange of information, obtain stipulations, and attempt to narrow the issues. In addition, the referee shall set a date for the completion of discovery, the date(s) for any further pre-hearing conferences, the date(s) on which any hearing briefs, witness lists and exhibits lists as the referee may require shall be exchanged and submitted, and the date on which the hearing shall commence. All discovery methods (and sanctions and other remedies for noncompliance with same) available to litigants under the California Civil Discovery Act (CCP Section 2016, et seq.) and means of production permitted under CCP Section 1985 et seq. shall be available to the Parties in such reference. Such discovery may include exchanges of expert trial witness information pursuant to CCP Section 2034. The referee shall be requested to set the matter for hearing, and try any and all issues of law and fact, within sixty (60) days after his or her appointment. All discovery shall be completed no later than fifteen (15) days before the first hearing date established by the referee. The referee may extend such period in the event of a Party’s refusal to provide requested discovery for any reason whatsoever, including, without limitation, legal objections raised to such discovery or unavailability of a witness due to absence or illness. No Party shall be entitled to “priority” in conducting discovery. All discovery requests shall be served by means of facsimile or overnight (next day) delivery. Depositions may be taken by either Party upon seven (7) days’ written notice, and requests for production or inspection of documents shall be responded to within ten (10) days after receipt of service. All disputes relating to discovery which cannot be resolved by the Parties shall be submitted to the referee whose decision on such matters shall be final and binding upon the Parties. The referee shall determine the manner in which the reference proceeding is conducted including the time and place of all hearings, the order of presentation of evidence, and all other questions that arise with respect to the course of the reference proceedings. All proceedings and hearings conducted before the referee, except for trial, shall be conducted without a court reporter, except that when any Party so requests, a court reporter shall be used at any hearing conducted before the referee. The Party making such a request shall have the obligation to arrange for and pay for the court reporter. The costs of the court reporter at the trial shall be borne equally by the Parties. Judgment shall be entered pursuant to CCP Section 644 by the Court on any decision rendered by the referee. The Parties shall cooperate in seeking that all proceedings shall be closed to the public, and that confidentiality is maintained with respect to all pleadings, records and evidence.
iii.Waiver of Jury Trial. Each Party hereby expressly waives any and all rights to a jury trial in connection with any reference proceeding under this Agreement. iv.Governing law; rules of evidence. The referee shall be required to determine all issues in accordance with existing law of the State of California, without regard to conflicts of law principles.

The referee shall be empowered to enter equitable as well as legal relief, to provide all temporary and/or provisional remedies and to enter equitable orders that will be binding upon the Parties. v.Statement of Decision and Judgment. The referee shall issue a written statement of decision within twenty (20) days of the date on which the case has been submitted for decision, which statement of decision shall be reported to the Court in accordance with CCP Section 644 and mailed promptly to the Parties. Judgment shall be entered on the decision of the referee in accordance with CCP Section 644; and the decision may be excepted to, challenged and appealed according to law.

8.Entire Agreement. This Agreement is the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the matters described herein. No prior agreement, statement or promise made by either Party shall be binding or valid.

9.Amendments. Grantor and Grantee may amend this Agreement only by written amendment signed by both Parties.

10.Assignment. The covenants, conditions, and restrictions contained in this Agreement are intended to run with the land and to bind all future owners of any interest in, as applicable, Burdened Property or the Quarry Property. Any subsequent transferee shall, by acceptance of title, be deemed to have assumed the obligations of this Agreement and to have accepted the restrictions contained herein.

11.Construction. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. This Agreement shall be construed as if both Parties (or their counsel) prepared it.

12.Notices. Except as otherwise expressly stated herein, all notices, requests, demands and other communications (collectively, “Notice”) which the Parties are required or desire to serve upon or deliver to the other Party shall be in writing and shall be given by nationally recognized overnight courier, by certified United States mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, addressed as set forth below, or by electronic mail (if acknowledged following delivery) addressed as set forth below:

TO GRANTOR: TO GRANTEE:

Blue Rock Springs, LLC
c/o Jeb Elmore
Vice President - Acquisitions
Lewis Management Corp.
9216 Kiefer Blvd.

Sacramento, CA 95826
Blue Rock Springs, LLC
c/o Lewis Management Corp.
1156 N. Mountain Avenue
Upland, CA 91786
Syar Industries, Inc.
c/o Roni Krueger
2301 Napa Vallejo Highway
Napa, CA 94558
COPY TO: COPY TO:

Corie A. Edwards, Esq.

Reuben, Junius & Rose LLP
One Bush Street, Suite 600
San Francisco, CA 94104
Paul Aherne, Esq.

PO Box 2540
Napa, CA 94558

13.Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts with the same force and effect as if executed in the form of a single document.

14.Article and Section Headings. The headings of the articles and sections in this Agreement are inserted solely for convenience or reference, and are not intended to govern, limit or aid in the construction of any term or provision hereof.

15.Waiver.
a. No claim of waiver, consent or acquiescence with respect to any provision of this Agreement shall be made against either Party except on the basis of a written instrument executed by or on behalf of such Party.
b. Either Party’s consent to or approval of any act by the other Party requiring such Party’s consent or approval shall not be deemed to waive of render unnecessary such Party’s consent to or approval of any subsequent act by the other Party.

16.No Agency. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as permitting or authorizing either Party to act in any capacity as an agent of the other. Any intention to create a joint venture, partnership or principal and agent relationship between the Parties is hereby expressly disclaimed. This Agreement shall create the relationships of Grantor and Grantee only, subject to the limitations herein.

17.Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence with respect to this Agreement.

18.Authority. Each person signing this Agreement on behalf of either Grantee or Grantor warrants and represents to the other Party that such person is duly and fully authorized to enter into this Agreement on behalf of such entity, that this Agreement will be binding upon such entity and its constituent members and that the execution of this Agreement has been approved and ratified as required by the organizational documents of such entity.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first above written.

Dated: [DATE] SYAR INDUSTRIES, INC.
____________________________________
By: James M. Syar
Its: Chief Executive Officer
Dated: [DATE] BLUE ROCK SPRINGS, LLC
____________________________________
By: Jeb Elmore
Its: Vice President - Acquisitions
Exhibit A
Legal Description – Burdened Property
Exhibit B
Legal Description – Quarry Property
Exhibit C
Form of Termination of Collaborative Use Easement
Exhibit D
Disclosures to Potential Buyers
Exhibit E
December 4, 2014 Solano County Department of Resource Management Planning Services Division Staff Report

EXHIBIT G
Quarry Expansion Area

EXHIBIT H

1. In accordance with paragraph 10 of the Site Preparation Agreement, City and Syar agree to the following:
a. The Quarry Operator will not blast on weekends except under emergency situations (as defined in Section 13 hereof). The Quarry Operator will give City 48-hour notice prior written notice of any emergency blasting events. The City may require cancellation of outdoor activities at the revised Blue Rock GC during the scheduled emergency blasting events.
b. The City may temporarily suspend special outdoor activities at the clubhouse during the scheduled Quarry weekday blasting events and emergency blasting events. This provision shall in no way cancel golf play. c. City shall require, consistent with SB 110 of 2011 (amending Section 1103.4 of the Civil Code), that future land purchasers or lessors, and business operators, within one mile of the Quarry receive a “Notice of Mining Operations” disclosing the presence and continued operation of the Lake Herman Quarry with its blasting consistent with the Quarry Permit and EIR.
d. Commercial land sales/leases, and residential sales/leases for all properties listed in Exhibit A of this Agreement shall include a deed restriction providing notice of Quarry Operations consistent with the Quarry Permit and the Easement identified in Exhibit F .

Vallejo City CouncilJuly 12, 2022

Vallejo City Council
July 12, 2022