My 9.16.25 Meeting Summary

On Tuesday, the Council met to discuss several significant items:

- We adopted a resolution dissolving the Clayton Successor Agency.  Since the City's Redevelopment Agency (RDA) was dissolved by the state in 2012, the Successor Agency was established to fulfill any remaining obligations of the RDA.  Since that time, activity has been winding down, including the repayment of RDA debts.  As all activity is now concluded, there is no longer a need for the Successor Agency.  The City did receive approximately $250K per year from the state to administer the Successor Agency, so there is expected to be a decline in revenues in the out years for that amount.

- We extended the contract of our outside City Engineer while the recruiting for an in-house City Engineer continues.

- We modified the City's salary schedule to repurpose the existing role of Management Analyst to a Project Manager to better meet the needs of the City.

- We designated Councilmember Enea as the City's representative to the League of Cal Cities for their annual conference in early October.

- We had an extended discussion about the City's infrastructure needs both in terms of work needed, and the associated costs.  This discussion focused on two main areas - pavement and hardscape, and staff compensation as it relates to recruitment and retention.

RE: Pavement and Hardscape:

We discussed back in our March 18 meeting the current state of our streets, and what it costs to maintain them.  Approximately $2.6M per year in order to keep the roads in their current condition is what the City would need to spend.  We currently receive approximately $800K/year in road related funding from a mix of sources.  In addition to the roads, there are several areas in the City where the sidewalks are in need of repair.  Net new sidewalks could cost over $1K/foot, where repairing an existing sidewalk could be in the range of $3-$800/ft.

After discussion, the Council provided feedback to staff that we would like to maintain the roads as they are now - no significant increase in cost or quality, and no significant decrease in quality either.  In total, the high level estimate of this policy including the cost of sidewalks would be an additional approximately $3M in spend each year.  Staff will use this figure, refine it, and come back with a future agenda item to discuss what options exist to make this happen.

RE: Compensation as it relates to recruitment and retention:

We discussed that overall City staff is approximately 22% below market in terms of compensation, with certain positions less than that in the mid teens, and some positions greater than 45% below market.  We as a Council gave guidance to staff that we would like our aspirational target to be approximately 15% below market.  Staff will include this in determining possible options to make this happen as well.

When we meet in mid October (first meeting in October has been cancelled), we should have a more full picture to discuss our plans going forward in order to close the projected future deficits.

Upcoming Meeting 9.16.25

At our next meeting, we will be discussing several significant items:

- We will discuss the potential dissolution of the City of Clayton Successor Agency. This Agency was formed to manage and wind down the affairs of the former Clayton Redevelopment Agency.

- We will discuss a contract amendment with the City Engineer to extend services while the City continues to look to fill the full time position.

- We will discuss updating our job classification of the Management Analyst position to better meet the needs of the City.

- We will continue to discuss future revenue options, focusing on the long term needs of the City.

- We will designate a voting delegate and alternate to the League of California Cities.

If you have any thoughts or questions on the above, please let me know.

8.19.20 Meeting Discussion - Long Term Budget Deficit

At our 8.19.20 meeting, we had a discussion with no action taken regarding closing the City's long term budget deficit.  The discussion focused on two sections - City's needs, and potential revenue options.

On the Needs front, the discussion focused on three areas:  Infrastructure, Staff recruitment and retention, and rising operational costs.

Infrastructure:  This includes things like streets, sidewalks, parks, and facilities.

Each year the city received approximately $1M from various sources to be used for transportation and road related activities.  The City as a practice has accumulated these funds and every other year, performs road work with the sum of two years of funding, approximately $2M.  At our 3.18.25 meeting, we received an engineer's report detailing the condition of our roads, and what it costs to maintain them.  

Street quality is measured in terms of Pavement Condition Index (PCI).  Overall Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of the City is approximately 73.  The scale is out of 100, and is divided into four general condition categories. Pavements in “Good” condition have a PCI above 70, pavements in “Fair” condition have a PCI between 50 and 69, pavements in “Poor” condition have a PCI between 25 and 49, and finally pavements in “Failed” condition have a PCI below 25.  

Based on the report presented, in order for the City to simply maintain a PCI of 73 that it currently has overall, the City would need to spend approximately $13M over 5 years, or $2.6M/year.  This means that the City's current sources of income to fund road projects is not sufficient to maintain the road conditions that currently exist.  The shortfall is approximately $1.6M/year.

That shortfall is just roads though.  There are also numerous areas in the City where sidewalks need repair and maintenance as well.  So the first question is whether or not as a matter of policy we wish to maintain our current road quality, or are okay with it being something less.

Staff Recruitment and Retention:  This is regarding how we attract and retain talent.

Current city staff are approximately 15-45% below market in compensation.  Jobs and requirements are not always apples to apples, however in comparing similar cities this is where Clayton compares.  If we wish to continue to attract and retain talent, we will struggle if we are too far below market.  Thus far we've been able to acquire staff when needed, however some positions are more difficult to fill.  Often times staff will gain experience in Clayton and then turnover quickly when opportunity for increased compensation or greater experience is presented.  Frequent turnover impacts the City's ability to deliver consistent services.  So the next question is whether or not as a matter of policy we are comfortable being below market, and at what magnitude.  

Rising Operational Costs:  This is regarding the cost of day to day activities.

In the current environment, inflation is outpacing the City's revenue sources on a consistent basis.  This affects contracted services, acquisition of goods and supplies, and all economic transactions.  The next question is whether or not the City should seek a way to hedge against rising costs.

On the revenue options front, staff presented information on various methods for increasing revenue.  Each had pros and cons, and potential revenue that could be generated.  These methods included examples such as a parcel tax, a parcel assessment, parcel transfer tax, sales tax, utility user tax, and a cannabis development agreement.  There may be others as well.  

After discussion, we determined that the next step would be to focus on what the City needs and the level of funding required to provide the level of services as a policy matter.  This will come back at either the mid September or mid October meeting.

My 8.19.20 Meeting Summary

At our meeting on Tuesday, we discussed several significant items:

- We approved a resolution allowing an additional ADU on properties, increasing the total number allowed from four, to five, contingent on meeting other criteria like lot size and lot coverage.  This was done based on feedback received from CA Housing and Community Development (HCD).  While the City approved its Housing Element Update (HEU) timely as required by law back in January of 2023, HCD did not approve it even though it met all statutory requirements including planning for zoning for housing at all income levels.  Further, the City actually enacted the new zoning in January of 2024.  

Based on communication from HCD, the City has received feedback that if this new resolution allowing an additional ADU, then HCD would approve the City's HEU.  As such, the Council voted 5-0 in favor of this action.  After HCD approved the HEU I will have more to say about the overall process.

- We appointed Brian Mayhew to the Financial Sustainability Committee.  He is a long time Clayton resident and has over 30 years of municipal finance experience including most recently retiring as CFO at the Metropolitan Transportation Commission after serving for more than 20 years.

 - We made several appointments to the Trails and Landscape Committee (TLC).  The TLC is an 11 member body of which 10 of the 11 members' terms are currently expired.  The TLC requires six members for a quorum.  We appointed 8 of the 9 individuals who applied, the 9th person is currently serving and their term is not yet expired.

- We appointed Sheila Driscoll as the City's representative to the Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging.  Ms. Driscoll has served in a volunteer capacity in many organizations in the community and will be a great addition to the Advisory Council.

- We agreed to modify the City's franchise agreement with Republic Services.  When originally drafted, the agreement called for certain increased in rates based on CPI changes.  It was later discovered that the timing of CPI change information was not in alignment with the dates drafted in the agreement.  The only modifications to the agreement were to bring these dates in line for ease of administration.

 - We updated the job classification of the Assistant City Manager/Administrative Services Director to just be Administrative Services Director and made updates to the City's Salary schedule to reflect the change.  This action was requested by staff to better align the organizational structure to the needs of the City.

- We had a discussion with no action taken regarding closing the City's long term budget deficit.  I will comment on this item in a separate thread.

Upcoming Meeting 8.19.25

At our next meeting, we will be discussing several significant items:

- The actual meeting will start at 6:30 where there will be a closed session regarding existing litigation.

- There will be an update from Climatec regarding the status of the energy efficiency work that has been happening in the City.

- We will discuss updates to the City's Housing element to include an additional allowed ADU based on feedback from HCD.

- We will discuss an appointment to the Financial Sustainability Committee.

- We will discuss appointments to the Trails and Landscape Committee.

- We will discuss an appointment to the Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging.

- We will discuss an amendment to the franchise agreement with Republic Services to align effective dates of CPI adjustments.

- We will discuss potential future revenue options to address the City's long term projected budget deficits.

- We will discuss amending job classifications to better align with the City's needs.

If you have any thoughts or questions on the above please let me know.

My 7.15.25 Meeting Summary

On Tuesday, the Council met and discussed several significant items:

- We held a public hearing regarding real property assessment increases for the Diablo Estates at Clayton Benefit Assessment District. This was the annual increase of the levy of real property tax assessments at the Diablo Estates Assessment District.  The city administers certain functions for the group of homes similar to an HOA manager and the assessments cover those costs.  The City is allowed to raise the assessment each year by CPI which would have been 2.22%, however based on the needs of the District, the Council decided to increase the amount by 2.0%.

I asked a question about the projected interest income attributable to the District.  It was budgeted at zero, however it appears that the interest income associated with the reserve balance may not have been applied.  Staff will do an inception to date look and come back with more information.

- We adopted two resolutions approving the new Memorandum of Understanding with the City's management employees and updated the associated salary schedule update.  This is consistent with the ongoing negotiations with City staff.

- We adopted a resolution updating the job descriptions of Police officer and Senior Maintenance Worker.  This brings more current these job descriptions as they haven't been updated in some time.  We also created a new job description for Seasonal Maintenance Worker - Temporary Position.  This role will better allow the City to manage it's seasonal workers.

- We adopted the annual appropriation limit that is required by State law.  This was a perfunctory action based on a mathematical formula established by the State.

Upcoming Meeting 7.15.25

At our next meeting, we will be discussing several significant items:

- We will have a public hearing regarding the Diablo Estates at Clayton Benefit Assessment District regarding the levying of annual assessments.

- We will discuss updating the MOU with the City's management employees and the associated salary schedule.

- We will discuss updating the job descriptions for two positions - Police Officer and Senior Maintenance Worker.  We will also discuss creating a new job description for the position of Maintenance Worker I - Temporary Seasonal.

- We will discuss the adoption of the annual appropriation limit for fiscal year 2026.

If you have any thoughts or questions on the above, please let me know.