City Council Correspondence: The excerpts below have been sourced from the website of council member Jeff Wan to share with the Clayton Watch Community. You can access council member Wan's website by following this link: https://www.jeffwanforclaytoncitycouncil.net. While we may not always agree with the opinions shared, we believe in facilitating a platform for respectful debates. Thank you for contributing to the ongoing conversation in the comments section. Remember to keep your comments respectful and concise.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two Terms, and Looking Ahead
Jeff Wan, Mayor
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I first ran for City Council, part of my motivation was simple: I wanted to move beyond complaining about things I thought should be different and start doing the work to make them better. I also wanted to show my kids that if you care about your community, you have to be willing to participate in the process. If you think there is a better way, then learn the process, do the work, and try to be the change you want to see.
Two Terms, and Looking Ahead
 |
| Jeff Wan, Mayor |
When I first ran for City Council, part of my motivation was simple: I wanted to move beyond complaining about things I thought should be different and start doing the work to make them better. I also wanted to show my kids that if you care about your community, you have to be willing to participate in the process. If you think there is a better way, then learn the process, do the work, and try to be the change you want to see.
I also believed I represented a voice that was not fully present on the Council at the time. Even for issues where there was widespread community disagreement, the Council was always unanimous. A City Council should reflect the community it serves. That does not mean every Councilmember will share every resident’s experience, but it does mean the Council benefits when different viewpoints and different community priorities are represented.
During my time on the Clayton City Council, my work has focused on fiscal discipline, transparency, public safety, infrastructure, quality of life, responsible revenue planning, and addressing long-standing issues that had gone unresolved for years. The common theme across this work is diligence. City government should listen to residents, understand the facts, use public money carefully, maintain the assets we already own, and make difficult decisions only after doing the work required to support them.
I want to highlight a few areas where the City made significant progress over my last two terms:
Transparency and Communication
For government to work for the people, residents need to be informed. At the same time, people should not have to follow every detail of City operations to understand what their elected representatives are doing. That is why I began writing updates before and after every City Council meeting. The purpose of these updates is simple: make it easier for residents to know what is happening, what decisions are coming, and how they can participate when an item matters to them.
From routine administrative items to major policy decisions, the City always has work underway, and residents should be able to understand it without having to search through lengthy agendas or watch hours of meeting video. This became especially important because the City uses “action style minutes,” which capture the decisions made but not the discussion, reasoning, or rationale behind those decisions. I believe elected officials have a responsibility to explain their reasoning. I have worked to make that information easier to access and easier to understand.
Fiscal Discipline and Financial Sustainability
Fiscal discipline has been one of my highest priorities on the Council. I served on the Budget/Audit Committee throughout all of my years in office. During this time, I pushed for a more disciplined and conservative approach to the City’s finances.
I recommended that the City save surpluses to help stabilize future pension expenses. I identified and helped correct numerous issues in the City’s external audit reports. I helped facilitate funding for an additional school crossing guard. I was also one of the first to identify the structural financial challenges the City is now facing.
When the City revisited its expenditure policy, I pushed for a more fiscally conservative version. Even when I was in the minority, I consistently argued against using consultants for routine activities when the City could reasonably do the work itself. I also opposed spending tens of thousands of dollars and significant staff time on a survey where the results were largely predictable.
Later, when inflation began rising and the cost of goods and services started outpacing the City’s revenue growth, there were immediate calls to raise taxes. I resisted that approach. My position was that the City first needed to understand its true financial condition before taking any action to raise revenue. Taxes should be a last resort, after the City has done the work to understand its costs, evaluate its revenues, improve operations, and identify other options.
The City conducted a much deeper review of its actual costs, revenues, service levels, and long-term financial needs. We looked at where revenues were falling short, where costs were rising, and what options were available before turning to any tax measure. A significant part of that effort was updating the City’s master fee schedule. Historically, fees had not always kept pace with the actual cost of providing services. That meant the City was not always recovering the right amount for the services it provided. Through the fee study, we updated the fee schedule to better reflect actual costs and created a more sustainable process for keeping fees current going forward.
We also updated the City’s investment policy and began more robust reviews of City investments. The City moved toward higher-yield investment products and managed investment services, allowing Clayton to rely on professional expertise rather than placing that responsibility solely on limited City staff. This helped improve returns on existing funds without raising taxes.
The City also took a look at its organizational structure. With only 26 total employees, there are not many easy changes available. Even so, we made thoughtful adjustments. Some positions were eliminated, some were consolidated, and some functions were moved under different areas. Those changes allowed the City to save money, continue delivering core services, and, in some areas, provide new services focused on the City’s highest priorities.
The theme has been consistent: spend carefully, protect reserves, understand the City’s true financial position, and make sure taxpayer dollars are used for clear public benefit.
Responsible Revenue Planning
After the City pursued cost savings, fee updates, investment improvements, organizational changes, and operational reviews, the City still remained in a deficit position. At that point, it became clear that leaving the deficit unresolved would be irresponsible. Once the City had taken every reasonable action to reduce costs and increase non-tax revenue, the remaining option was to consider new revenue.
The Council spent significant time evaluating potential revenue sources. We held workshops, worked with staff, reviewed financial projections, and received input from residents. The conclusion was that the most appropriate course of action was to place a 1% local sales tax before Clayton voters this November. Clayton has never passed a local sales tax increase since incorporation. The current sales tax rate is 8.75%, but Clayton receives only a small portion of that existing amount. Most of it goes to the state, county, and other voter-approved measures.
A 1% local sales tax is different because 100% of the local tax collected would stay with the City of Clayton. In fact, the estimated revenue from a new 1% local sales tax is roughly equal to what Clayton currently receives from the existing 8.75% sales tax rate. The projected revenue, approximately $800,000 to $1 million per year, would be significant for a City with roughly $7 million in annual General Fund spending. This work reflected the appropriate level of diligence: understand the City’s financial position, reduce costs where possible, increase non-tax revenues where possible, and only then ask voters to consider a tax measure.
City Infrastructure
The City began, continued, and made progress on several important infrastructure and facility improvements.
The City was awarded a 1% below-market interest loan to fund the largest infrastructure investment in Clayton since the Oakhurst development was constructed. That project allowed the City to make major improvements across public facilities and infrastructure, including solar installation at City facilities, lighting replacement throughout the City, electric vehicle charging, water efficiency improvements, and HVAC efficiency upgrades.
We also applied for and received FEMA funding to repair portions of Cardinet Trail that were damaged during major storms. That process took time and required significant administrative follow-through. I thought it was important to see the work through because, on a tight City budget, we should use outside funding whenever it is available and appropriate. There was an initial push to use reserves to move the work forward, but pursuing outside funding first was the more fiscally responsible approach.
The City also began preliminary work on the library refresh project, which is scheduled to begin soon. Councilmember Trupiano has been a key leader in pushing this project forward. Maintenance of City-owned buildings has been deferred for many years. The library, which also serves as the City Council meeting space, has not received basic upkeep such as carpet replacement and painting. Maintaining the assets we already own is one of the most practical and responsible things the City can do.
Together, these projects reflect a larger priority: reinvesting in the City’s existing infrastructure, improving safety and accessibility, using outside funding where possible, and taking better care of the public assets residents already own.
School Safety and Pedestrian Improvements
As a parent, I have always been especially focused on traffic safety around schools.
When the president of the Mt. Diablo Elementary PFC reached out in 2019 to ask whether the City could help provide an additional crossing guard outside the school, I was glad to help. Initially, the City helped by accepting a donation from the PFC and coordinating with existing service providers. That cooperation was valuable, but I believed school safety should be a City priority, not just a parent-funded effort.
As part of the Budget/Audit Committee, I worked to make sure that crossing guard was included in future budgets. I worked with the Principal of the middle school to add a diagonal pedestrian crossing outside the school. Improving traffic and pedestrian safety around schools is one of the ways the City can make sure its spending reflects its priorities. The sidewalk improvements near the elementary school build on that same priority: make it safer and easier for children and families to get to school.
Housing Element Compliance
The City also completed one of the most difficult and time-consuming state planning requirements facing California cities: securing approval of Clayton’s Housing Element from the California Department of Housing and Community Development. California law requires every city and county to adopt a Housing Element as part of its General Plan. The Housing Element is the City’s plan for how it will accommodate housing needs across income levels. It does not require the City itself to build housing, but it does require the City to plan for housing, identify sites where housing could be built, evaluate zoning and development constraints, create programs to support housing production, and show how the City can accommodate its assigned Regional Housing Needs Allocation.
For Clayton, this was a years-long process. The City responded to HCD comments, revised policies and programs, analyzed available sites, evaluated constraints, and worked through a detailed state review process. The City made multiple updates to its Housing Element, including rezoning multiple sites that HCD failed to recognize. This required substantial staff time, consultant work, Planning Commission review, Council discussion, public engagement, and repeated coordination with HCD. The process was made more difficult because HCD continued to request additional revisions not required by statute even after the City had made updates intended to comply with statutory requirements. The entire process stalled when HCD stopped responding to the City. It was Councilmember Trupiano who led meetings with State Senator Grayson asking him to assist with getting responses from HCD.
Geological Hazard Abatement District
Another major area of focus was the Geological Hazard Abatement District (GHAD).
When I first joined the Council, I reviewed the GHAD reports and saw that much more work needed to be done. As early as 2019, I requested that the GHAD’s detailed scope of work, timing, and funding needs be discussed. The GHAD is distinct from the City of Clayton, although the Clayton City Council serves as the GHAD Board. The GHAD assesses a levy on approximately 1,400 parcels in Clayton, with different tiers based on property type. The purpose of that assessment is to fund GHAD activities.
The GHAD’s duties are outlined in the Plan of Control and include maintenance of drainage facilities, inspection of drainage ditches, debris removal, repairs, drain cleanout, erosion control evaluation, and monitoring of geological movement and water pressure through devices such as inclinometers and piezometers. The problem was that the GHAD’s revenues were far below what would be required to perform those duties. The assessment level was set before Proposition 218, and after Proposition 218, increasing the assessment required voter approval. Prior assessment revenue was approximately $47,000 per year, with most of that amount consumed by program administration rather than actual monitoring, maintenance, or mitigation work.
Over time, many of the monitoring devices used to measure geological movement were damaged or no longer operable. In several areas where movement is possible, the GHAD did not have adequate information to determine whether movement was occurring or how severe it might be. If significant geological movement occurs, it can pose serious risk to nearby homes. I recognized that this was a long-standing problem. Working with Councilmember Trupiano, we helped push for staff to analyze the GHAD’s actual needs and the funding required to perform its responsibilities. The basic question was simple: why have a Geological Hazard Abatement District if it does not have the funding to do the work it was created to do?
We took that question to the affected residents and asked whether they would support increasing GHAD assessments so the district could perform its duties. The measure passed. As a result, a district that had been underfunded for decades is now better positioned to do the work it was created to do: monitor risk, maintain facilities, and address hazards.
Regency Gate Quality of Life
One of the most significant neighborhood quality-of-life issues during my first term involved the area outside Regency Gate. After the trailhead became popularized through social media and organized hiking groups, a quiet neighborhood experienced a major increase in traffic, parking demand, blocked driveways, trash, speeding, and aggressive driving from people looking for parking. Residents had raised concerns before, but the issue had not gained enough traction at the City.
I spent substantial time talking with affected residents, as well as people who wanted to preserve public trail access. The goal was to find a balanced solution that protected neighborhood quality of life while still allowing the public to access the trails. I proposed a permit parking system. Although there was initial hesitation, the majority of the Council was ultimately persuaded, and the City implemented the program. The result has been successful. Residents have described the change as night and day.
Summer Concerts and Community Partnerships
We also made the Summer Concerts in the Grove more sustainable. For years, the concert series relied heavily on current and former Councilmembers and an informal network of volunteers and relationships. That approach helped keep the tradition alive, but it was not a sustainable long-term structure. Lead by Councilmember Trupiano, we brought in an outside firm to help manage the series more formally, so the work does not sit with individual Councilmembers when that is not really the role of the Council.
That change allows Councilmembers to participate in and enjoy the events alongside residents, while also creating a more reliable operating model for the future. We also improved the funding and community benefit model for the concerts. The City continues to seek sponsorships and donations, and those efforts have been successful in helping cover the cost of the series largely due to the work of Councilmember Trupiano who in her time on Council has doubled the amount of sponsorships received. In addition, I proposed partnering with local schools to help collect donations during the concerts. In return, the donations are shared with the schools. As a result, the concert series not only brings the community together, but also creates a way for residents to support local schools. It turns a City event into a broader community partnership.
Updating Local Ordinances
I worked to update local ordinances that were outdated, overly restrictive, or inconsistent with how residents actually live. Before being elected, I was surprised by how restrictive Clayton’s sign ordinances were. After reviewing the rules adopted by prior Councils, it became clear that the City’s ordinances were overly restrictive and likely inconsistent with First Amendment case law.
I argued that the City needed to update its rules. Ultimately, the City revised its sign ordinances to better align with constitutional requirements.
Another issue that came up frequently in conversations with residents was backyard hens. Many Clayton residents already kept hens, but City ordinances officially prohibited them. The issue became especially clear when I spoke with an elementary school teacher who incubated chicks as part of a classroom project but then had to surrender the hens because they could not legally be kept in Clayton.
I researched the benefits and impacts of allowing backyard hens and found that, excluding Clayton, all but one city in the County allowed them. I worked with City staff on the research and helped persuade my fellow Councilmembers to change the law.
As a result, Clayton residents can now legally keep backyard hens.
ARPA and the Clayton Cares Program
When the City first learned it would receive federal COVID relief funding through ARPA, the allowable uses were initially focused on categories such as public health response, economic impacts, premium pay, revenue loss, and infrastructure. The Council initially wanted to support local businesses, and I agreed that was important. I also made sure the City’s ARPA program included direct assistance to households. I wanted to focus on creating something that would be directly beneficial to Clayton residents and businesses without creating unnecessary complexity for applicants or City staff. That work became the Clayton Cares program, which focused on practical, direct support for the community.
When the Council revisited ARPA funding, we continued to focus on local businesses and households while also looking at how to recognize City employees, including police officers, for their work during the pandemic. The initial premium pay proposal was approximately $2,000 per officer. I suggested a more structured approach: decide what percentage of available funds should go toward premium pay, apply that framework across employees, and then calculate the resulting amount. That approach allowed the City to provide $10,000 per employee, a much more meaningful recognition for staff who are often underpaid, while still using ARPA funds responsibly.
Later, ARPA guidelines changed and the funds became more flexible, effectively allowing them to function more like general reserves. Even so, the City’s earlier approach reflected the right priorities: support residents, support local businesses, recognize employees, and avoid creating programs that were too burdensome to administer.
Civil Grand Jury Response
I along with Councilmember Trupiano, led the City’s response to a Civil Grand Jury investigation and report concerning the City of Clayton. The investigation required substantial time from City staff, Councilmembers, and City leadership. We participated in interviews, responded to questions, reviewed records, and worked through the formal response process.
When the final report was issued, it contained significant factual errors, including statements that misstated the City’s audited financial information. The report also drew conclusions that were not supported by the record. Some cities may have chosen to simply acknowledge the report and move on. I believed Clayton had a responsibility to respond directly and factually. Residents deserve accurate information, especially when the City’s financial condition and public decision-making were being questioned.
Councilmember Trupiano and I helped lead the effort to rebut the report, correct the record, and respond to the findings with facts. The City’s response demonstrated that the report’s findings were unsupported, inaccurate, or unfounded. This work was important because public misinformation should not be left unanswered. The City had a responsibility to defend the accuracy of its financial reporting, its public records, and its decision-making process.
Changing How the City Operates
Beyond individual projects and decisions, one of my broader goals was to help redirect the City toward what should be its highest priorities: serving its residents. I believed Clayton needed to move away from old ways of operating that relied too heavily on informal relationships, handshake understandings, and backroom networks. City government should not depend on who knows whom, who has always done something, or who has access to informal channels. Serving the public should process driving and transparent. That shift has not always been easy. But I believe it has been necessary. Residents deserve a City government that is focused on core services in a professional and transparent manner.
Looking Ahead
After careful consideration, I have decided that I will not seek a third term on the Clayton City Council. I’ve done much of what I set out to do, and I believe the time is right to create an opportunity for another Clayton resident to serve. As the City moves forward, it will benefit from both experienced leadership and new voices willing to take on the responsibility of public service.
Serving on the Council has been an honor, and I deeply grateful to the people of Clayton who trusted me to represent them. My time on the Council has been focused on doing the hard work required to make responsible decisions: improving transparency, explaining my reasoning to residents, taking a disciplined approach to the budget, identifying structural financial challenges early, updating fees, strengthening investment practices, restructuring operations, investing in infrastructure, addressing long-standing obligations, and only then considering new revenue.
The work, of course, never ends. The next Council will have important decisions ahead. The City will need to maintain service levels and invest in infrastructure, while at the same time address the structural deficit. This is what is required to preserve the quality of life that makes Clayton special. I am grateful for the opportunity to have served, for the residents who engaged in the process, for the small but mighty and diligent City staff, and for the many people who helped push the City toward more disciplined, transparent, and responsible governance.
This last part cannot be left unsaid. Public service is a responsibility, but that responsibility is shared not only by those who sit behind the dais, but also by the friends and family who support them. They give up time and attention, and sometimes endure criticism they did not ask for. For that, I am deeply grateful to my family. Without their patience, support, and at times, grace, I could never have undertaken this role.
