Pacific Grove City Council Special Study Session (Nov 5, 2025): Five-Year CIP & Infrastructure Needs
Pacific Grove City Council Special Study Session: Five-Year CIP and Infrastructure Needs
On November 5, 2025, the Pacific Grove City Council convened a special study session to review the development of the city's five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and analyze identified infrastructure needs. The presentation, led by Deputy City Manager Joyce Halaby, illuminated a significant funding gap of $20.7 million over ten years for existing infrastructure, primarily in pavement and facility conditions, while acknowledging that further studies are required to capture full costs for unassessed systems like sidewalks.
Consent Calendar
- The Council unanimously approved the agenda for the special study session on the motion of Councilmember Emilio with a second by Councilmember Rao.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Support for Data Transparency: Councilmember Emilio expressed support for the report, noting it is a "step in the right direction" to daylight the information and move away from "kicking the can down the road," emphasizing the Council's commitment to fixing problems rather than blaming previous administrations.
- Opposition to Deferred Maintenance & Fiscal Concerns: Resident Andy Kubik expressed confusion and concern regarding the lack of efficiency and historical deferment of maintenance for 30-40 years, asking how the city intends to get services "faster, better, and cheaper" without increasing taxes on residents.
- Opposition to Future Tax Increases: Resident Vince Tumanello expressed disbelief and disappointment over the lack of prior long-term planning, stating he is "very disappointed" by the presentation and asking the Council not to come to residents for more taxes, suggesting the city should instead be more frugal with operations and union negotiations.
- Support for Fiscal Responsibility: Resident Inga (spelled Inga in transcript) described the report as "thoroughly sobering" and affirmed that residents can no longer support further financial deficits, calling for fiscal responsibility from the Council.
- Support for Long-term Planning: Councilmember Walkingstick acknowledged the "sobering" nature of the numbers but expressed support for the process, stating the city must run "like a business" to identify costs and revenue gaps, and requested future metrics projected decade by decade.
- Support for Revenue Diversification: Councilmember Garfield expressed support for finding revenue sources that do not burden residents, such as visitor taxes (e.g., paid parking, tourism-focused projects like the Kimpton hotel), and questioned the City's mandate to repair non-core facilities.
- Support for Proactive Investment: Councilmember Paduri expressed support for the Council's commitment to "fixing the problem" and avoiding the pitfalls of hoarding money, emphasizing the need to capture matching grants and grants opportunities to solve the infrastructure challenges.
- Support for Systemic Understanding: Mayor Smith expressed support for the Council's decision to look ahead, acknowledging that infrastructure neglect is a national issue stemming from post-war eras, and affirmed the City's commitment to raising revenue rather than cutting essential services.
Discussion Items
- City's Five-Year CIP Framework: Staff presented a data-driven roadmap to identify long-term infrastructure needs, noting that while the city has robust data on pavement and facilities, significant data gaps remain for systems like the sewer collection system (which lacks data beyond next year) and sidewalk infrastructure (which lacks any baseline).
- Pavement Management Program (PMP): Staff explained that the current network has a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) of 55 (Fair), aiming for a target of 70. Identified needs are $12 million over five years and $24 million over ten years. Current available funding (Measure X, SB1, General Fund) results in an unfunded need of $3.6 million over five years and $7 million over ten years. Staff emphasized the strategy of fixing the worst roads first while prioritizing preventive maintenance to avoid costly rehabilitation.
- Facilities Conditions Assessment: Staff reported that the city owns 18+ facilities. Of those assessed, only one has an FCI (Facility Condition Index) greater than 5, indicating most are well-maintained currently. However, identified needs are $7.5 million over five years and $14 million over ten years. Due to a lack of dedicated funding sources, the unfunded need is $6.6 million over five years and $13.8 million over ten years, excluding the $900,000 in donor-funded Chautauqua Hall improvements.
- Total Funding Gap: Staff summarized the total unfunded need for all assessed infrastructure categories as $11.7 million over five years and $9.5 million over the subsequent five years, totaling $20.7 million over ten years. Staff noted that additional studies (costing approx. $1.3 million) are needed to close data gaps for sewer and other systems, which would further increase the total identified needs.
- Forest Avenue and Utility Coordination: In response to a query about Forest Avenue's condition, Staff clarified that current maintenance is deferred to coordinate with upcoming sewer mainline evaluations and the Pebble Beach golf course closure. Staff confirmed that while utility companies like PGE dig up roads, the City holds the ultimate responsibility for repaving and ensures treatments (like slurry seals) are applied via encroachment permits.
- Budgeting Philosophy: Council members discussed the necessity of balancing reactive rehabilitation with preventive maintenance. Councilmember Paduri and Mayor Smith emphasized the importance of capturing matching grants and avoiding the "hoarding" of funds, as inflation and construction costs (estimated at 25-30% over 10 years) exceed the return on holding cash.
Key Outcomes
- Report Status: The study session concluded with no formal votes or actions; it served strictly as an educational forum and data presentation.
- Next Steps: Staff will return to Council on November 19 with an update on the status of the General Fund.
- Future Planning: The Council acknowledged the $20.7 million gap as a baseline and committed to a multi-step process involving identifying revenue sources (e.g., tourism taxes, paid parking), seeking matching grants, and closing data gaps through further studies.
- Strategic Alignment: The Council expressed consensus on adopting a proactive, long-term asset management strategy to address 30-40 years of deferred maintenance, prioritizing fiscally responsible planning over short-term budget cycles.
Meeting Transcript
Recording in progress. Recording stopped. Recording in progress. All right, great. Good evening, everyone. This is a special study session agenda for the Pacific Grove City Council today, November fifth, twenty twenty-five at four PM. We're here in Council Chambers of Pacific Grove, California, three hundred forest Avenue, and I'm calling the meeting to order. All council members are present today, and we're going to do a study session on the five-year CIP and identified infrastructure needs. Oh, and can I get an approval for this special agenda? Move to approve. Second. All right. Motion by Emilio, second by Rao. Uh and any opposed or uh take a voice vote. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Seeing none. Passes unanimously, and we'll go ahead and turn it over to Mr. Goh for item one A. Mr. Mayor, if I could just really quickly just kind of set the stage for what we're doing here today. First of all, um, in our in our work plan this year, one of the items we're identify is to create a five-year CIP. Um, so what we're going to show you tonight is is kind of the framework for that and how far we've gotten and how much more we need to build into the future. Um, this is a study session, so at the end of tonight, where there's going to be no actions that are being asked of anybody. So tonight's agenda is just to provide the information, the educate answer questions, let the community get involved and start the conversation. So no expectation of um any decisions or anything tonight. So with that, I'll turn it over to our crack team who's been working hard on this. And we will be providing the public an opportunity to comment as well as soon as the presentation's completed. Thank you, Mayor Smith. Um, Miss Hallaby today is going to be given the presentation. We've all seen her excellent presentations that she's given in the past. So let's just give it to the All-Star and let her do it. And then we'll be here for questions, comments after the presentation. With that, it will probably drum up some questions. We're going to do our best to answer those questions. If we're not able to answer any of the questions that come out of this this evening, we will get you responses and then send it to the group. At this point, then I'll hand it over to deputy city manager Hallaby. Thank you. Thank you. It's quite the introduction. Um, I'm gonna go ahead and jump right in. So the purpose of today's study session is really twofold. The first element is to provide an update on the development of the city's five-year plan, which as Matt mentioned is an element of the city council's community goals and work plan for the current period. The second facet is to highlight two key infrastructure areas, which are pavement and facilities, where we have really strong and robust data and we have some insights that we can share in terms of long-term need. So, why does a five-year CIP matter? A five-year CIP is actually a really vital tool for any municipality because it helps plan for the future and helps cities invest in the infrastructure that supports the day-to-day life in our community for community members. It ensures that we have major infrastructure needs identified and can plan for them and address them before they become costly emergencies, right? So the more we defer maintenance, the more challenging it becomes to address. It allows the city to prioritize projects, coordinate work across systems.
openpublica.com