Agenda packet — Atherton City Council, September 20, 2023 (part 2 of 3)

GASB 40 - DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT RISK

DISCLOSURE

TOWN OF ATHERTON
As of June 30, 2023
Cusip Description Coupon Maturity
date
Call date S&P
rating
Moody
rating
Par value or
shares
Historical % Portfolio Market
value
% Portfolio
mkt value
Effective
cost hist cost dur (yrs)
Federal Home Loan Banks
3130AV6J6 FEDERAL HOME
LOAN

4.500 03/13/2026

3.400 07/24/2023
AA+
A+
Aaa
A2
750,000.00 758,133.75 4.71 747,163.45 4.75 2.46
Issuer total 750,000.00 758,133.75 4.71 747,163.45 4.75 2.46 US Bank NA/Cincinnati OH
90331HNV1 US BANK NA

CINCINNATI
650,000.00 689,442.00 4.28 649,120.36 4.13 0.07
Issuer total 650,000.00 689,442.00 4.28 649,120.36 4.13 0.07 International Business Machines Corp
459200HP9 IBM CORP 3.375% 3.375 08/01/2023 A- A3 650,000.00 690,144.00 4.29 648,630.42 4.12 0.09 Issuer total 650,000.00 690,144.00 4.29 648,630.42 4.12 0.09 Toyota Motor Credit Corp
89236THU2 TOYOTA MOTOR
CREDIT

0.450 01/11/2024

3.875 02/01/2024
A+ A1 650,000.00 648,745.50 4.03 632,840.26 4.02 0.52
Issuer total 650,000.00 648,745.50 4.03 632,840.26 4.02 0.52 JPMorgan Chase & Co
46625HJT8 JPMORGAN CHASE &
CO
A- A1 600,000.00 632,604.00 3.93 594,112.80 3.78 0.57
Issuer total 600,000.00 632,604.00 3.93 594,112.80 3.78 0.57 Apple Inc
037833EB2 APPLE INC 0.7% 0.700 02/08/2026 01/08/2026 AA+ AA+
Aaa
Aaa
650,000.00 593,749.00 3.69 585,958.01 3.72 2.50
Issuer total 650,000.00 593,749.00 3.69 585,958.01 3.72 2.50 Federal National Mortgage Association
3135G0V34 FANNIE MAE 2.5% 2.500 02/05/2024 500,000.00 528,045.00 3.28 491,146.80 3.12 0.58 Issuer total 500,000.00 528,045.00 3.28 491,146.80 3.12 0.58 12

Page 128 of 460 ends

GASB 40 - DEPOSIT AND INVESTMENT RISK

DISCLOSURE

TOWN OF ATHERTON
As of June 30, 2023
Cusip Description Coupon Maturity
date
Call date S&P
rating
Moody
rating
Par value or
shares
Historical % Portfolio Market
value
% Portfolio
mkt value
Effective
cost hist cost dur (yrs)
Pfizer Inc
717081DM2 PFIZER INC 3.4% 3.400 05/15/2024

0.550 07/12/2024

0.700 01/15/2026

0.000
A+
AA
A1
A3
A2
500,000.00 499,270.00 3.10 489,234.08 3.11 0.85
Issuer total 500,000.00 499,270.00 3.10 489,234.08 3.11 0.85 American Honda Finance Corp
02665WDS7 AMERICAN HONDA 500,000.00 471,975.00 2.93 475,054.46 3.02 1.00 Issuer total 500,000.00 471,975.00 2.93 475,054.46 3.02 1.00 John Deere Capital Corp
24422EVK2 JOHN DEERE

CAPITAL
500,000.00 439,170.00 2.73 449,793.02 2.86 2.44
Issuer total 500,000.00 439,170.00 2.73 449,793.02 2.86 2.44 Cash and Cash Equivalents
CASH 12,808.64
12,808.64
12,808.64
12,808.64

0.00 0.00
12,808.64
12,808.64

0.08 0.08

0.00 0.00

1.26 Issuer total
Grand total 16,481,808.64 16,093,909.42 100.00 15,733,149.75 100.00 13

Page 129 of 460 ends

SECURITIES

PURCHASED

TOWN OF ATHERTON
For the period June 1, 2023 - June 30, 2023
Cusip Description / Broker Trade date
Settle date
Coupon Maturity/
Call date
Par value or
shares
Unit cost Principal
cost
Accrued
interest
Government Bonds
91282CDK4 USA TREASURY 1.25%
30NOV2026
06/07/2023
06/09/2023

1.250

2.750
11/30/2026
06/30/2025
500,000.00
350,000.00

90.78 96.40
(453,906.25)
(337,409.38)
(153.69)

RBC CAPITAL MARKETS,
LLC
912828XZ8 USA TREASURY 2.75%
30JUN2025

THE BANK OF NEW YORK
MELLON
06/15/2023
06/20/2023
(4,546.62)
Total Government Bonds
Grand total
850,000.00
850,000.00
(791,315.63)
(791,315.63)
(4,700.31)
Grand total (4,700.31)
14

Page 130 of 460 ends

SECURITIES SOLD AND

MATURED

TOWN OF ATHERTON
For the period June 1, 2023 - June 30, 2023
Cusip Description / Broker Trade date Coupon
Settle date
Maturity/
Call date
Par value or Historical cost Amortized cost Price Fair value at sale or
Realized
gain
Accrued
interest
sold
shares at sale or
maturity maturity (loss)
Government Agencies
3133834G3 FEDERAL HOME LN BKS

2.125
06-09-2023
06/09/2023
06/09/2023

2.125 (500,000.00) 514,521.50 500,000.00 0.00 500,000.00 0.00 0.00 Total (Government Agencies)
Grand total
(500,000.00)
(500,000.00)
514,521.50
514,521.50
500,000.00
500,000.00
500,000.00
500,000.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
15

Page 131 of 460 ends

DETAIL OF RETURN AND INTEREST

RECEIVED

TOWN OF ATHERTON
For the period June 1, 2023 - June 30, 2023
Cusip Description Accretion
(amortization)
Realized gain
(loss)
Change in fair
value
Interest earned Interest received
Cash
Cash and Cash Equivalents 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,539.81 2,539.81 Total Cash 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,539.81 2,539.81
Corporate Bonds
02665WDS7
037833EB2
459200HP9
24422EVK2
46625HJT8
717081DM2
89236THU2
90331HNV1
AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE 0.55%
12JUL2024
1,247.41
1,684.16
(1,616.54)
1,574.55
(1,325.37)

35.49 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
401.20
(5,126.94)
871.63
221.52
366.53

0.00 0.00

0.00 APPLE INC 0.7% 08FEB2026 (CALLABLE
08JAN26)
IBM CORP 3.375% 01AUG2023
1,767.19
JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 0.7% 281.95
15JAN2026
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 3.875% 01FEB2024
PFIZER INC 3.4% 15MAY2024
(3,490.78)
(170.70) 1,872.92
1,369.44
235.63
(1,710.47)
1,921.78
1,588.81
(5,715.47)
TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 0.45% 11JAN2024
US BANK NA CINCINNATI 3.4% 24JUL2023 (CALLABLE
14JUL23)

45.40 (1,283.12)
361.98
1,780.28
Total Corporate Bonds 7,895.46
Government Agencies
3135G0V34
3133EM6N7
3133EJ2B4
3133834G3
3130AV6J6
3134A2HG6
3137EAFA2
FANNIE MAE 2.5% 05FEB2024 (891.26)

88.20 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
652.40
2,061.60
1,175.18
346.10
1,006.94

68.47 0.00
FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 0.17% 0.00
27SEP2023
FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANK 3%
06DEC2023
FEDERAL HOME LN BKS 2.125 06-09-2023
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK 4.5%
13MAR2026
FREDDIE MAC 0% 11DEC2025
(1,723.43)
(221.14)
(227.20)
2,199.59
(11.31)
1,812.50
236.11
2,718.75

0.00 11,250.00
5,312.50
(7,766.79) 0.00
(6,983.85)
2,322.36

0.00 FREDDIE MAC 0.25% 04DEC2023 100.70 625.00
16

Page 132 of 460 ends

DETAIL OF RETURN AND INTEREST

RECEIVED

0.00 0.00

0.00 941.91
(1,888.49)
(698.46)

44.10 302.08

0.00 FREDDIE MAC 0.625% 25NOV2025 (CALLABLE 0.00
25NOV23)
FREDDIE MAC 0.625% 27OCT2025 (CALLABLE
27JUL23)
FREDDIE MAC 0.65% 28MAY2026 (CALLABLE
28NOV23)
302.08 0.00
(3,819.16)
(13,657.20)
261.81 0.00
Total Government Agencies 6,853.54 17,187.50
Government Bonds
91282CBA8
91282CBM2
91282CBE0
91282CBR1
91282CAW1
91282CBC4
91282CDK4
912828T91
912828XZ8
91282CFK2
USA TREASURY 0.125% 15DEC2023 271.95
184.86
180.28
153.95

78.95 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 3,718.75
2,031.25

82.19 51.79
500.00
USA TREASURY 0.125% 15FEB2024 0.00
USA TREASURY 0.125% 15JAN2024
USA TREASURY 0.25% 15MAR2024
USA TREASURY 0.25% 15NOV2023
USA TREASURY 0.375% 31DEC2025
USA TREASURY 1.25% 30NOV2026
USA TREASURY 1.625% 31OCT2023
USA TREASURY 2.75% 30JUN2025
USA TREASURY 3.5% 15SEP2025
2,207.03 51.79 0.00
1,445.31 101.90 0.00
2,246.09 101.90 0.00
3,537.93
833.46
(541.02)
253.16
329.08
5,282.60
9,664.43
(9,703.11)
(3,417.97)
1,757.81
372.93 2,250.00
358.61 0.00
662.37 0.00
(1,628.13)
(7,734.38)
(9,077.35)
(28,450.02)
265.88 4,812.50
2,139.94 0.00
4,189.30
21,478.11
Total Government Bonds
Grand total
7,562.50
27,289.81
17

Page 133 of 460 ends

TRANSACTION
REPORT

TOWN OF ATHERTON
For the period June 1, 2023 - June 30, 2023
Trade date Cusip
Settle date
Transaction Sec type Description Maturity Par value or
shares
Realized
gain(loss)
Principal Interest Transaction total
06/04/2023 3137EAFA2 Income
06/04/2023
Government Agencies
Government Agencies
Government Bonds
Government Agencies
Government Agencies
Government Bonds
Government Bonds
Government Bonds
Government Bonds
FREDDIE MAC 0.25% 12/04/2023
12/06/2023
11/30/2026
06/09/2023
06/09/2023
06/30/2025
12/15/2023
06/30/2025
500,000.00
750,000.00
500,000.00
500,000.00
(500,000.00)
350,000.00
800,000.00
350,000.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
625.00
11,250.00
(153.69)
5,312.50

0.00 625.00
11,250.00
(454,059.94)
5,312.50
06/06/2023 3133EJ2B4 Income
06/06/2023

FEDERAL FARM CREDIT
BANK
USA TREASURY 1.25%
06/07/2023 91282CDK4 Bought
06/09/2023
(453,906.25)
06/09/2023 3133834G3 Income 0.00
06/09/2023

FEDERAL HOME LN BKS

2.125

FEDERAL HOME LN BKS

2.125
USA TREASURY 2.75%
06/09/2023 3133834G3 Capital Change
06/09/2023
500,000.00
(337,409.38)

0.00 500,000.00
(341,956.00)
500.00
06/15/2023 912828XZ8 Bought
06/20/2023
(4,546.62)
06/15/2023 91282CBA8 Income 500.00
06/15/2023
USA TREASURY 0.125%
06/30/2023 912828XZ8 Income USA TREASURY 2.75%
06/30/2023

0.00 4,812.50
2,250.00
2,539.81
4,812.50
06/30/2023 91282CBC4 Income
06/30/2023
USA TREASURY 0.375% 12/31/2025 1,200,000.00

0.00 0.00 2,250.00
06/30/2023 Income Cash and Cash Equivalents Cash 0.00 2,539.81 18

Page 134 of 460 ends

ADDITIONAL

INFORMATION

TOWN OF ATHERTON
As of June 30, 2023
Past performance is not a guide to future performance. The value of investments and any income from them will fluctuate and is not guaranteed (this may partly be due to exchange rate changes) and investors may not get back the amount invested. Transactions in foreign securities may be executed and settled in local markets. Performance comparisons will be affected by changes in interest rates. Investment returns fluctuate due to changes in market conditions. Investment involves risk, including the possible loss of principal. No assurance can be given that the performance objectives of a given strategy will be achieved. The information contained herein is for your reference only and is being provided in response to your specific request and has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable; however, no representation is made regarding its accuracy or completeness. This document must not be used for the purpose of an offer or solicitation in any jurisdiction or in any circumstances in which such offer or solicitation is unlawful or otherwise not permitted. This document should not be duplicated, amended, or forwarded to a third party without consent from Insight. This is a marketing document intended for professional clients only and should not be made available to or relied upon by retail clients Investment advisory services in North America are provided through two different SEC-registered investment advisers using the brand Insight Investment: Insight North America LLC (INA) and Insight Investment International Limited (IIIL). The North American investment advisers are associated with a broader group of global investment managers that also (individually and collectively) use the corporate brand Insight Investment and may be referred to as Insight, Insight Group or Insight Investment.

INA is an investment adviser registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. Registration with the SEC does not imply a certain level of skill or training.

You may request, without charge, additional information about Insight. Moreover, specific information relating to Insights strategies, including investment advisory fees, may be obtained from INA's Form ADV Part 2A, which is available without charge upon request.

Where indicated, performance numbers used in the analysis are gross returns. The performance reflects the reinvestment of all dividends and income. INA charges management fees on all portfolios managed and these fees will reduce the returns on the portfolios. For example, assume that $30 million is invested in an account with INA, and this account achieves a 5.0% annual return compounded monthly, gross of fees, for a period of five years.

At the end of five years that account would have grown to $38,500,760 before the deduction of management fees. Assuming management fees of 0.25% per year are deducted monthly from the account, the value at the end of the five year period would be $38,022,447. Actual fees for new accounts are dependent on size and subject to negotiation. INA's investment advisory fees are discussed in Part 2A of its Form ADV.

Unless otherwise stated, the source of information is Insight. Any forecasts or opinions are Insight’s own at the date of this document (or as otherwise specified) and may change. Material in this publication is for general information only and is not advice, investment advice, or the recommendation of any purchase or sale of any security. Insight makes no implied or expressed recommendations concerning the manner in which an account should or would be handled, as appropriate investment strategies depend upon specific investment guidelines and objectives and should not be construed to be an assurance that any particular security in a strategy will remain in any fund, account, or strategy, or that a previously held security will not be repurchased. It should not be assumed that any of the security transactions or holdings referenced herein have been or will prove to be profitable or that future investment decisions will be profitable or will equal or exceed the past investment performance of the securities listed.

Please compare the information provided in this statement to the information provided in the statement received from your Custodian.

For trading activity the Clearing broker will be reflected. In certain cases the Clearing broker will differ from the Executing broker.

In calculating ratings distributions and weighted average portfolio quality, Insight assigns U.S Treasury and U.S agency securities a quality rating based on the methodology used within the respective benchmark index. When Moody’s, S&P and Fitch rate a security, Bank of America and Merrill Lynch indexes assign a simple weighted average statistic while Barclays indexes assign the median statistic. Insight assigns all other securities the lower of Moody’s and S&P ratings.

Information about the indices shown here is provided to allow for comparison of the performance of the strategy to that of certain well-known and widely recognized indices. There is no representation that such index is an appropriate benchmark for such comparison. You cannot invest directly in an index and the indices represented do not take into account trading commissions and/or other brokerage or custodial costs. The volatility of the indices may be materially different from that of the strategy. In addition, the strategy’s holdings may differ substantially from the securities that comprise the indices shown.

The ICE BofA 3 Month US T-Bill index is an unmanaged market index of U.S. Treasury securities maturing in 90 days that assumes reinvestment of all income.

The ICE BofA 6 Month US T-Bill index measures the performance of Treasury bills with time to maturity of less than 6 months.

The ICE BofA 1-Year US Treasury Index is a one-security index comprised of the most recently issued 1-year US Treasury note. The index is rebalanced monthly. In order to qualify for inclusion, a 1-year note must be auctioned on or before the third business day before the last business day of the month.

The ICE BofA 3-Year US Treasury Index is a one-security index comprised of the most recently issued 3-year US Treasury note. The index is rebalanced monthly. In order to qualify for inclusion, a 3-year note must be auctioned on or before the third business day before the last business day of the month.

The ICE BofA 5-Year US Treasury Index is a one-security index comprised of the most recently issued 5-year US Treasury note. The index is rebalanced monthly. In order to qualify for inclusion, a 5-year note must be auctioned on or before the third business day before the last business day of the month.

The ICE BofA 1-3 US Year Treasury Index is an unmanaged index that tracks the performance of the direct sovereign debt of the U.S. Government having a maturity of at least one year and less than three years.

The ICE BofA 1-5 US Year Treasury Index is an unmanaged index that tracks the performance of the direct sovereign debt of the U.S. Government having a maturity of at least one year and less than five years. 19

Page 135 of 460 ends

ADDITIONAL

INFORMATION

TOWN OF ATHERTON
As of June 30, 2023
Insight does not provide tax or legal advice to its clients and all investors are strongly urged to consult their tax and legal advisors regarding any potential strategy or investment.

Insight is a group of wholly owned subsidiaries of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation. BNY Mellon is the corporate brand of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation and may also be used as a generic term to reference the Corporation as a whole or its various subsidiaries generally. Products and services may be provided under various brand names and in various countries by subsidiaries, affiliates and joint ventures of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation where authorized and regulated as required within each jurisdiction. Unless you are notified to the contrary, the products and services mentioned are not insured by the FDIC (or by any governmental entity) and are not guaranteed by or obligations of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation or any of its affiliates. The Bank of New York Corporation assumes no responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the above data and disclaims all expressed or implied warranties in connection therewith. © 2023 Insight Investment. All rights reserved.
20

Page 136 of 460 ends

Item No. 5
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – CONSENT AGENDA
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ANTHONY SUBER, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER/ CITY CLERK
DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 2023
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING A VOTING DELEGATE

AND UP TO TWO ALTERNATES FOR THE LEAGUE OF
CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE, SEPTEMBER 20
- 22, 2023.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution 23-XX designating a voting delegate and up to two alternatives to the League of California Cities Annual Conference, September 20 – 22, 2023.

BACKGROUND
The League’s 2023 Annual Conference in scheduled for Wednesday, September 20 through Friday, September 23, being held in Sacramento, CA.

The League’s Annual Business meeting is scheduled for the Friday of the Conference. At this meeting, the League membership considers and acts on Resolutions that establish League policy.

Cal Cities Members may submit policy proposals sixty days before the Annual Conference and Expo. The resolution must have the concurrence of at least five additional member cities or individual members. Once the Resolution Packet for 2023 is available it can be found at www.calcities.org The conference voting procedures are attached to this staff report as Attachment

2. To vote at the Annual Business meeting, the City Council must designate a voting delegate.

Council may also appoint up to two alternate voting delegates, one of who may vote if the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity.

The voting delegate and alternates must be registered to attend the conference. They need not register for the entire conference; they may register for Friday only. In order to cast a vote at least one person must be present at the Business Meeting and in possession of the voting delegate card.

Presently Mayor Bill Widmer and Vice Mayor Diana Hawkins-Manuelian, and Council member Rick DeGolia are registered to attend the conference and absent alternative direction at the

Page 137 of 460 ends

League of CA Cities Conference Delegates
SEPTEMBER 20, 2023

Page 2 of 2 ends

September 6 meeting, Mayor Widmer will be listed as the Primary Voting Delegate and Vice Mayor Hawkins-Manuelian will be listed as the Alternate. Either attendee may vote but only one may vote.

Attachment 1 – League of CA Resolution will be used to designate the Council’s choices for primary delegate and alternate.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to this item. The 2023/24 budget includes funding for conference attendance.

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal Area F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed, and Well-Planned

POLICY FOCUS
Attendance at the Annual League Conference is encouraged for continuing Council education, experience, and networking opportunities. The Conference provides the Council with the opportunity to engage with a broader section of California communities that may face similar challenges. There is also the opportunity to participate in educational workshops that focus on relevant local and statewide topics and solutions.

PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with this agenda item being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting in print and electronically. Information about the project is also disseminated via the Town’s electronic News Flash and Atherton Online. There are approximately 1,200 subscribers to the Town’s electronic News Flash publications. Subscribers include residents as well as stakeholders –to include, but be not limited to, media outlets, school districts, Menlo Park Fire Protection District, service provides (water, power, and sewer), and regional elected officials.

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
This item has not been before a Town Committee or Commission

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution, League of California Cities Voting Delegate – 2023

2. Memo, League of California Cities Voting Guidelines

Page 138 of 460 ends

Resolution No. 23-XX Page 1 of 1 September 6, 2023
RESOLUTION NO. 23-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ATHERTON

DESIGNATING MAYOR RICK DEGOLIA AS THE VOTING DELEGATE FOR

THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL BUSINESS MEETING TO BE HELD ON SEPTEMBER 22, 2023
WHEREAS, The League of California Cities Annual Business meeting will be held on September 22, 2023; and
WHEREAS, The League of California Cities Bylaws require that a City’s voting delegate be designated by the City Council and that the voting delegate must be registered to attend the conference and be present at the business meeting; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the Town of Atherton orders as follows:

1. The City Council designates Mayor Bill Widmer as the voting delegate and Vice Mayor Diana Hawkins-Manuelian as an alternate for the League of California Cities Annual Conference Business meeting to be held on Friday, September 22, 2023.

2. That the City Council directs the City Clerk to transmit a copy of this resolution to the League of California Cities.

I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the Town of Atherton at a regular meeting thereof held on this 6th day of September, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
_____________________
Bill Widmer, Mayor
Town of Atherton
ATTEST:
______________________
Anthony Suber, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
Andreas Booher, Assistant City Attorney

Page 139 of 460 ends

1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org DATE: Wednesday, June 21, 2023
TO: Mayors, Council Members, City Clerks, and City Managers RE: DESIGNATION OF VOTING DELEGATES AND ALTERNATES
League of California Cities Annual Conference and Expo, Sept. 20-22, 2023, Sacramento SAFE Credit Union Convention Center
Every year, the League of California Cities convenes a member-driven General Assembly at the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo. The General Assembly is an important opportunity where city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy.

Taking place on Sept. 22, the General Assembly is comprised of voting delegates appointed by each member city; every city has one voting delegate. Your appointed voting delegate plays an important role during the General Assembly by representing your city and voting on resolutions.

To cast a vote during the General Assembly, your city must designate a voting delegate and up to two alternate voting delegates, one of whom may vote if the designated voting delegate is unable to serve in that capacity. Voting delegates may either be an elected or appointed official.

Please complete the attached voting delegate form and email it to Cal Cities office no later than Monday, August 28.

New this year, we will host a pre-conference information session for voting delegates to explain their role. Submitting your voting delegate form by the deadline will allow us time to establish voting delegate/alternate records prior to the conference and provide preconference communications with voting delegates.

Please view Cal Cities’ event and meeting policy in advance of the conference.

Action by Council Required. Consistent with Cal Cities bylaws, a city’s voting delegate and up to two alternates must be designated by the city council. When completing the attached Voting Delegate form, please attach either a copy of the council resolution that reflects the council action taken or have your city clerk or mayor sign the form affirming that the names provided are those selected by the city council.

Please note that designating the voting delegate and alternates must be done by city council action and cannot be accomplished by individual action of the mayor or city manager alone.

Council Action Advised by August 28, 2023

Page 140 of 460 ends

Conference Registration Required. The voting delegate and alternates must be registered to attend the conference. They need not register for the entire conference; they may register for Friday only. Conference registration is open on the Cal Cities website.

For a city to cast a vote, one voter must be present at the General Assembly and in possession of the voting delegate card and voting tool. Voting delegates and alternates need to pick up their conference badges before signing in and picking up the voting delegate card at the voting delegate desk. This will enable them to receive the special sticker on their name badges that will admit the voting delegate into the voting area during the General Assembly.

Transferring Voting Card to Non-Designated Individuals Not Allowed. The voting delegate card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates, but only between the voting delegate and alternates. If the voting delegate and alternates find themselves unable to attend the General Assembly, they may not transfer the voting card to another city official.

Seating Protocol during General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.

The voting delegate desk, located in the conference registration area of the SAFE Credit Union Convention Center in Sacramento, will be open at the following times:

Wednesday, Sept. 20, 8:00 a.m.- 6:00 p.m. and Thursday, Sept. 21, 7:30 a.m.- 4:00 p.m. On Friday, Sept. 22, the voting delegate desk will be open at the General Assembly, starting at 7:30 a.m., but will be closed during roll calls and voting.

The voting procedures that will be used at the conference are attached to this memo.

Please share these procedures and this memo with your council and especially with the individuals that your council designates as your city’s voting delegate and alternates.

Once again, thank you for completing the voting delegate and alternate form and returning it to Cal Cities office by Monday, Aug. 28. If you have questions, please contact Zach Seals at [email protected].

Attachments:
• General Assembly Voting Guidelines
• Voting Delegate/Alternate Form
• Information Sheet: Cal Cities Resolutions and the General Assembly

Page 141 of 460 ends

1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org General Assembly Voting Guidelines

1. One City One Vote. Each member city has a right to cast one vote on matters pertaining to Cal Cities policy.

2. Designating a City Voting Representative. Prior to the Cal Cities Annual Conference and Expo, each city council may designate a voting delegate and up to two alternates; these individuals are identified on the voting delegate form provided to the Cal Cities Credentials Committee.

3. Registering with the Credentials Committee. The voting delegate, or alternates, may pick up the city's voting card at the voting delegate desk in the conference registration area. Voting delegates and alternates must sign in at the voting delegate desk. Here they will receive a special sticker on their name badge and thus be admitted to the voting area at the General Assembly.

4. Signing Initiated Resolution Petitions. Only those individuals who are voting delegates (or alternates), and who have picked up their city’s voting card by providing a signature to the credentials committee at the voting delegate desk, may sign petitions to initiate a resolution.

5. Voting. To cast the city's vote, a city official must have in their possession the city's voting card and voting tool; and be registered with the credentials committee. The voting card may be transferred freely between the voting delegate and alternates but may not be transferred to another city official who is neither a voting delegate nor alternate.

6. Voting Area at General Assembly. At the General Assembly, individuals with a voting card will sit in a designated area. Admission to the voting area will be limited to the individual in possession of the voting card and with a special sticker on their name badge identifying them as a voting delegate.

7. Resolving Disputes. In case of dispute, the credentials committee will determine the validity of signatures on petitioned resolutions and the right of a city official to vote at the General Assembly.

Page 142 of 460 ends

CITY: ________________________________________
2023 ANNUAL CONFERENCE

VOTING DELEGATE/ALTERNATE FORM
Please complete this form and return it to Cal Cities office by Monday, August 28, 2023.

Forms not sent by this deadline may be submitted to the Voting Delegate Desk located in the Annual Conference Registration Area. Your city council may designate one voting delegate and up to two alternates.

To vote at the General Assembly, voting delegates and alternates must be designated by your city council. Please attach the council resolution as proof of designation. As an alternative, the Mayor or City Clerk may sign this form, affirming that the designation reflects the action taken by the council.

Please note: Voting delegates and alternates will be seated in a separate area at the General Assembly. Admission to this designated area will be limited to individuals (voting delegates and alternates) who are identified with a special sticker on their conference badge. This sticker can be obtained only at the voting delegate desk.

1. VOTING DELEGATE
Name:

Title:

2. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE
Name:

Title:

Email: _______________________________
Email: ______________________________

3. VOTING DELEGATE - ALTERNATE
Name:

Title:

Email: _____________________________

ATTACH COUNCIL RESOLUTION DESIGNATING VOTING DELEGATE AND ALTERNATES OR ATTEST: I affirm that the information provided reflects action by the city council to designate the voting delegate and alternate(s).

Name: ____________________________________ Email: _________________________________ Mayor or City Clerk: ________________________ Date: __________ Phone: ________________ (circle one) (signature) Please complete and email this form to [email protected] by Monday, August 28, 2023.

Page 143 of 460 ends

Sixty days before the
Annual Conference and
Expo, Cal Cities members
may submit policy
proposals on issues of
importance to cities. The
resolution must have the concurrence
of at least five additional member cities
or individual members.

How it works: Cal Cities
Resolutions and the General Assembly
General Assembly
General Resolutions
Policy Committees
Developing League of California Cities policy is a dynamic process that engages a wide range of members to ensure that we are representing California cities with one voice. These policies directly guide Cal Cities advocacy to promote local decision-making, and lobby against statewide policy that erodes local control.

The resolutions process and General Assembly is one way that city officials can directly participate in the development of Cal Cities policy. If a resolution is approved at the General Assembly, it becomes official Cal Cities policy. Here’s how Resolutions and the General Assembly works.

The petitioned resolution
is an alternate method
to introduce policy
proposals during the
annual conference. The
petition must be signed by
voting delegates from 10% of member
cities, and submitted to the Cal Cities
President at least 24 hours before the
beginning of the General Assembly.

Petitioned Resolutions
The Cal Cities President
assigns general resolutions
to policy committees where
members review, debate,
and recommend positions for
each policy proposal. Recommendations are
forwarded to the Resolutions Committee.

Who’s who
The Resolutions
Committee includes
representatives from
each Cal Cities diversity
caucus, regional
division, municipal
department, policy
committee, as well as
individuals appointed by
the Cal Cities president.

Voting delegates
are appointed by each
member city; every city
has one voting delegate.

The General Assembly
is a meeting of the
collective body of
all voting delegates —
one from every
member city.

Seven Policy
Committees meet
throughout the year to
review and recommend
positions to take on
bills and regulatory
proposals. Policy
committees include
members from each Cal
Cities diversity caucus,
regional division,
municipal department,
as well as individuals
appointed by the Cal
Cities president.

During the General Assembly, voting delegates
debate and consider general and petitioned
resolutions forwarded by the Resolutions Committee.

Potential Cal Cities bylaws amendments are also
considered at this meeting.

Cal Cities policy
development is a
member-informed
process, grounded
in the voices and
experiences of city
officials throughout
the state.

For more information visit www.calcities.org/general-assembly Prior to the Annual Conference and Expo
Resolutions Committee
The Resolutions Committee
considers all resolutions.

General Resolutions approved1
by either a policy committee
or the Resolutions Committee
are next considered by the General
Assembly. General resolutions not approved,
or referred for further study by both a policy
committee and the Resolutions Committee
do not go the General Assembly. All
Petitioned Resolutions are considered by the
General Assembly, unless disqualified.2
• Voting delegates will receive increased communications to prepare them for their role during the General Assembly.
• The General Assembly will take place earlier to allow more time for debate and discussion.
• Improvements to the General Assembly process will make it easier for voting delegates to discuss and debate resolutions.

What’s new in 2023?
During the Annual Conference and Expo
1 The Resolution Committee can amend a general resolution prior to sending it to the General Assembly. 2 Petitioned Resolutions may be disqualified by the Resolutions Committee according to Cal Cities Bylaws Article VI. Sec. 5(f).

Page 144 of 460 ends

Item No. 6
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – CONSENT AGENDA
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ANTHONY SUBER, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER/ CITY CLERK
DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 2023
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMITTEE

AND COMMISSION RESOLUTION DISSOLVING THE RAIL

COMMITTEE

RECOMMENDATION
Consider modifications to Town Committees and Commissions governing Resolution dissolving the Rail Committee as a formal Brown Act Committee and redesignating it as a resident lead committee.

BACKGROUND | ANALYSIS
The Rail Committee was last updated with Resolution No. 20-26 reducing its membership down to seven (7) members. The Rail Policy was also updated to reflect the status of High-Speed Rail, Caltrain Electrification, and the permanent closure of the Atherton Rail Station. This decision was made with fall-off through attrition and challenges in getting new applicants.

The proposed amended Resolution dissolves the Rail Committee effective immediately per the City Council's direction. Each member of the Rail Committee was notified of the proposed dissolution of the Rail Committee as a formal Brown Act committee and its re-designation into a Town-supported and resident-led committee. This structure would be like the Town’s Tree Committee.

At the June 21, 2023, City Council meeting, the Council recognized the great impact the Committee has had in assisting the Town with rail-related issues, Council proposed the dissolution and a redesignation due to the declining rail-related issues affecting the Town.

The Rail Committee met on Tuesday, September 5, 2023, and discussed the dissolution and redesignation. The motion to support the dissolution and re-designation passed 4-2.

FISCAL IMPACT

Page 145 of 460 ends

Governing Committee Resolution Amendment
SEPTEMBER 20, 2023

Page 2 of 2 ends

None.

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal Area E – Strengthen Community Engagement and Transparency

POLICY FOCUS
Town Commissions and Committees represent a key component of civic engagement within the community. The participation of the members is a vital part of the Town’s public engagement and review process. These groups have the ability to gather public input on an issue and provide feedback and recommendations to the City Council for consideration. The Council has the authority to create, modify or dissolve Committees by Resolution.

PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with this agenda item being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting in print and electronically. Information about the project is also disseminated via the Town’s electronic News Flash and Atherton Online. There are approximately 1,400 subscribers to the Town’s electronic News Flash publications. Subscribers include residents as well as stakeholders –to include, but be not limited to, media outlets, school districts, Menlo Park Fire Protection District, service provides (water, power, and sewer), and regional elected officials.

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
Rail Committee (meets the 1st Tuesday every other month)

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution No. 23-XX Rail Dissolution and Re-designation

Page 146 of 460 ends

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 23-XX Page 1 of 11 September 20, 2023
RESOLUTION 23-XX
AMENDS RESOLUTION 23-17
A Resolution of the City Council of the Town of Atherton Establishing and Governing Town Committees
Amended June 21, 2023
The City Council of the Town of Atherton hereby resolves as follows:

Section 1. Establishment of Committees
The following committees are established for the Town of Atherton:

1. Audit/Finance Committee

2. Environmental Programs Committee

3. Park and Recreation Committee

4. Rail Committee

5.4. Transportation, Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Committee

Section 2. Committee Principles and Rules of Procedure
Principles: All committees shall follow the City Council Rules of Procedure, the Atherton Municipal Code, the Political Reform Act, and the provisions of the California Open Public Meeting Law (Brown Act). These resources may be found on the Town’s website and/or via the City Clerk’s Office. All members shall attend an education and training session hosted by the City Attorney and City Clerk upon appointment.

The responsibility and accountability for all work necessary to efficiently and cost effectively carry out the advisory functions of each committee shall rest exclusively with the Chairman or Council Member assigned to the committee.

A Town Department is assigned to each Committee. Each Department Manager is responsible for providing the necessary staff (in the most cost-effective manner) to prepare for and attend committee meetings. This includes but is not limited to meeting with the Committee Chair and City Council Liaison in advance of each meeting to create an agenda; prepare the agenda packet; take and prepare minutes; and conduct follow up from meetings.

Committee Agenda Preparation: In general practice, the staff liaison to each committee shall meet with the Committee Chair and the City Council Liaison in advance of each upcoming meeting to review the meeting agenda. Regular agenda items, such as approval of meeting minutes, followup staff reports, and general information reports shall be added to the agenda as needed. Other items shall be added through one of the methods described below.

One of the following methods may be used for placing an item on a Committee agenda:

Page 147 of 460 ends

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 23-XX Page 2 of 11 September 20, 2023

1. Council: A majority vote of the Council may direct staff to add an item to a Committee agenda.

2. City Manager: The City Manager may receive requests for agenda items from the public, staff, a committee member or a Council Member. The City Manager will review the request with the Committee Chair and City Council liaison. The City Manager shall have sole discretion to refer the request to the City Council at the next available meeting, or schedule the item for the Committee agenda.

3. Staff and Committees: There may be a need for routine agenda items which may arise out of committee meeting discussions; are requested and agreed on by a majority of the Committee as part of Future Agenda Items; or items created from staff follow up of previous Committee and/or staff meetings. These items may be added to a future agenda following an agenda preparation meeting between the Committee Chair, Council Member liaison and staff liaison.

4. Colleagues’ Memorandum: If at least two committee members prepare a colleagues' memo, the staff liaison shall place the item on the Committee’s agenda under a Future Agenda Items Section. A colleague's memo is a written request, no more than two pages in length, presenting an item to be added to a future agenda. Upon review of the colleagues’ memo, the Committee shall not discuss the merits of the item itself; but shall solely discuss whether to add the item to a future agenda for discussion. Upon majority vote of the Committee, the item shall be added to the next agenda or a specific designated Agenda.

Committee Procedures for placing items on Council agenda:

1. Committee Action: Any formal recommendation to Council taken by a Committee shall be placed on a City Council agenda within the next two regular meetings.

The City Clerk has overall responsibility for posting committee agendas.

Advocate: Collectively, committees are encouraged to advocate positions to the City Council on matters under the purview of their committee. Otherwise, no committee or any of its members shall represent itself or themselves as speaking on behalf of the Town, City Council, and/or committee without prior approval of the City Council. Individual members are not authorized to make public statements or comments on matters within the purview of their committee outside of the normal committee process. It could be perceived as using the member’s position to indicate some special knowledge or understanding of the matter, or to confuse members of the public with respect to whether the comments are being made to improperly influence an agency decision.

Committee members should refrain from using their title when addressing other boards, commissions, committees, or the City Council to avoid creating an appearance of special status to the public. Statements of previously approved City Council policy may be made without additional City Council approval. When there is a question, a committee member shall consult the City Attorney for advice. Members of committees may attend meetings of other committees and the City Council; however, members shall not present opinions of their own committee at such meeting unless the position is previously approved by their committee. A quorum of a committee may attend such a meeting, but they may not discuss among themselves Town business, nor comment or discuss the matter under consideration unless authorized to do so by the committee to avoid a possible Brown Act violation.

Page 148 of 460 ends

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 23-XX Page 3 of 11 September 20, 2023
Educational Materials: Committees may provide approved educational materials to the public regarding the functions and actions of the committee, but shall not engage in advocating to the public any particular position which is contrary to City Council policy. Any educational materials sent to the public shall be approved by the City Manager, and shall follow the Town’s procurement process. It shall be the City Manager’s discretion on whether or not the educational materials need Council approval beforehand.

Meetings: The Committee shall establish a regular meeting schedule on an annual basis in July.

The Department assigned to the committee shall update the website to reflect the meeting schedule.

Changes in the dates or time of meetings from the established schedule may be made by majority vote of the committee.

Minutes: Staff shall prepare action minutes for all committees. Action minutes shall be presented to the City Clerk within 7 days following the meeting or as soon as feasible if there is a reason not to produce them within that timeframe. Finalized minutes should be sent electronically to the City Clerk for posting, after the Committee has approved them. The City Clerk will share appropriate information received from the minutes with the City Manager and City Council.

Reports: If desired by the City Council, an annual report shall be created and approved by the Committee and provided to the City Manager, City Clerk and City Council of committee activities for the preceding year.

Special Meetings: The Chair or a majority of the Committee may call a special meeting at any time in accordance with the Brown Act.

Website: Any website created for a Committee by the Town shall be incorporated into the Town’s website. If created, websites shall be developed in accordance with the “advocate” section of this resolution.

Section 3: Appointment of Voting Members to Committees
Appointment: Members other than City Council Members shall be appointed following recruitment process set forth by the City Clerk and approved by the City Council. With the exception of the Transportation, Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Committee as described, all appointed members shall be Atherton residents. Members shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council, or until the expiration of their terms set out below. The terms of the Members were staggered pursuant to Resolution No. 19-07 with subsequent terms of appointment reverting to the standard 4-year term. Vacancies in any committee arising from any reason, including expiration of term, shall be filled by temporary appointment of the City Council, or by annual recruitment.

The Committee Chairperson or staff assigned shall notify the City Clerk of resignations and vacancies. Each Committee which cannot fill at least 50% of its seats shall be postponed until the Town can recruit at least a quorum (50%+1). During that time, the City Council shall continually recruit qualified individuals and town staff shall continue to advertise periodically.

Page 149 of 460 ends

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 23-XX Page 4 of 11 September 20, 2023
Term expiration dates shall end on June 30. Appointed committee members shall serve no more than two full consecutive terms on the committee to which they are appointed. A member may be reappointed to the committee following a minimum two (2) year hiatus. However, if a seat is vacant and no one applies, City Council may grant an exemption.

City Council representatives and any alternates on committees are selected by the Mayor and approved by the City Council to serve a one (1) year term. Appointed City Council Members and City Council Member Alternates shall serve as liaisons to Committees; but shall not serve as voting members to Committees. Alternates participate on committees in the absence of the appointed Council Members. For each Committee, unless otherwise directed by the City Council, one City Council member shall be appointed as a primary liaison and one as an alternate. Members shall coordinate attendance to ensure appropriate representation.

Members who intend to be absent from a meeting shall alert the chairperson and/or staff person assigned. The Chairperson shall state during the meeting, under roll call whether the member is excused (notification was given) or absent (no notification was given). Unexcused absences of members, other than City Council Members, from two or more consecutively scheduled meetings shall result in the automatic vacation of the member’s office. The staff person assigned to the Committee shall work with the Chairperson to alert the City Clerk of consecutive absences. The City Clerk shall alert the City Manager who shall decide how to inform City Council. City Council has the authority to override this rule based on the information received.

Chairperson and Staff: Each committee shall have a Chairperson. The Committee shall select its Chair on an annual basis in July. Council Members shall not serve as Chair or Vice Chair of Committees. The Department assigned to the committee shall have the authority to appoint staff member(s) to serve Town committees. Any requests by a committee for staff work, information, or assistance from Town staff shall be made to the City Manager.

Section 4: Funding for Committees
Committees do not have authorization to expend Town resources. In the event funding for a committee activity is desired, a budget shall be prepared and presented to the City Council for review and approval as part of the Town’s regular budget process. The committee shall follow the guidelines set forth by the purchasing policy approved by City Council through Ordinance 595 and any expenditure policies developed and approved by the City Council. No Committee member shall use his or her own personal credit card. For items under $150 a committee member may request a cash advance and then come back to the Town with itemized receipts. For items over $150, a committee member shall complete a check request from the Town or have the Town purchase the goods/services.

Section 5: Committee Composition, Powers and Duties

1. Audit/Finance Committee

Page 150 of 460 ends

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 23-XX Page 5 of 11 September 20, 2023
The Audit/Finance Committee makes recommendations to the City Council on issues related to the Town’s audit and finances. The Committee typically meets every other month. Acting in an advisory capacity, the Audit/Finance Committee shall have the following powers and duties:
a. Make recommendations to the City Council in all matters pertaining to Town finances; b. Discuss and consult with the City Manager on any matter pertaining to the budget, capital spending plan and the long-range financial plan for the Town; c. Upon request, make recommendations to the City Council in all matters pertaining to the Town’s annual audit;
d. Assist staff, as needed, in the provision of oversight to the annual audit process; and, assist in the presentation of the annual audit to the City Council with recommendations as to acceptance;
e. Upon request, advise the City Council regarding appointment of outside auditors to complete the annual audit;
f. Assist staff as needed in the review of the proposed audit scope prior to commencement of annual audit.

The Committee consists of two (2) City Council liaisons, typically the Mayor and Vice Mayor, and five (5) appointed resident members Resident appointed members shall serve a term of four (4) years. The Committee meets in the Council Chambers or the Town Administrative Conference Room.

The Finance Department is assigned overall responsibility of the Audit/Finance Committee.

Resolution 19-07 established staggered terms with subsequent terms of appointment reverting to the standard 4-year term.

2. Environmental Programs Committee
The Environmental Programs Committee provides the City Council with recommendations, outreach programs, and education on environmental issues facing the Town’s natural and built environment. The Environmental Programs Committee typically meets every other month. Acting in an advisory capacity, the Environmental Programs Committee shall have the following powers and duties:
a. Upon request, make recommendations (programmatic and legislative) to the City Council on all matters pertaining to the Town’s natural and built environment and the Town’s regional role and responsibilities as one of the communities on the San Francisco Bay Peninsula.
b. Pursuant to established City Council programs and policy, assist staff in the creation of pro-active community engagement programs for residents, commercial and public enterprises active within the Town’s jurisdiction.

Page 151 of 460 ends

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 23-XX Page 6 of 11 September 20, 2023
The Environmental Programs Committee consists of five (5) appointed resident members and one (1) City Council Member liaison. Resident appointed members shall serve a term of four (4) years. The Committee meets in the Council Chambers or the Town Administrative Conference Room.

The City Manager’s Department is assigned overall responsibility of the Environmental Programs Committee.

Resolution 19-07 established staggered terms with subsequent terms of appointment reverting to the standard 4-year term.

3. Park and Recreation Committee
The Park and Recreation Committee makes recommendations to the City Council on issues related to Holbrook Palmer Park and any active or passive recreational space within the Town. The Committee typically meets monthly. Acting in an advisory capacity, the Park and Recreation Committee shall have the following powers and duties:
a. Upon request, make recommendations to the City Council in all matters pertaining to the Town’s active and passive parks and public recreation services; b. Work with staff, as needed, to assist other governmental agencies and public and private groups in the advancement of park and recreation planning and programming; c. Work with staff to develop and maintain a Master Plan for active and passive recreational spaces within the Town; and, annually, in the month of April, present a report to the City Council;
d. Work with staff to review the annual budget for the Town’s park and recreation programs and services during the budget process and make recommendations with respect thereto to the City Council.
e. Assist staff with a review of fees and services within the Park and make recommendations with respect thereto to the City Council. f. Upon request, study and make recommendations on the acquisition and development of recreation areas, activities and facilities such as playgrounds, buildings, parks, open space and other centers of recreation;
g. Assist staff in the planning of recreation programs for the community.

The Park and Recreation Committee consists of seven (7) appointed resident members and one (1) City Council Member liaison. Of the appointed members, two members shall be representatives of the Holbrook-Palmer Park Foundation. Each of the foregoing representatives shall serve a term of two (2) years. When a vacancy arises, the City Clerk will contact each organization to request a new representative. If the organization submits more than two candidates, the City Council shall select the candidate to serve as the representative.

Remaining resident appointed members serve a term of four (4) years. The Park and Recreation Committee meets in Holbrook-Palmer Park.

Page 152 of 460 ends

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 23-XX Page 7 of 11 September 20, 2023
The Public Works Department is assigned overall responsibility of the Park and Recreation Committee.

Resolution 19-07 established staggered terms with subsequent terms of appointment reverting to the standard 4-year term.

4. Rail Committee
The Atherton Rail Committee makes recommendations to the City Council on issues related to the Town’s Rail Corridor, High Speed Rail, and Caltrain consistent with the City Council’s adopted Rail Related Policy Issues, attached hereto as Exhibit A. The Committee typically meets once per quarter. Acting in an advisory capacity, the Rail Committee shall have the following powers and duties:
a. Advise the City Council on all matters pertaining to High Speed Rail (HSR), the Rail Corridor and Caltrain, consistent with the City Council adopted Rail Related Policy Issues.
b. Assist staff in the research of specific impacts that HSR and other rail infrastructure and services may have on the Rail Corridor and the Town. c. Rail Committee members are authorized to act as spokespersons to articulate and advocate the Town’s Rail Related Policy Issues as they pertain to Rail Committee matters to legislatures, HSR and Caltrain board of directors, regional organizations, press and other interested parties.

The Rail Committee consists of seven (7) appointed resident members and one (1) City Council Member liaison. Resident appointed members shall serve a term of four (4) years.

The Committee meets in the Council Chambers or the Town Administrative Conference Room.

The Public Works Department is assigned overall responsibility of the Rail Committee.

Resolution 19-07 established staggered terms with subsequent terms of appointment reverting to the standard 4-year term.

5.4.Transportation, Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Committee The Transportation, Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Committee makes recommendations to the City Council on issues related to transportation, traffic, roadway safety, pedestrian and bicycle safety. This committee shall satisfy the requirements of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission as the Town’s Transportation, Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Committee Membership should be composed of both bicyclists and pedestrians. The Committee typically meets every other month. The Committee consists of seven (7) appointed members and one (1) City Council Member liaison. Committee appointed members shall serve terms of four-year (4) years. Acting in an advisory capacity, the Committee shall have the following powers and duties:

Page 153 of 460 ends

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 23-XX Page 8 of 11 September 20, 2023
a. Upon request, make recommendations to the City Council in all matters pertaining to transportation, traffic, and roadway safety within the Town. b. As needed, assist staff in the identification and review of traffic and roadway safety enhancements.
c. As needed, assist staff in the review of regional project impacts on local traffic and transportation corridors.
d. As needed, assist staff in the review of traffic safety enforcement measures. e. As needed, assist staff in the review of Neighborhood Traffic Management Program requests.
f. Work with staff in providing recommendations on issues related to the Town’s bicycle and pedestrian network and Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. g. Make recommendations to the City Council on the selection of bicycle and pedestrian projects to be submitted for state and federal funding opportunities. h. Work with staff to promote bicycling and walking as safe and healthy alternative modes of transportation, including safe routes to schools. i. Assist Town staff in the planning, operations and maintenance of bicycle and pedestrian facilities in Town.

The Police Department shall have overall responsibility of the Transportation Committee.

The Chief of Police will coordinate with the Public Works Department when Public Works staff are needed for the meeting.

Resolution 19-07 established staggered terms with subsequent terms of appointment reverting to the standard 4-year term.

Section 6: Advice
Appointed members of committees are encouraged to seek advice from Town staff when they are uncertain of the foregoing rules.

This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. All previous resolutions governing Town committees and commissions including Resolution No. 15-10 and Resolution No. 19-07 are hereby superseded and rescinded.

I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the Town of Atherton at a regular meeting thereof held on the _ day of September 2023, by the following vote.

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

Page 154 of 460 ends

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 23-XX Page 9 of 11 September 20, 2023
_________________________________
Bill Widmer, Mayor
Town of Atherton
ATTEST:
____________________________
Anthony Suber, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
Andreas Booher, Assistant City Attorney

Page 155 of 460 ends

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 23-XX Page 10 of 11 September 20, 2023

EXHIBIT A

RAIL POLICY ISSUES

ADOPTED BY THE TOWN OF ATHERTON
A. HIGH-SPEED RAIL (HSR)
Legislative
In 2008, the Town voters decided against Prop 1A which authorized the HSR project. At that time, Town Resolutions, passed unanimously by the Council, opposed the HSR project, including the Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Business Plan and use of the rail corridor by HSR.

The Town remains opposed to the HSR project and supports legislative initiatives to prevent the implementation of the HSR project, in its current form, through the Town. If the HSR project moves forward, the Town fully expects that the project will minimize and fully mitigate environmental impacts to the Town.

Litigation
The Town may take the position to use legal means, as deemed appropriate by the City Council, to delay, hinder or halt the implementation of Prop 1A which Atherton residents and the City Council voted to oppose.

Lobbying
The Town has engaged a lobbyist, in conjunction with other communities, to represent the Town’s interests on HSR matters.

The Council encourages members of the Town’s Rail Committee to advocate on behalf of the Town with respect to HSR in manners consistent with the above HSR Rail Policy.

B. RAIL CORRIDOR AND CALTRAIN
The Town was one of the earliest train stops on the rail corridor between San Francisco and San Jose.

Families, and later commuters, used the Atherton station for rail service to and from ‘the City’ for over 100 years. Lloyden Park was developed for residents desiring easy access to public transportation provided by the train.

In years past, Caltrain provided the Atherton Station with weekday and weekend rail service until it declared its first “fiscal emergency” citing the need to reduce costs, including station stops. As a result, the number of weekday rail stops at the Atherton Station were reduced to zero while weekend service is still provided.

Page 156 of 460 ends

Attachment 1
Resolution No. 23-XX Page 11 of 11 September 20, 2023
Atherton is the only city on the Caltrain line that receives no weekday train service. Atherton residents have been using nearby stations in Redwood City and Menlo Park for weekday commute services and for express service on the weekends. Atherton understands that Caltrain is an integral part of the transportation system in the peninsula and still serves as an important alterative to automotive travel in and through the Town.

Further Caltrain’s fiscal health is important to maintain rail as a viable transit option.

The Atherton Station building serves as an important historical and cultural resource to the Town and should be preserved.

Town Priorities Regarding Caltrain Line and Corridor
The Town recognizes that successful implementation of the Town’s rail corridor priorities with Caltrain require a partnership with Caltrain. To that end, the Town will endeavor to work with Caltrain to address the following priorities for the Atherton Station and Rail Corridor:
 Modernization of the rail system must minimize and fully mitigate any environmental impact to the Town.
 Safety improvements along the rail corridor through the Town, including safety fencing and screening along the corridor, and the installation of four-quadrant gates at the Watkins Avenue rail crossing.
 Conversion of the Atherton Station building to a public amenity and civic space integrated with the Atherton Town Center, including the installation of safety fencing, removal of the center boarding platform and associated access points.
 Installation of an active transportation route to the Menlo Park Caltrain Station.  The Town seeks to perfect the Quiet Zone within the Town through the addition of four quadrant gates at the Watkins Avenue crossing, closure of the Atherton Station and repurposing of the Atherton Station building. These measures require the support and partnership of Caltrain.

Page 157 of 460 ends

Item No. 7
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – CONSENT AGENDA
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ROBERT OVADIA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 2023
SUBJECT: APPROVE A TASK ORDER WITH INTERWEST CONSULTING

GROUP FOR THE DEIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

MANAGEMENT OF THE HOLBROOK-PALMER PARK

PLAYGROUND IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council approve a task order with Interwest Consulting Group, Inc. in the amount of $180,000 for design and construction management services related to the improvement of the playground at Holbrook-Palmer Park.

BACKGROUND
The Holbrook-Plalmer Park playground and play structures have aged and are in need of replacement. The City Council, through adoption of the FY2023-24 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) approved a project to redesign and replace the playground at Holbrook-Palmer Park. Staff solicited a proposal from Interwest Consulting Group (Interwest), Inc. for the design and construction management services associated with the replacement of the playground area at Holbrook-Palmer Park, under their master services agreement with the Town.

Though not directly included in the scope of the playground CIP project, there is a need to consider the eventual replacement of the playground restrooms in the design process, particularly as the boundaries and access to/from the playground area may change.

ANALYSIS
Interwest provided the attached scope and fee proposal for the design and construction management of the playground improvements, which include the following elements:
• Public Outreach:
o Provide 3D renderings with color options from various playground and restroom vendors

Page 158 of 460 ends

Holbrook-Palmer Park Playground Improvements
September 20, 2023

Page 2 of 3 ends

o Attendance at 2-4 Park and Recreation Committee meetings to present conceptual plans
o Solicit public input on playground layout and features through the Park and Recreation Committee
• · Design Services
o Provide any electrical, survey, civil, and utility coordination to produce 60%, 90% and 100%completed plans for Town staff to review.
o Includes any design to improve any sewer, drainage, fencing, footprint expansion, as well as a prefab restroom renovation.
o Provide a detailed engineers estimate of total cost of project. o Assist with solicitation of bids, bid review and award recommendations • Construction Management and Inspection Services
o Review project documents for constructability prior to bidding. o Conduct pre-construction meeting and Bi-weekly on-site progress meetings. o Provide Project Management services to include utility coordination, conflict resolution, cost control and project delivery (timing). o Provide a designated on-site Senior Inspector throughout construction during all working hours.
o Review submittals and payment requests.
o Respond to any RFI’s and process potential change orders.

The Interwest team assigned to this project have designed and managed various playground renovation and expansion projects, primarily in southern California, and are available to assist the Town with the redesign of the Holbrook-Palmer Park playground Project. Utilization of our existing Master Services Agreement with Interwest will help us deliver the project in a timelier manner.

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost proposal from Interwest totals $180,000 for public outreach, design, and construction management and inspection services. A total of $250,000 has been approved in the FY 2023-24 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget for the Holbrook-Palmer Park Playground Improvements Project. The 5-year CIP forecasts allocates an additional $1,000,000 in FY 2024- 25 for construction.

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal Area A – Maintain Fiscal Responsibility
• Goal Area B – Preserve Small Town Character and Quality of Life • Goal Area E – Strengthen Community Engagement and Transparency • Goal Area F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed, and Well-Planned

POLICY FOCUS

Page 159 of 460 ends

Holbrook-Palmer Park Playground Improvements
September 20, 2023

Page 3 of 3 ends

The Council policy focus should be on the desire to renovate the Holbrook-Palmer Park Playground.

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
This item has not been before a Town Committee or Commission

ATTACHMENTS

1. Interwest proposal dated August 31, 2023

Page 160 of 460 ends

24 South D Street, Suite 100, Perris, CA 92570
626.224.2055
August 31, 2023
Robert Ovadia, Public Works Director
Town of Atherton
80 Fair Oaks Lane, Atherton
CA 94027
Re: Letter Proposal to Provide Public Outreach, Design, Construction Management, and Inspection Services for the Holbrook Palmer Park Playground Renovation Project Dear Mr. Ovadia,
Interwest Consulting Group (Interwest) is pleased to present this letter proposal to the Town of Atherton. Upon our discussions, we understand that the City needs a highly qualified team for the public outreach, design, construction management, and inspection services for the Holbrook Palmer Park Playground Renovation Project.

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Based upon our review of the capital improvement budget and provided documents, we propose to provide public outreach, design, construction management, and inspection services to include on-site, and any off-site project required work including coordination of survey and geotechnical sub-contracting services. We anticipate the scope of services to include:

PUBLIC OUTREACH
• Solicit and conduct public engagement through the Parks and Recreation Committee on park layout and included features.
• Attend 2- 4 regularly scheduled Parks and Recreation Committee meetings to present conceptual plans until direction is provided and equipment features are selected. • Provide 3D renderings with color options from selected playground and restroom subcontractors.

DESIGN SERVICES
• Provide any electrical, survey, civil, and utility coordination to produce 60%, 90% and 100% completed plans for Town staff to review.
• Produce 100% completed plans for Town Staff to review and make final comments. • Includes any design to improve any sewer, drainage, fencing, footprint expansion, as well as a prefab restroom renovation.
• Provide a detailed engineers estimate of total cost of project. • Post bid specifications and plans to the Town of Atherton preferred bidding account. • Process lowest bidder and execute Contract Services Agreement with all required documentation.
• File all labor compliance paperwork through a Community Workforce Agreement.

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT/INSPECTION SERVICES
• Review project documents prior to bidding to include plans and specs from a constructability standpoint and provide detailed cost analysis.
• Conduct pre-construction meeting and Bi-weekly on-site progress meetings. • Provide Project Management services to include utility coordination, conflict resolution, cost control and project delivery (timing).
• Provide a designated on-site Senior Inspector throughout construction during all working hours.

Page 161 of 460 ends

THOUGHTFUL SOLUTIONS . THRIVING COMMUNITIES .

Town of Atherton/
Holbrook Palmer Park Playground Project / Proposal for Design/CM&I Services • Review submittals and payment requests.
• Respond to any RFI’s and process potential change orders. • Follow all labor compliance state laws using a preferred labor compliance subcontractor. • Provide final close-out project documentation.

FEE ESTIMATE
The supervision services described herein will be billed at the following rates based on a 10-month schedule providing services on both the front end and back end of the project. An additional amount not to exceed $30,000 will be required for Survey, Geotechnical, and Labor Compliance subcontracting services.

ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF FEES
(Based on a 10-month design, bid, build schedule)
PUBLIC OUTREACH (2-4 months) *Provide approved conceptual showing features

TASK RATE HOURS TOTAL
Senior Engineer $175 40 $7,000
Project Manager $195 80 $15,600
TOTAL: 120 $22,600
DESIGN SERVICES (2-3 months) *Includes 1-2 P&R Advisory Board presentations Senior Engineer $175 175 $30,625
Engineering Associate $125 200 $25,000
Construction Manager/PM $165 40 $6,600
Administrative Services $90 80 $7,200
TOTAL: 495 $69,425
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT (2-3 months) *Construction start date will be dependent on lead time of materials Construction Manager/PM $165 160 $26,400
Administrative Services $90 85 $7,650
TOTAL: 245 $34,050
INSPECTION SERVICES (2 months) * Actual construction work Senior Inspector $120 200 $24,000
TOTAL: 200 $24,000
TOTAL NTE BILLABLE HOURS: 1,060 $150,075
TOTAL NTE SUBCONTRACTING WORK: $30,000
GRAND TOTAL NTE FOR PROJECT: $180,075
We appreciate the opportunity to continue serving the Town of Atherton. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Bill Evans at 786.350.8190 or [email protected] Sincerely,
Paul Meschino,
President
Interwest Consulting Group

Page 162 of 460 ends

Item No. 8
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – CONSENT AGENDA
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ROBERT OVADIA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 2023
SUBJECT: THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT FOR TENNIS

FACILITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES BETWEEN THE TOWN

AND PLAYER CAPITAL TENNIS

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council approve a third amendment to the Tennis Facility Management Services Agreement with Player Capital for three (3) years with extensions for up to two additional (1) year terms upon written agreement of both parties; and authorize the City Attorney to prepare and the City Manager to execute the amendment.

BACKGROUND
The City Council awarded Player Capital Tennis (PCT) as the contractor to manage the tennis facilities in Holbrook Palmer Park starting September 25, 2014. The original contract provided for an initial term of one (1) year from the date of execution, with two (2) additional three (3) year term extensions for a total of seven (7) years, upon mutual agreement.

The first amendment was executed on January 3, 2018, formally extending the agreement through the approved seven (7) year term, ending September 26, 2021.

The second amendment was executed on October 8, 2021, formally extending the contract term through September 26, 2023, with two (2) additional one (1) year terms upon mutual agreement.

The initial three-year term of this amendment is nearing expiry and can be considered for extension.

ANALYSIS
PCT has been actively managing the tennis courts and reservation system for the tennis courts at Holbrook-Palmer Park. Pursuant to the terms of the original Tennis Facility Management Agreement, Player Capital Tennis pays the Town a flat rate of $40,000 per year ($3,333 per month)

Page 163 of 460 ends

PCT Tennis Facility Management Amendment No. 3
September 20, 2023

Page 2 of 3 ends

for the opportunity to manage the tennis facility and have exclusive rights to provide instruction at the tennis facility. This fee helps in providing funds to maintain the tennis facility. The original agreement also required an additional payment in the amount of $15,000 with each renewal.

Earlier in 2023, the Park and Recreation Committee, in their regular review of tennis facility management, discussed the possible extension of the current management agreement and did not have any objection. The Committee did recommend consideration of adjustments to the current flat rate to account for inflation.

As noted above, the term of the agreement is set to expire on September 26, 2023, if not extended.

Player Capital Tennis is interested in extending the current agreement with the Town for Tennis Facility Management. Staff has conferred with Player Capital Tennis and they have agreed to a $5,000 increase to the base payment amount (12.5% increase) and convert the additional renewal payment of $15,000 such that it be included with their regular fees ($5,000 annually). Staff is seeking Council authorization for extending the term of the agreement prior to termination of its own accord. The proposed extension is for a term of three (3) years term with a total flat rate payment of $50,000 per year ($4,167 per month), with extensions for up to two additional (1) year terms upon written agreement of both parties.

FISCAL IMPACT
Pursuant to the terms of the original Tennis Facility Management Agreement, Player Capital Tennis pays the Town a flat rate of $40,000 per year ($3,333 per month) for the opportunity to manage the tennis facility and have exclusive rights to provide instruction at the tennis facility.

This fee helps in providing funds to maintain the tennis facility. The proposed amendment would adjust the fee to $50,000 per year ($4,167 per month), inclusive of the renewal fee.

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal Area A – Maintain Fiscal Responsibility
• Goal Area B – Preserve Small Town Character and Quality of Life • Goal Area F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed, and Well-Planned

POLICY FOCUS
The policy focus should center on the desire to retain professional tennis facility management services at the Holbrook-Palmer Park tennis courts.

Page 164 of 460 ends

PCT Tennis Facility Management Amendment No. 3
September 20, 2023

Page 3 of 3 ends

1,200 subscribers to the Town’s electronic News Flash publications. Subscribers include residents as well as stakeholders –to include, but be not limited to, media outlets, school districts, Menlo Park Fire Protection District, service provides (water, power, and sewer), and regional elected officials.

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
This item has not been before a Town Committee or Commission

ATTACHMENTS
None.

Page 165 of 460 ends

Item No. 9
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – CONSENT AGENDA
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ROBERT OVADIA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 2023
SUBJECT: APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH DOUGLAS KIM + ASSOCIATES FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT

SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE EL CAMINO REAL

COMPLETE STREETS GAP CLOSURE PROJECT, SELBY LANES

BIKE LANE PROJECT AND EL CAMINO REAL DRAINAGE

IMPROVEMENTS

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council approve a professional services agreement with Douglas Kim + Associates in the amount of $105,000 for project management services for the El Camino Real Complete Streets Gap Closure project, Selby Lanes Bike Lanes project, and El Camino Real Drainage Improvements project; Authorize the City Attorney to prepare the agreement; and Authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement.

BACKGROUND
El Camino Real Complete Streets Gap Closure Project
The Town received a grant from through the SMCTA (TA) Pedestrian and Bicycle Program for the El Camino Real Complete Streets Gap Closure project to develop conceptual designs for bicycle and pedestrian improvements along El Camino Real through the Town of Atherton. The development of bicycle and pedestrian facilities along El Camino Real was identified in the Town’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. The grant included technical support, managed by TA. The grant funding agreement, approved by the City Council requires a local match of $50,000 from the Town. SMCTA is in the process of negotiating the contract with their on-call consultant for the development of conceptual designs and public outreach for the project. Project management support on the Town side is needed to help coordinate public outreach and assist the visioning of this major improvements project. TA has advised that project support expenditures would be considered as local match expenditures.

Page 166 of 460 ends

Project Management Services
ECR Gap Closure, Selby Bike Lanes, ECR Drainage
September 20, 2023

Page 2 of 3 ends

Selby Lanes Bike Lanes
The implementation of bicycle lanes along Selby Lane from El Camino Real to Selby Lane is also outlined in the Town’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. The Town applied for a One Bay Area Grant through the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to assist in funding the project.

Though the project was not awarded funds in the initial funding round, it was placed on a contingency funding list should additional funds become available. The City Council prioritized implementation of the project through the Capital Improvement Program in advance of any potential grant funding. Staff engaged Willdan Engineering, through its Master Services Agreement to prepare the design plans, specifications and cost estimates for public bid. Project management support is needed to help manage the project and to assist in the public outreach efforts related to the project.

El Camino Real Drainage Improvements
The FY 2023-24 CIP includes the review of the drainage issues along El Camino Real and the development of potential stormwater solutions to address the flooding along El Camino Real on a long-term basis.

ANALYSIS
Staff solicited a proposal from Douglas Kim + Associates for project management services for the El Camino Real Complete Streets Gap Closure project and the Selby Lane Bike Lanes Improvement Project. Douglas Kim previously assisted the Town as the Town’s Sustainability Coordinator on a contract basis. During his time as Sustainability Coordinator, Mr. Kim assisted in the development of the grant applications for both projects and is familiar with the Town’s needs and perspectives related to improvements along these important corridors. Mr. Kim would act as the project manager for the Town and be the primary contact for the TA and their consultant on project related issues for the El Camino Real Gap Closure Project. Mr. Kim would also take on the project management and oversee the work being done by Willdan on the Selby Lane Bike Lanes Improvement Project.

Due to Mr. Kim’s familiarity with the area and the proposed project management for the projects along El Camino Real and along Selby Lane, staff solicited a proposal from Mr. Kim to manage the El Camino Real Drainage Improvements project concurrently with the other projects. Mr. Kim would assist in soliciting consultant proposals to develop alternatives and design stormwater management solutions along El Camino Real, concurrently with the other projects.

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost proposals from Douglas Kim + Associates include $50,000 for the El Camino Real Complete Streets Gap Closure Project, $30,000 for the Selby Lane Bike Lanes Improvements Project, and $25,000 for the El Camino Real Drainage Improvement Project, for a total of $105,000. Funding for these services was approved as part of the respective Capital Improvement Program project budgets.

Page 167 of 460 ends

Project Management Services
ECR Gap Closure, Selby Bike Lanes, ECR Drainage
September 20, 2023

Page 3 of 3 ends

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal Area A – Maintain Fiscal Responsibility
• Goal Area B – Preserve Small Town Character and Quality of Life • Goal Area F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed, and Well-Planned

POLICY FOCUS
The Council policy focus should be on the implementation of the El Camino Real Complete Streets Gap Closure Project, Selby Lane Bike Lane Improvements Project and the El Camino Real Drainage Improvements project as approved in the Town’s Capital Improvement Program.

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
This item has not been before a Town Committee or Commission

ATTACHMENTS

1. Douglas Kim + Associates El Camino Real Complete Streets Gap Closure Project Management Proposal Letter dated August 3, 2023

2. Douglas Kim + Associates Selby Lane Bicycle Lanes Improvements Project Management Proposal Letter dated August 3, 2023

3. Douglas Kim + Associates El Camino Real Drainage Improvements Project Management Proposal Letter dated August 3, 2023

Page 168 of 460 ends

August 3, 2023
Robert Ovadia, Public Works Director
Town of Atherton
80 Fair Oaks Lane
Atherton, CA 94027
RE: EL CAMINO REAL COMPLETE STREETS CORRIDOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT Dear Mr. Ovadia:

I am pleased to submit a proposal to serve as your Project Manager for the El Camino Real Complete Streets Corridor Project.

My consulting practice, Douglas Kim + Associates, LLC, is a local, certified Small Business Enterprise and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise with 25 years of experience of developing transportation plans and advancing projects through the planning, design, environmental, rightof-way, and construction phase.

I can serve as your PM on this multi-jurisdictional project and would charge my services on a time and materials basis, with an hourly rate of $200 per hour and a Not-to-Exceed of $50,000. I understand the roughly 16-month planning and feasibility study process would include representing the Town in its partnership with the San Mateo County Transportation Authority.

My role would include working with TA staff and their consultants in the planning, conceptual design, community engagement, and related tasks for the development of a 1.5-mile complete streets corridor. I would provide monthly invoices with task-level detail.

I am authorized to negotiate a contract with the Town. Please let me know if I can be of any assistance. You can reach me at [email protected] or at (650) 239-6300.

Respectfully,
Douglas Kim, AICP

Page 169 of 460 ends

August 3, 2023
Robert Ovadia, Public Works Director
Town of Atherton
80 Fair Oaks Lane
Atherton, CA 94027
RE: SELBY LANE BICYCLE LANE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT MANAGEMENT Dear Mr. Ovadia:

I am pleased to submit a proposal to serve as your Project Manager for the Selby Lane Bicycle Lanes Improvements Project.

I can serve as your PM on this project and would charge my services on a time and materials basis, with an hourly rate of $200 per hour and a Not-to-Exceed of $30,000 in FY 2023/24. I understand the process will be to manage Willdan Engineering in the development of 100 percent designs for the two linear miles of Class II bicycle lanes and associated infrastructure and would include the development of bid documents to solicit construction management services following completion of the design phase. It would help ensure the delivery of tasks in Task Order #006. I would provide monthly invoices with task-level detail.

I am authorized to negotiate a contract with the Town. Please let me know if I can be of any assistance. You can reach me at [email protected] or at (650) 239-6300.

Respectfully,
Douglas Kim, AICP

Page 170 of 460 ends

August 3, 2023
Robert Ovadia, Public Works Director
Town of Atherton
80 Fair Oaks Lane
Atherton, CA 94027
RE: EL CAMINO REAL DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT MANAGEMENT Dear Mr. Ovadia:

I am pleased to submit a proposal to serve as your Project Manager for the El Camino Real Stormwater Management Project.

I can serve as your PM on this multi-jurisdictional project and would charge my services on a time and materials basis, with an hourly rate of $200 per hour and a Not-to-Exceed of $25,000 in FY 2023/24. I understand the process will be to help secure and manage an engineering consultant who can initiate the study and design of stormwater solutions along the 1.5-mile El Camino Real corridor. I would provide monthly invoices with task-level detail.

I am authorized to negotiate a contract with the Town. Please let me know if I can be of any assistance. You can reach me at [email protected] or at (650) 239-6300.

Respectfully,
Douglas Kim, AICP

Page 171 of 460 ends

Item No. 10
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – PUBLIC HEARINGS
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: ROBERT OVADIA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

ANDREAS BOOHER, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 2023
SUBJECT: WAIVE THE FIRST READING AND INTRODUCE BY TITLE ONLY, AN ORDINANCE ADDING SECTION 12.06.030-D AND
CHAPTER 12.10 TO THE ATHERTON MUNICIPAL CODE

CLARIFYING MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES OF

OWNERS OF PROPERTY ADJACENT TO PUBLIC RIGHTS OF

WAY AND IMPOSING LIABILITY ON OWNERS OF PROPERTY

ADJACENT TO PUBLIC SIDEWALKS FOR INJURIES SUFFERED

ON PUBLIC SIDEWALKS, AS DEFINED

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council waive the first reading and introduce by title only, an Ordinance adding Section 12.06.030-D and Chapter 12.10 to the Atherton Municipal Code ("AMC") to clarify the maintenance responsibilities of property owners of adjacent sidewalks and public rightof-way, as defined therein.

BACKGROUND
Chapter 8.20 of the AMC defines public nuisance and provides for nuisance abatement code enforcement on private property. For street frontage areas, the Town has historically used a combination of local law (Chapter 12.06 Encroachments) and State law (California Streets and Highways Code 5600) to pass along maintenance responsibilities and legal liability for street frontage areas to adjacent property owners. Street frontage areas are those portions of the public right-of-way between the property line and the paved street.

When the Town identifies an issue with the frontage area, the adjacent property owner is notified their frontage is in violation via Code Enforcement and they are required to bring it into compliance within a reasonable period of time, depending on the nature of the issue (i.e., trees, shrubs, sidewalks, irrigation, drainage, DG, etc.).

In the case of construction projects, the Town reviews plans for compliance with the Encroachment

Page 172 of 460 ends

Right-of-Way Maintenance and Liability
September 20, 2023

Page 2 of 7 ends

5 8
6 Ordinance for any frontage being improved. For any improvements placed in the right-of-way via an Encroachment Permit, the property owner is required to obtain a revocable permit that passes on all liability and a responsibility for maintenance of those improvements to the property owner.

Each year, staff receive numerous complaints regarding frontage maintenance issues ranging from weeds, ruts, and depressions to sidewalk trip hazards and blocked access routes and visibility issues due to tree limbs and shrubbery, downed trees, or deteriorated pavement or other surface treatments. Due to the limited funds available to the Town for the maintenance of streets, the Town does not have the resources to take on the maintenance obligations for all these deficiencies in the right-of-way, some of which are caused due to negligent maintenance of the adjacent property owner or deliberate placement within the right-of-way of non-conforming materials.

The Town currently only maintains trees in the Town Center, the Park, and selected areas of the Town (i.e., medians, ECR, Middlefield Road, etc.) where the Town has taken over responsibility for tree maintenance along major thoroughfares. Most of the lot frontages throughout Town are the responsibility of the adjacent property owner.

While the Town does not have the resources to address all these issues, this Ordinance clarifies the procedures whereby the Town can intercede in the case of emergencies where an imminent risk of harm exists due to the condition of the area between the street and the property line, and provides for cost recovery from the adjacent property owner for such emergency work.

Finally, due to the maintenance responsibility resting with adjacent property owners, the proposed Ordinance also imposes a duty and liability on property owners for any injuries caused due to the nuisance conditions occurring on the public rights of way located on or adjacent to their properties resultant from their failure to maintain the area in a safe condition.

ANALYSIS
Since 1941, Section 5610 of the Streets and Highways Code has provided:
“The owners of lots or portions of lots fronting on any portion of a public street or place when that street or place is improved or if and when the area between the property line of the adjacent property and the street line is maintained as a park or parking strip, shall maintain any sidewalk in such condition that the sidewalk will not endanger persons or property and maintain it in a condition which will not interfere with the public convenience in the use of those works or areas save and except as to those conditions created or maintained in, upon, along, or in connection with such sidewalk by any person other than the owner, under and by virtue of any permit or right granted to him by law or by the city authorities in charge thereof, and such persons shall be under a like duty in relation thereto.”
Through this section, the Streets and Highways Code imposes a duty on property owners to maintain the area between their property line and the street to ensure those areas between the street and their property line are free of nuisances and hazards that could endanger people or property, or interfere with the use of the public right-of-way.

Page 173 of 460 ends

Right-of-Way Maintenance and Liability
September 20, 2023

Page 3 of 7 ends

5 8
6 Historically, the Town has relied on Section 5610 in combination with our Encroachment Ordinance to hold property owners responsible for maintaining the frontage area. The Encroachment Ordinance prescribes that no one can place anything in the adjacent street frontage area without the permission of the Town and that anything put within that right-of-way is the responsibility of the adjacent property owner to maintain. Through the Encroachment Ordinance, the Town imposes standards for landscaping in the frontage areas, which include maximum heights, clearances, and setbacks. The property owners are responsible for maintaining such landscaping in a healthy growing condition so as not to create a safety hazard or public nuisance and they are required to maintain the frontage strips free of weeds, litter and debris and they shall not impede any drainage.

While the Town has relied on Section 5610, case law has held that in order to continue to pass along the duty and maintenance obligations to adjacent property owners, local jurisdictions must affirmatively point to this authority in its ordinances. To date, the Town has not done so. The proposed ordinance adds Chapter 12.10 to the AMC to accomplish this requirement as well as make a few clarifications with respect to maintenance obligations, liability, enforcement procedures, and provides a cost-recovery mechanism for the Town where it must intercede dude to hazards that pose an imminent risk of harm. The Ordinance is modeled after the San Jose Ordinance and the provisions of Sections 5610-5618 of the Streets and Highways Code.

Absent an ordinance codifying Section 5610, the Town cannot pass along maintenance and liability responsibility within the frontage areas; and liability will be a fact-dependent analysis should there be damage or injury resultant from a condition within that frontage. If the Town were to be liable for dangerous conditions in the right-of-way, which currently exist due to maintenance adjacent property owners have failed to undertake, staff would need to begin a much more proactive code enforcement and risk assessment program to identify where those risks are and proactively mitigate risks through an aggressive tree trimming and right-of-way maintenance program.

Despite the fact that the Streets and Highways Code permits assigning maintenance obligations on adjacent property owners, not all jurisdictions do so. There are no statistics on what percentage of jurisdictions state-wide hold adjacent property owners responsible, but it is a very common practice to do so. In San Mateo County, approximately two-thirds of the incorporated cities clearly place maintenance responsibilities on adjacent property owners.

At its September 6, 2023, Study Session, the City Council reviewed the draft ordinance. Council directed staff to bring the Ordinance back for consideration with minor corrections. In addition, following the Study Session, the Mayor and City Manager met with residents in the Lloyden Park neighborhood to discuss the ordinance and their concerns. A memorandum regarding the proposed Ordinance was provided to the City Manager from Lloyden Park residents following the meeting (Attachment 2). A response to the residents from the City Manager is attached as Attachment 3.

Page 174 of 460 ends

Right-of-Way Maintenance and Liability
September 20, 2023

Page 4 of 7 ends

5 8
6 Issues Raised
Additional Information Regarding Streets & Highways Code Provisions The Streets and Highways Code very clearly passes along responsibility for maintenance and repair of sidewalks and other frontage to the adjacent property owner. The Streets and Highways Code is more than simply Section 5610. The additional information in the Town’s proposed ordinance is modeled after that additional information as well as the City of San Jose’s Ordinance (linked here) which has been tested by the courts. Attachment 4 is an expanded version of the State law. This mirrors the Town’s ordinance for notice, repair, etc.).

Other Jurisdiction Ordinances
In addition to the City of San Jose’s Ordinance, — Menlo Park and Redwood City programs were referenced in both the Town’s Study Session and the Lloyden Park meeting. Here are links to their programs. Menlo Park (Link) and Redwood City (Link).

Liability
As the City Attorney has noted, while the State law passes on the duty to maintain the frontage area to the adjacent property owner, it does not strictly pass on liability. Recent court decisions, like the one in the case of San Jose’s Ordinance, provide that jurisdictions must affirmatively pass on that liability as well as the maintenance obligation by incorporating existing State law. At a minimum, the Town’s ordinances must reference and incorporate Section 5600. Here are some other resources (white papers, PowerPoint, etc.) that provide some broad educational information. PARSAC Risk Pool PowerPoint - Managing Sidewalk Liability; League of Cities White Paper - But It’s YOUR Sidewalk (2014)
Recent Sidewalk Inspections and Cost to Repair
The Town did conduct a sidewalk survey of Lloyden Park about in April/May 2023 around the time the Council discussed rights-of-way issues at the April 5 Study Session. Staff has access to a pooled contract for sidewalk assessment and grinding work via PLAN JPA (Town’s Insurance Pool). Staff used the services of Precision Concrete Cutting (PCC) to do the assessment. Precision Concrete Cutting (PCC) has a fixed/negotiation price for Sidewalk Assessment and Grinding - Sidewalk Assessment is ~$386/sidewalk mile - roughly $1,000 per day. Sidewalk grinding costs vary based on the amount of uplift - ~$43 for 3/8” to 1/2” of uplift; $80 for 1/2” to 1” of uplift; and $165 for 1” to 2” of uplift. Anything larger than 2” - the full panel must be replaced and that is not a part of their service scope.

PCC identified 825 instances of sidewalk uplift that they could address through grinding; 55 areas of sidewalk replacement that must be bid out separately (greater than 2” of uplift or slabs broken/unstable); and 6 utility box sections that need reporting to utility agencies for uplift. The 825 instances of sidewalk uplift that they could address via grinding totaled approximately $45,000 worth of work. The 55 areas of removal and replacement totaled approximately 2,848 square feet.

This work would need to be publicly bid and has an estimated cost of $20-$25 per square foot

Page 175 of 460 ends

Right-of-Way Maintenance and Liability
September 20, 2023

Page 5 of 7 ends

5 8
6 (depending on the market - could be higher) - would come to another $70,000+. This could be $300 to $3,000 per property depending on the length of sidewalk repair in front of their parcel.

At the Lloyden Park meeting, the neighbors provided the City Manager with photographs of damaged or uplifted sidewalk areas deeming them hazardous. This would be considered “notice” to the Town of the hazard. Staff will use these photos and the recent field survey to paint or otherwise highlight and identify the hazard locations in the field. Staff will then need to work with the adjacent property owners for repair - using current State and local laws to do so (adjacent property owners are responsible).

In the past, the Town has contracted and paid for all basic grinding work for uplifted sidewalks using Parcel Tax funds. If the remedial work required panel replacement or root work, the Town would group up these areas and get three (3) public bids for the work. Each bid was separated by address/parcel. Staff would then reach out to each adjacent property owner and let them know they were responsible for the repair costs and the repair. Staff advised them of the Town’s cost and the property owner could opt to have the Town do the work and be invoiced for it or do it themselves based on the Town’s standard for construction. Most chose to have the Town do the work.

Additional Considerations
Concurrent with consideration of this Ordinance, the Council may discuss potential policy options around implementation and public education. These policy options include development of a sidewalk repair program (separate from the Ordinance), review of the Heritage Tree Ordinance as it pertains to sidewalk and right-of-way hazards, and public education.

Sidewalk Repair Program
Several jurisdictions have sidewalk repair programs to assist property owners in addressing sidewalk trip hazards. Most programs include provisions for concrete grinding, asphalt ramping, and sidewalk replacement. Some jurisdictions place the cost burden fully on the adjacent fronting property owners (either directly via citation or billing, or indirectly via an assessment district), others share the cost burden with the property owners, particularly if the issues are associated with publicly owned trees. Some jurisdictions take a shared approach, where ethe jurisdiction takes on the ramping and grinding aspects, where appropriate, and leaves requires permanent repairs by the property owner.

Heritage Trees
As noted above, many within the sidewalk area are related to vegetation and trees. Where sidewalks and streets are impacted by tree roots of heritage trees, it may be necessary to prune/remove large roots or remove trees in their entirety. The Heritage Tree Ordinance may need to be revised to include consideration of tree removals associated with such hazards in the public right-of-way. Additionally, the Town would need a release of liability from the property owner should repair work impact adjacent trees or improvements.

Page 176 of 460 ends

Right-of-Way Maintenance and Liability
September 20, 2023

Page 6 of 7 ends

5 8
6 Public Outreach
Following adoption of the Ordinance, education materials advising property owners of their responsibilities will be developed. Such materials would be available on-line and distributed through Town publications such as the Athertonian. Additional materials may be developed regarding any additional programs as they are developed.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
The proposed Ordinance is exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resource's Code section 21000 et seq. ("CEQA") pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) as it can be seen with certainty that the project has no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.

FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed Ordinance does not involve or authorize and direct expenditures.

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal Area B – Preserve Small Town Character and Quality of Life • Goal Area D – Manage Circulation and Improve Safety
• Goal Area F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed, and Well-Planned

POLICY FOCUS
The Council’s policy focus should be on maintenance and liability responsibilities associated with improvements in the public right-of-way beyond the paved roadway.

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
This item has not been before a Town Committee or Commission

Page 177 of 460 ends

Right-of-Way Maintenance and Liability
September 20, 2023

Page 7 of 7 ends

5 8
6 ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Ordinance

2. Lloyden Park Memorandum to City Manager

3. City Manager Response to Lloyden Park residents

4. Streets and Highways Code Sections 5610 – 5618

Page 178 of 460 ends

2367385.2 14537.002
ORDINANCE No. 66X

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ATHERTON ADDING SECTION

12.06.030-D AND CHAPTER 12.10 TO THE ATHERTON MUNICIPAL CODE, CLARIFYING

MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES ON OWNERS OF PROPERTY ADJACENT TO PUBLIC

RIGHTS OF WAY AND IMPOSING LIABILITY ON OWNERS OF PROPERTY ADJACENT TO

PUBLIC SIDEWALKS FOR INJURIES SUFFERED
WHEREAS, the Town of Atherton ("Town") wishes to protect the public peace, safety, welfare, and tranquility of its residents, and;
WHEREAS, the Town wishes to encourage the maintenance of well-kept properties. The Town recognizes that property values and the general welfare of the community are founded in large part on the appearance, maintenance and safety of properties, and; WHEREAS, owners of property adjacent to public sidewalks and rights-of-way are usually in the best position to quickly identify and address potentially dangerous conditions that might occur on them, and;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5610 of the Streets and Highways Code, the owners of property adjacent to public sidewalks owe a duty to the Town to maintain such sidewalks in such condition that the sidewalk will not endanger persons or property or interfere with the public convenience in its use, and;
WHEREAS, the Town is empowered through its police powers to impose maintenance obligations on property owners for their property, as well as abutting rights-of-way. Those property owners are best positioned to address and to also notify the Town of dangerous conditions of property that they abut, and;
WHEREAS, imposing liability on owners of property adjacent to public sidewalks and rights of way incentivizes those property owners to regularly inspect and maintain their adjacent public sidewalks and landscaping and;
WHEREAS, this Ordinance clarifies the maintenance responsibilities of adjacent property owners, and makes them liable for personal injuries or property damage that result from the property owner's failure to maintain the adjacent sidewalk, or adjacent landscaping, and; WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that this Ordinance is not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15060, subdivision (c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15061, subdivision (b)(3) (there is no possibility the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment).

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the Town of Atherton incorporates the findings in the recitals above and adopts them as though fully set forth herein and does hereby ordain as follows:

Section 1. PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY
The purpose of this ordinance is to clarify the sidewalk maintenance responsibilities of adjacent property owners and hold them liable to members of the public for injuries or property damage

Page 179 of 460 ends

2367385.2 14537.002
that result from the property owner's failure to maintain the adjacent sidewalk as required in this Chapter. The authority is derived from the State Constitution and Streets and Highways Code Chapter 22 of Division 7, Part 3.

Section 2. FINDINGS.

The recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated by reference herein.

Section 3. ADDITION OF SECTION 12.06.030-D OF THE ATHERTON MUNICIPAL CODE
Section 12.06.030-D is hereby added to read:

D. “Sidewalk” shall have the same meaning as in Section 5600 of the California Streets and Highways Code. This term is interpreted to include the lot frontage strip that forms the areas between the property line and the street line that are publicly accessible or used for ingress and egress to the abutting property, regardless of whether such areas are improved in any manner.

Section 4. ADDITION OF CHAPTER 12.10 OF THE ATHERTON MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 12.10 is hereby added to read:

12.10 Maintenance and Repair of Sidewalks and Rights-of-Way

12.10.010 Maintenance and Repair of Sidewalks
A. Anything in this chapter to the contrary notwithstanding, the maintenance and repair of sidewalk areas and the making, confirming and collecting of assessments for the cost and expenses of said maintenance and repair may be done and the proceedings therefor may be had and taken in accordance with this part and the procedure therefor provided in Chapter 22 of Division 7, Part 3, of the Streets and Highways Code of the state as the same is now in effect or may hereafter be amended. In the event of any conflict between the provisions of said Chapter 22 of Division 7, Part 3, of the Streets and Highways Code of the state and this Chapter, the provisions of this Chapter shall control.

B. For the purposes of this chapter, the definition of sidewalk shall be the same as in Section 12.06.030-D.

BC. The owners of lots or portions of lots adjacent to or fronting on any portion of a sidewalk area between the property line of the lots and the street line, including but not limited to parking strips, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, and persons in possession of such lots by virtue of any permit or right shall repair and maintain such sidewalk areas and pay the costs and expenses therefor, including a charge for the Town of Atherton's costs of inspection and administration whenever the Town awards a contract for such maintenance and repair and including the costs of collection of assessments for the costs of maintenance and repair under subsection A. of this section or handling of any lien placed on the property due to failure of the property owner to promptly pay such assessments.

Page 180 of 460 ends

2367385.2 14537.002
CD. For the purposes of this part, maintenance and repair of sidewalk area shall include, but not be limited to, maintenance and repair of surfaces including grinding, removal and replacement of sidewalks, repair and maintenance of curb and gutters, removal and filling or replacement of parking strips, removal of weeds and/or debris, supervision and maintenance of signs allowed pursuant to Chapter 15.36, tree and landscape maintenance, tree root pruning and installing root barriers, trimming of trees and shrubs and/or ground cover and trimming shrubs within the area between the property line of the adjacent property and the street pavement line, including parking strips and curbs, so that the sidewalk area will remain in a condition that is not dangerous to property or to persons using the sidewalk in a reasonable manner and will be in a condition which will not interfere with the public convenience in the use of said sidewalk area.

DE. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 5614 of the Streets and Highways Code, the Director of Public Works (director) may in his or her discretion, and for sufficient cause, extend the period within which required maintenance and repair of sidewalk areas must commence by a period of not to exceed ninety days from the time the notice referred to in said Section 5614 is given.

EF. Liability. The owners of lots or portions of lots (property owners) required by this Chapter to maintain and repair the sidewalk area shall owe a duty to members of the public to keep and maintain the sidewalk area in a safe and non-dangerous condition. If, as a result of the failure of any property owner to maintain the sidewalk area in a non-dangerous condition as required by Chapter 12.10, any person suffers injury or damage to person or property, the property owner shall be liable to such person for the resulting damages or injury.

12.10.020 Maintenance and Repair of Adjacent Trees and Landscaping and Duty to Warn A. The property owner of a lot or portion of a lot adjacent to or fronting on any portion of a street shall maintain and replace, if necessary, any street trees, shrubs, hedges or other landscaping adjacent to or fronting on the subject property in such condition that the street trees, shrubs, hedges or other landscaping comply with this Chapter. Each property owner shall plant and/or replace any removed or otherwise missing street trees in accordance with the requirements of subsection(c), below.

B. A property owner required by this section to plant, maintain, and replace, if necessary, trees, shrubs, hedges and other landscaping shall owe a duty to members of the public using streets to maintain such trees, shrubs, hedges or other landscaping in a safe and nonhazardous condition for users of the streets. For purposes of this section, maintenance of trees, shrubs, hedges and other landscaping includes, but is not limited to: watering, pruning, fertilizing, pest control, removal of branches, leaves, and other debris, weed abatement, and protection of the critical root zone.

C. A property owner required by this section to maintain any street trees, shrubs, hedges, or landscaping shall comply with the following:

1. Immediately notify the Director of Public Works of any dangerous or hazardous conditions of the adjacent public right of way;

2. Provide the necessary maintenance so that the street tree, shrub, hedge or landscaping is not in a hazardous condition or in a condition that will likely become a hazardous condition;

Page 181 of 460 ends

2367385.2 14537.002

3. Provide a minimum eight-foot vertical pedestrian clearance from the top of the sidewalk and a minimum fourteen-foot vertical vehicular clearance from the top of the street, to any part of a tree;

4. Provide adequate clearance for unobstructed pedestrian and vehicular view of all authorized traffic signals, traffic cameras, street lights, regulatory signs, street name signs, and other similar type of equipment or signs;

5. All maintenance shall be completed in accordance with the Atherton Municipal Code, Heritage Tree Protection Guidelines and other applicable permit requirements and standards;

12.10.030 Hazardous conditions; sight obstructions on private property.

A. No owner or person in possession or control of any premises shall maintain any tree, shrub, hedge or other landscaping located on such premises in a manner that causes or may cause a hazardous condition on a street or sidewalk.

B. No owner or person in possession or control of any premises on any corner or interior lot abutting upon a street shall permit the existence of any tree, shrub, hedge, landscaping, mound of earth, or boulders that obscure and impair the view of intersecting or entering traffic from a street of passing motorists or pedestrians or which impairs the view of the street signs, traffic signs, or any other control devices or signs placed upon the streets for the safety and convenience of the public.

12.10.040 Notice of violation.

If the director determines that the condition of any sidewalk, tree, shrub, hedge, or landscaping constitutes a violation of any provision of this chapter, the director shall, by notice in writing, notify the owner of the property in violation to prune or remove the tree, shrub, hedge, or landscaping or take any other necessary corrective action to cure the violation.

12.10.050 Notice of violation - Delivery.

The notice of violation specified in Section 12.10.040 may be given by delivering a written notice personally to the property owner, or by mailing the notice, postage prepaid, to the property owner thereof at his or her last known address as the same appears on the last equalized assessment rolls of the county.

12.10.060 Notice of violation - Contents.

A. Any notice of violation issued by the director pursuant to Section 12.10.050 shall contain the following information:

1. The date of the inspection.

2. The address or a description of the property where the violation is located.

3. A description of the violation.

4. A description of the corrective action required to address the violation.

Page 182 of 460 ends

2367385.2 14537.002

5. A definitive time period to complete the corrective action.

12.10.070 Notice of violation - Hearing.

The notice of violation shall further specify that the property owner receiving such notice may file with the Town his or her written objection to such notice and such written objection must be received by the Town within seven (7) calendar days of the notice. The written objection shall clearly outline the objection to the notice and the basis for such objection. The Town shall duly review all timely written objections that comply with this section and provide the property owner with an opportunity to be heard, and will thereafter render a written decision within a reasonable amount of time to sustain, overrule, or amend the notice of violation. The written decision shall be provided to the owner in the manner specified in Section 12.10.060, and such decision will be final.

12.10.080 Work performed by the Town.

A. If the corrective action required by notice is not completed within the time specified in the notice of violation, the Town shall have the authority to perform this work or cause this work to be performed and the owner of the abutting property shall be billed for the costs incurred. The property owner shall be responsible for all costs associated with the corrective action including but not limited to the costs of planting, removal or pruning of the tree, shrub, hedge, pavement work, or landscaping, administration time and expense, late charges, and the handling of any lien placed on the property owner's property due to failure of the property owner to pay within the required period.

B. After the Town completes the corrective action as set forth in this section, the Town shall mail an invoice to the property owner. The property owner shall remit full payment to the Town on or before the date specified in the invoice.

C. Any invoice not fully paid by the date specified on the invoice shall be deemed delinquent and the director shall initiate the assessment procedures set forth herein.

12.10.090 Emergency services performed by Town.

A. In cases of imminently hazardous conditions, the director shall have the authority to perform or cause to be performed the corrective work to abate the imminently hazardous condition without observance of any notice requirements. The property containing or adjacent to a tree, shrub, hedge, sidewalk, or landscaping that poses an imminently hazardous condition or the property adjacent to or fronting on the subject street tree, shrub, hedge, sidewalk, or landscaping that poses an imminently hazardous condition may be assessed for the costs incurred in accordance with this part. The Town shall send an invoice to the property owner setting forth the costs and expenses as described herein and the date specified for full payment to the Town.

B. If the property owner has failed to pay the invoice, the director shall issue a notice of cost informing the property owner of the failure to pay the invoice and that failure to pay the amount will result in the initiation of proceedings to place a lien against the property owner's property.

12.10.100 Notice of hearing before city council.

After completion of the work and failure of a property owner to pay the amounts set forth in the invoice, the director shall cause notice of the public hearing on the cost to be given to the property

Page 183 of 460 ends

2367385.2 14537.002
owner in the manner specified in this part, which shall specify the day, hour and place when the city council will hear and pass upon a report by the director of the cost of the work, the amount proposed to be assessed against the property, together with written objections, if any, which may be raised by any person liable to be assessed for the cost of such work.

12.10.110 Report to city council.

If the property owner does not pay the invoice by the required date, the director shall prepare and file with the city council a report specifying the work which has been done, the cost thereof, a description of the real property upon which the tree, shrub, hedge, or landscaping was located or of the real property adjacent to or fronting upon the street on which such street tree, shrub, hedge, or landscaping was located and the assessment against the parcel of land proposed to be levied to pay the cost thereof.

12.10.120 Hearing on assessment costs.

A. Upon the day and hour fixed for the hearing, the city council shall hear and pass upon the report of the director, together with any written or oral objections which may be raised by any property owner liable to be assessed for the corrective work. The city council may make such modifications in the report as it may deem just, after which, the report as submitted or as modified shall be confirmed. The decision of the city council on all objections shall be final and conclusive.

B. This hearing serves to provide the full opportunity of a person subject to an invoice to be heard and object to the determination that a violation occurred and was not corrected. The failure of any person to appear at the hearing shall constitute a failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

12.10.130 Assessment deemed a lien.

The cost of any corrective action may be assessed by the city council against the parcel of property upon which the tree, shrub, hedge, or landscaping is located, or the parcel of property which fronts upon or is adjacent to the street on which such street tree, shrub, hedge, or landscaping is located, and such cost so assessed, if not paid within five days after its confirmation by the city council, shall constitute a special assessment against that parcel of property, and shall be a lien on the property for the amount thereof, which lien shall continue until the assessment and all interest thereon is paid, or until discharged.

12.10.140 Lien - Recordation and collection.

The city council, after confirmation of the report of the director, may order a notice of lien to be delivered to the county recorder, who shall enter the amount thereof on the county assessment book opposite the description of the particular property, and the amount shall be collected, together with all taxes against the property. Thereafter, the amount of the lien shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as taxes against the property are collected, and shall be subject to the same penalties and interest, and to the same procedure under foreclosure and sale in case of delinquency.

12.10.150 Liability.

A. If any property owner fails to maintain any sidewalk, trees, shrubs, hedges, landscaping or other improvements in a nonhazardous condition as required by this Chapter, and any person

Page 184 of 460 ends

2367385.2 14537.002
suffers damage or injury to person or property, the property owner shall be solely liable for all damages or injuries caused by such failure.

B. Nothing contained in this chapter shall be deemed to impose any liability upon the Town, its officers or employees, nor to relieve the owner of any private property from the duty to keep sidewalks, trees, shrubs, hedges, or landscaping upon said private property, or under his or her control or upon streets in front of or contiguous to such private property, in a safe condition.

12.10.160 Remedies.

The provisions of this chapter are nonexclusive and supplementary to any existing rights and remedies, and the provisions of this chapter may be enforced by any remedies provided for in this municipal code or otherwise available at law. Violations of this chapter may be prosecuted criminally, civilly, or administratively, either undertaken separately or in conjunction with other remedies, at the sole discretion of the Town. Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed to prevent the Town from commencing any administrative or legal proceeding to enforce this chapter, Municipal Code, or any law.

Section 4. SEVERABILITY
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance.

The City Council of the Town of Atherton hereby declares that it would have adopted the remainder of this chapter and ordinance, including each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion irrespective of the invalidity of any other article, section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion. To the extent that prior Town ordinances governed any portion of this Ordinance held invalid, such prior Town ordinances shall again become effective if any portion of this Ordinance is held invalid.

Section 5: EFFECTIVE DATE AND PUBLICATION
This Ordinance shall be posted in at least three public places according to law and shall take effect and be in force from and after 30 days after its passage and adoption. The City Clerk is hereby directed to publish a summary of this Ordinance in an adjudicated newspaper of general circulation serving the residents of the Town of Atherton within fifteen (15) days after its passage.

Introduced on the ___ day of ____________________, 2023.

Passed and adopted as an ordinance of the City Council of the Town of Atherton at a regular meeting thereof held on the ___ day of __________________, 2023 by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Abstentions:
______________________________

Page 185 of 460 ends

2367385.2 14537.002
Mayor Bill Widmer
ATTEST:
______________________________
Anthony Suber, City Clerk/ACM

Page 186 of 460 ends

1 MEMORANDUM
To: George Rodericks
From: Sharon Hume, HALP President; John Maulbetsch, HALP Vice President; David and Elyse Barca; James and Kathy Janz; Walt Robinson; Bijal Vakil; Frank and Mary Burke; Jim and Judy Massey (all are residents of Lloyden Park) CC: All other Lloyden Park Residents
Re: New Sidewalk Ordinance adding Section 12.06.030-D and Chapter 12.10 Thanks George for the information you have provided at and since our meeting with you and the Mayor last week. This is a follow up from a few folks who were at the meeting and a few others who have been following this closely. We appreciate all the items you mentioned where the town has taken action with respect to rights-ofway. Those of us who have lived in Lloyden Park for many years have witnessed the construction, modification and maintenance of our sidewalks by the Town.

We are therefore interested in why any change should take place. We do understand the advice you have received that, to make Section 5610 applicable the town needs to give notice of that section. However, this ordinance seems to go well beyond that.

You recently wrote to Walt Robinson that it will be your recommendation to the Council that the Town continue to 100% fund all damage assessment and grinding efforts; but that any repair that needs to replace the entirety of a sidewalk panel due to the adjacent resident’s tree roots or other maintenance issues (such as failed irrigation lines, negligent damage, etc.) would be either 100% the responsibility of that resident or 50/50 cost share with the Town.

Thank you for that very constructive proposal on how to share the burden on residents by having the Town continue its maintenance and grinding efforts. We hope this means that the Town will deal with other normal wear and tear such as cracks in the sidewalk due to natural settling, earth shifting, and the like. It would be helpful if some changes can be made in the proposed ordinance based on your new proposal. We hope that Sections 12.10.010 B and C, Sections 12.10.040, 12.10.080 and 12.010.090 will be modified to draw a distinction between routine grinding efforts and major damage that requires the replacement of one or more sidewalk panels in their entirety.

We would also request that the Town take a second look at why to include sections

12.10.010E, 12.10.150 and 12.10.160. Those deal with duties and attempt to impose sole liability on the homeowner to third parties with respect to sidewalks. (For some reason section 12.10.150 is broader than 12.10.010E.)

Page 187 of 460 ends

2 As you may recall, Frank Burke mentioned at the meeting last week that Sections

12.10.01E and 12.10.150 and 12.10.160 as written appear to be unenforceable as they directly conflict with the Town’s responsibilities under Government Code §835 which states:
“Except as provided by statute, a public entity is liable for injury caused by a dangerous condition of its property if the plaintiff establishes that the property was in a dangerous condition at the time of the injury, that the injury was proximately caused by the dangerous condition, that the dangerous condition created a reasonably foreseeable risk of the kind of injury which was incurred, and that either:
(a) A negligent or wrongful act or omission of an employee of the public entity within the scope of his employment created the dangerous condition; or (b) The public entity had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition under Section 835.2 a sufficient time prior to the injury to have taken measures to protect against the dangerous condition.”
Section 835.2 states:
“(a) A public entity had actual notice of a dangerous condition within the meaning of subdivision (b) of Section 835 if it had actual knowledge of the existence of the condition and knew or should have known of its dangerous character. (b) A public entity had constructive notice of a dangerous condition within the meaning of subdivision (b) of Section 835 only if the plaintiff establishes that the condition had existed for such a period of time and was of such an obvious nature that the public entity, in the exercise of due care, should have discovered the condition and its dangerous character. On the issue of due care, admissible evidence includes but is not limited to evidence as to:
(1) Whether the existence of the condition and its dangerous character would have been discovered by an inspection system that was reasonably adequate (considering the practicability and cost of inspection weighed against the likelihood and magnitude of the potential danger to which failure to inspect would give rise) to inform the public entity whether the property was safe for the use or uses for which the public entity used or intended others to use the public property and for uses that the public entity actually knew others were making of the public property or adjacent property. (2) Whether the public entity maintained and operated such an inspection system with due care and did not discover the condition.”
In Peters v City and County of San Francisco, 41 Cal,. 2d 419, 427, 429 (1953) the California Supreme Court held: “[I]t is well settled that the city will be charged with constructive notice of substantial defects in the public sidewalk which have existed for

Page 188 of 460 ends

3 such a length of time and are of such a conspicuous character that a reasonable inspection would have disclosed them…
The city is under a duty to keep sidewalks in safe condition, it is directly liable to pedestrians for failing to correct a dangerous condition of which it had notice, and it is not relieved of its responsibility in this regard merely because the condition was created or maintained by a property owner who might also be liable to pedestrians for injuries resulting therefrom.”
Aside from the above mentioned concerns, we understand why the Town feels the need to adopt new Code Sections 12.10.010 to 12.10.140 to meet its obligations under Government Code 835-835.2 and the Peters case.

However, we feel that new Code Sections 12.10.010E, 12.10.150 and 12.10.160 go too far in trying to impose sole liability on the homeowner to third parties and place every homeowner in Atherton at risk of unwarranted claims. Third parties have separate rights and can use Section 5610 without the Town trying to somehow modify and enlarge that liability. Successful lawsuits have been brought by injured parties without such a provision. The provisions as drafted ignore that if someone claimed to suffer damage as a result of a defective sidewalk condition, there are still other issues to be resolved before there is liability. For instance, since California applies comparative negligence in personal injury cases, the relative responsibilities and actions of the homeowner, the Town and the pedestrian would all be taken into account.

We note that the Menlo Park Sidewalk Ordinance Chapter 13.08 has similar notice and repair provisions to those set forth in the new Atherton statute but does not attempt to impose sole liability on the homeowner. That City has miles of sidewalks and we have a few blocks.

Thank you for considering Lloyden Park residents' concerns. We have enjoyed many years of cooperative relationships with the Town and very much hope that can continue.

Page 189 of 460 ends

From: George Rodericks [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Memorandum Re: New Sidewalk Ordinance adding Section 12.06.030-D and Chapter 12.10 Date: September 14, 2023 at 1:17PM
To:

From: George Rodericks <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Memorandum Re: New Sidewalk Ordinance adding Section 12.06.030-D and Chapter 12.10 Date: September 12, 2023 at 8:19:30AM PDT
To: Frank Burke
Cc: Sharon Hume "John S. Maulbetsch" >, David Barca >, Elyse Barca <>, "James R. Janz" , Kathy Janz >, Walter Robinson >, Bijal.Vakil, Mary Burke >, Jim Massey >, judy massey , Robert Ovadia , "Booher, Andreas" Frank et al,
Thank you for the memorandum and comments. It was good to be able to chat with the neighbors through some of the issues involved. I will provide a copy of your memorandum to the City Council. I also wanted to take an opportunity to expand on a couple of points.

Section 5610 of State law is more than the paragraph noted. It is actually Section 5600-5630 of State law and many of the provisions in the Town’s ordinance originate there. In addition, the Town’s ordinance is modeled after the City of San Jose’s Ordinance, which has withstood legal scrutiny in its application. You can view a copy of the San Jose Ordinance here. Also for reference is some additional information shared with the Council, attached is a full PDF of Section 5600, a link to Menlo Park’s Ordinance/Program, a link to Redwood City’s Ordinance/Program, a link to a Risk Pool Analysis of Sidewalk Maintenance Programs, and a link to a white paper from the League of California Cities.

As you noted at the meeting on Wednesday night, it is clear that State law passes along a duty to the adjacent property owner to make them responsible for maintenance and repair of street frontages adjacent to their properties (sidewalk or no sidewalk).

That’s a function of State law, not local law. As you know, when there is a duty to maintain something and keep it free of hazard there is also likely a corresponding liability for negligence if the person or persons responsible fail to maintain it free of hazard (duty, breach, causation, and damages). If the property owner is negligent in that maintenance and repair obligation, they have “breached” their duty. And, if that breach is the underlying “cause” of injury and there are in fact injuries - “damages" - they can be held liable. That exists today irrespective of whether the Town adopts a local ordinance or not. For example - tree roots, tree maintenance, low branches, defective driveway, improper drainage, rocks/boulders/stumps, blocked visibility due to overgrown vegetation, etc. If, however, the property owner has notified the Town of a hazard (as the ordinance calls out) and the Town has underlying responsibility for maintenance (such as a fallen street sign, notify utilities, etc.) and the Town fails to take action to protect (pursuing remedy, marking, etc.), the Town could be held liable. Ultimately, issues will come down to who’s responsible for maintenance, was there negligent maintenance, was there notice of the hazard, was action taken following that notice (actual or constructive notice), and by whom. State law already places the duty for maintenance on the adjacent property owner.

If a property owner fails to maintain an aspect of their property or frontage within their control (overgrown hedges, trees, rocks, stumps, debris, etc. - not acts of god) and that causes the creation of a hazardous condition; that property should be held liable for any damages that occur. With respect to the Town’s local ordinance, there are two provisions with respect to liability. You pointed out at the meeting that Section 12.10.150(A) makes the property owner “solely” liable for all damages or injuries. This section incorporates the earlier provision (Section 12.10.010(E)) in specific relation to sidewalks but expands it to cover other items with the right-of-way area for which the property owner has a duty to maintain - trees, shrubs, hedges, landscaping and other improvements (driveways, keypads, landscape lighting, private signage, etc.). That section covers all of the frontage area not just sidewalks and passes liability along to the property owner only if there is injury that occurs due to their failure to maintain.

If the frontage is maintained free of hazards, there is no liability. It only attaches in the case of negligent maintenance. Both sections address liability only in the case of negligent maintenance. One is specific to sidewalks and one is more broad as the ordinance covers not just Lloyden Park where there are presently residential sidewalks but the entirety of Town. While Lloyden Park is the only significant area of residential neighborhood that currently has sidewalks, it is not and may not always be the only area. In fact, there are sidewalks in front of most of the local schools - Menlo Atherton High School, Laurel, Las Lomitas, Town Center, Park, etc. And, as the Town develops over time, there may be improvements along street frontages for pedestrian ways either decomposed granite or paved sidewalks in specific areas.

As noted, the general rule (and that of State law) is that an adjacent or abutting property owner is liable for injuries caused by a dangerous condition of the public sidewalk, if the dangerous condition was created through the negligence of the homeowner.

State law also provides that the adjacent or abutting property owner has a duty to maintain the right-of-way, inclusive of the sidewalk. The Town can create a specific Sidewalk Assessment, Maintenance and Repair Program that involves cost assessment and/or cost sharing. That is a budgetary and programmatic (policy) choice - not a codified Ordinance. A Sidewalk Assessment, Maintenance and Repair Program whereby the Town incurs a cost for assessment and basic grinding/general maintenance along with a potential 50/50 split for larger repairs is a policy decision. It would be a separate Town Program specifically related to sidewalks (outside of a local ordinance as it’s budgetary and implementation related not regulatory). As noted, I would recommend to the Council that the Town be responsible for the costs of an annual or bi-annual sidewalk assessment program and that the Town consider bearing the cost of any related grinding and general maintenance. However, costs related to larger repair due to adjacent tree roots (unless it is clearly a Town maintained tree) or other private property maintenance issues be borne either entirely by the property owner or cost shared with the Town. If it were a 100% resident cost, the Council could certainly recommend that the neighborhood consider forming a Landscape Maintenance Assessment District to bear the costs more broadly.

Your Memorandum and the additional information shared over the course of these emails and staff directed investigations into Page 190 of 460 Your Memorandum and the additional information shared over the course of these emails and staff directed investigations into the rubberized sidewalk areas in Redwood City (which they do not use any longer due to increased cost and liability) and other issues will all be discussed at the 9/20 City Council meeting as part of the Ordinance Introduction Public Hearing.

George Rodericks
City Manager
Town of Atherton
80 Fair Oaks Lane
Atherton, CA 94027
(650) 752-0504 - Office
[email protected]
Schedule A Meeting With Me
PUBLIC DISCLOSURE NOTICE:

This email and any attached files were sent from an email account assigned to a public official for the Town of Atherton. This email, replies to this email, or emails sent directly to this email account may constitute a public record and, if retained during the normal course of business, may be subject to disclosure to any person upon request.

On Sep 11, 2023, at 10:40PM, Frank Burke < wrote:
[The e-mail below is from an external source. Please do not open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin.]
5610 - Codes Display Text.pdf MEMORANDUM to George
Rodericks.docx

Page 191 of 460 ends

Codes Display Text 9/7/23, 9:43 AM
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?division=7.&chapter=22.&part=3.&lawCode=SHC&article=2. Page 1 of 2 Code: Select Code Section: 1 or 2 or 1001 Search
5610.
5611.
5612.
5613.

Up^ Add To My Favorites

STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE - SHC
DIVISION 7. THE IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 1911 [5000 - 6794] ( Division 7 added by Stats. 1941, Ch. 79. ) PART 3. PERFORMING THE WORK [5100 - 5954] ( Part 3 added by Stats. 1941, Ch. 79. ) CHAPTER 22. Maintenance of Sidewalks [5600 - 5630] ( Chapter 22 added by Stats. 1941, Ch. 79. ) ARTICLE 2. Repairs [5610 - 5618] ( Article 2 added by Stats. 1941, Ch. 79. ) The owners of lots or portions of lots fronting on any portion of a public street or place when that street or place is improved or if and when the area between the property line of the adjacent property and the street line is maintained as a park or parking strip, shall maintain any sidewalk in such condition that the sidewalk will not endanger persons or property and maintain it in a condition which will not interfere with the public convenience in the use of those works or areas save and except as to those conditions created or maintained in, upon, along, or in connection with such sidewalk by any person other than the owner, under and by virtue of any permit or right granted to him by law or by the city authorities in charge thereof, and such persons shall be under a like duty in relation thereto.
(Added by Stats. 1941, Ch. 79.)
When any portion of the sidewalk is out of repair or pending reconstruction and in condition to endanger persons or property or in condition to interfere with the public convenience in the use of such sidewalk, the superintendent of streets shall notify the owner or person in possession of the property fronting on that portion of such sidewalk so out of repair, to repair the sidewalk. (Added by Stats. 1941, Ch. 79.)
Notice to repair may be given by delivering a written notice personally to the owner or to the person in possession of the property facing upon the sidewalk so out of repair, or by mailing a postal card, postage prepaid, to the person in possession of such property, or to the owner thereof at his last known address as the same appears on the last equalized assessment rolls of such city or to the name and address of the person owning such property as shown in the records of the office of the clerk. (Added by Stats. 1941, Ch. 79.)
The postal card shall contain a notice to repair the sidewalk so out of repair, and the superintendent of streets shall, immediately upon the mailing of the notice, cause a copy thereof printed on a card of not less than 8 inches by 10 inches in size, to be posted in a conspicuous place on the property. In lieu of posting a copy of the mailed notice on the property as provided in this section, the superintendent of streets may, not less than seven days nor more than 10 days after the mailing of the first postal card notice, mail an additional postal card, postage prepaid, marked “Second Notice,” to the person to whom the first postal card notice was addressed. The second notice shall otherwise contain the material required by this article, but shall not extend the time for commencing repairs specified in Section 5614.
(Amended by Stats. 1969, Ch. 211.)
Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites

Page 192 of 460 ends

The notice shall particularly specify what work is required to be done, and how it is to be done, and what materials shall be used in the repair and shall further specify that if the repair is not commenced within two weeks after notice is given and diligently and without interruption prosecuted to completion, the superintendent of streets shall make such repair, and the cost of the same shall be a lien on the property. (Amended by Stats. 1953, Ch. 798.)
The legislative body may adopt a resolution determining that bonds shall be issued and assessments collected and enforced pursuant to Part 5 of this division. In such event, the notice to repair shall specify that bonds shall be issued to represent the security of the unpaid assessments, payable over a period of not to exceed six years, and shall further recite a maximum rate of interest to be paid on the indebtedness, which shall not exceed 7 percent a year, payable semiannually.
(Amended by Stats. 1968, Ch. 986.)
If the repair is not commenced and prosecuted to completion with due diligence, as required by the notice, the superintendent of streets shall forthwith repair the sidewalk. Upon the written request of the owner of the property facing the sidewalk so out of repair, as ascertained from the last equalized assessment roll of the city, or as shown in the records of the office of the clerk, the superintendent may repair any other portion of the sidewalk fronting on the property that is designated by the owner. The superintendent shall have power to prescribe the form of the written request. The cost of repair work done by request pursuant to this section shall be a part of the cost of repairs for which, pursuant to this chapter, subsequent notices are given, hearings held and assessment and collection procedures are conducted.
(Amended by Stats. 1963, Ch. 648.)
Upon the completion of the repair, the superintendent of streets shall cause notice of the cost of the repair to be given in the manner specified in this article for the giving of notice to repair, which notice shall specify the day, hour and place when the legislative body will hear and pass upon a report by the superintendent of streets of the cost of the repair together with any objections or protests, if any, which may be raised by any property owner liable to be assessed for the cost of such repair and any other interested persons. If bonds are to be issued, the notice shall also contain the information required by Section 5614.1. (Amended by Stats. 1967, Ch. 615.)
Upon the completion of the repair, the superintendent of streets shall prepare and file with the legislative body a report specifying the repairs which have been made, the cost of the repairs, a description of the real property in front of which the repairs have been made and the assessment against each lot or parcel of land proposed to be levied to pay the cost thereof. Any such report may include repairs to any number of parcels of property, whether contiguous to each other or not.
(Added by Stats. 1941, Ch. 79.)
Upon the day and hour fixed for the hearing the legislative body shall hear and pass upon the report of the superintendent of streets, together with any objections or protests which may be raised by any of the property owners liable to be assessed for the work of making such repair and any other interested persons. Thereupon the legislative body may make such revision, correction or modifications in the report as it may deem just, after which, by motion or resolution, the report as submitted, or as revised, corrected or modified, shall be confirmed. The legislative body may adjourn the hearings from time to time. The decisions of the legislative body on all protests and objections which may be made, shall be final and conclusive. (Added by Stats. 1941, Ch. 79.)

Page 193 of 460 ends

Item No. 11
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – REGULAR AGENDA
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: STEVE D. MCCULLEY, CHIEF OF POLICE
DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 2023
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT: “BIKE SAFETY IN SAN MATEO COUNTY: MAKING BICYCLING SAFER IN THE
COUNTY”

RECOMMENDATION
Consider the attached response letter to the San Mateo Grand Jury on their report entitled “Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County” and, if appropriate, authorize the Mayor to sign the response letter.

BACKGROUND
On July 10, 2023, the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury released a report entitled “Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County” (Attachment 1). The purpose and focus of the report are on improving bicycle safety throughout San Mateo County.

The County also has some areas that are primarily recreational biking destinations and areas that accommodate both commuting bicyclists and recreational bicyclists. As a result, each community also assigns a different level of importance to bicycle safety relative to other issues, such as crime, motor vehicle safety and public works improvement projects. And education and enforcement of bicycle laws varies from one jurisdiction to another.

Despite the differences among the jurisdictions, there are several commonalities. One is that cities and law enforcement do not consistently maintain records about bicycle near misses, accidents, or complaints; data is neither broadly available nor consistently maintained. Another commonality is that government entities focused on bicycling and/or improving bicycle safety do not communicate and collaborate with each other often enough, if at all. This makes it difficult to get accurate information on the number and severity of incidents and gauge how safe it is to bicycle in San

Page 194 of 460 ends

Grand Jury Report – Bicycle Safety
SEPTEMBER 20, 2023

Page 2 of 3 ends

Mateo County. Without data, and communication among the municipalities, San Mateo County and its cities and towns lose out on available state and local funding to improve bicycle safety through physical improvement projects. The Town of Atherton is required to respond to all findings and recommendations no later than October 10, 2023.

ANALYSIS
According to the Grand Jury report, to improve bicycle safety and thereby increase ridership, San Mateo County and its Cities need to:

1. Create effective ways to educate bicycle riders and motorists about bicycle rules of the road to enhance predictability.

2. Develop consistent communications among government organizations responsible for bike safety (e.g., between law enforcement and public works).

3. Conduct enforcement details in each jurisdiction to ensure enforcement leads to education.

4. Collect accurate data about accidents and incidents that is crucial to supporting and justifying grant applications and funding from State and local agencies for physical improvements to infrastructure for bicyclists (e.g., connectivity of bicycle routes from one city to another), needed signage, and other engineering improvements.

The attached reply has been prepared for Council consideration and approval (Attachment 2). The Mayor’s draft response Agrees with all applicable findings of the Grand Jury and for each Recommendation notes where the Town is in its implementation of the requirements and best practices.

FISCAL IMPACT
Currently there are no fiscal impacts in response to the Grand Jury responses.

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal Area E – Strengthen Community Engagement and Transparency • Goal Area F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed, and Well-Planned

POLICY FOCUS
The Grand Jury requires that the Town indicate agreement or disagreement with specific findings in the Grand Jury Report. Further, the Grand Jury requires that the Town respond to each of the recommendations indicating whether that recommendation has been implemented, will be implemented in the future (with a specific time frame), whether further analysis is needed (with a specific time frame), or whether it will not be implemented.

Page 195 of 460 ends

Grand Jury Report – Bicycle Safety
SEPTEMBER 20, 2023

Page 3 of 3 ends

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
This item has not been before a Town Committee or Commission

ATTACHMENTS

1. Civil Grand Jury Report “Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County.”

2. Grand Jury Draft Response letter from Mayor Widmer.

Page 196 of 460 ends

Bike Safety in San Mateo County
Making Bicycling Safer in the County
Release Date: July 10, 2023
2022-23 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury

Page 197 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 1
“Biking is one of the few activities that checks all the boxes at once — it’s active, practical, social, sustainable, stress-relieving, fun, and is a great family activity. Biking has the unique ability to elevate the mundane — it turns errands into adventures. More people on bikes keeps our streets safer, our air cleaner and our communities better connected.” Sonia Elkes, 2021 Bike Champion of the Year for San Mateo County Bay Area Bike to Work Website “I often drive up Alpine Road near the Stanford golf course and I believe I would have a head-on crash with oncoming cars if I left a 3-foot margin between my car and the thoughtless bikers who ride out partially in the road. What is the best advice for that situation?” Comment on Bicyclists Can Now Report 3’ Rule Violations Online in The Almanac 5/12/2023. “On the afternoon of Monday, April 10, bicyclist Lester Legarda was fatally struck by a driver on Cañada Road, a rural route popular among walkers, equestrians, and bicyclists. Details of the crash scene suggest that the collision speed was high. One solution to prevent future tragedies along Cañada is tantalizingly simple — reduce the 50-mph speed limit. Sure, drivers will likely continue to exceed the speed limit. But just like the paint on the road that defines where drivers are supposed to drive, posted speed limits set expectations for acceptable driver behavior.” Reduce the speed limit on Canada Road San Mateo Daily Journal 04/20/23.

Page 198 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 2
Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County ISSUE
As bicycle riding has become an ever more meaningful form of transportation, especially with the popularization of eBikes, the demand by County residents for safe micro-mobility solutions has soared. Are San Mateo County and its municipalities positioned to respond to safety concerns and meet those demands?

SUMMARY
Whether for commuting or recreational purposes, residents in every jurisdiction of San Mateo County (SMC), as well as from the surrounding Bay Area counties, use bicycles. Because bicycles are widely available, for some the only mode of getting to and from work and jobs, and ridden in every jurisdiction, bicycle safety has become an increasingly important issue for SMC and its cities and towns. Without greater focus on bike safety, the number of riders will remain low, because people will avoid bicycling when they don’t feel safe. The benefits of increasing bicycle riding are important to all residents of San Mateo County: reducing motor vehicles, healthy lifestyle and an inexpensive form of transportation. Accordingly, San Mateo County, and its cities and towns have a responsibility to make it safe for drivers and pedestrians, as well as bicyclists.

Due to differences in terrain, population density, and existing infrastructure, the 20 different municipalities and the unincorporated portions of the County have differing bicycle safety needs and requirements. Some cities are very hilly, making commuting to work, school, or transit stations nearly impossible. Others are more urban and accommodate many more commuting bicyclists. The County also has some areas that are primarily recreational biking destinations and areas that accommodate both commuting bicyclists and recreational bicyclists. As a result, each community also assigns a different level of importance to bicycle safety relative to other issues, such as crime, motor vehicle safety and public works improvement projects. And education and enforcement about bicycle laws varies from one jurisdiction to another.

Page 199 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 3
To improve bicycle safety and thereby increase ridership, San Mateo County and its cities and towns need to:

1. Create effective ways to educate bicycle riders and motorists about bicycle rules of the road to enhance predictability.

2. Develop consistent communications among government organizations responsible for bike safety (e.g., between law enforcement and public works).

3. Conduct enforcement details in each jurisdiction to ensure enforcement leads to education.

BACKGROUND
Why is bike safety an important topic?
Statistically, the safer a person feels riding a bike, the more likely they will use it as regular transportation; both as a commuter and a recreational user.

Fifty-three percent of Americans worry about being hit by a motor vehicle when riding a bicycle; 47% say they would be more likely to ride a bike if pathways were physically separated from motor vehicles.1
However, bicycle accident statistics, though better than in 1998, averaged 231 fatalities and injuries over the last ten years. The average was 203 fatalities the last three years, but the drop includes the pandemic shutdown and more people working from home. The source of the recent data is the California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS2) database, managed by the California Highway Patrol. All law enforcement agencies are required to submit accident data to the database on a regular basis.

A 2002-2003 SMC Civil Grand Jury titled, Bike Safety in San Mateo County3, questioned whether San Mateo County and the cities adequately consider and support safe bicycle travel? At that time, it was estimated that 46% of Americans bicycle for pleasure and 300,000 County residents bicycle at least occasionally. Commuting by bicycle was less than 1% in the County.

That year’s Grand Jury found that bicycle infrastructure for safe travel needed improvement, but funding was an issue. It also found that communication and planning between the county and the cities on bicycle projects and safety could be improved. And that throughout SMC, bicycle safety was not a high priority. The primary recommendation of the report was the county, and all cities should develop a long-term strategic bicycle and safety plan.

1 People for Bikes: https://www.peopleforbikes.org/news/building-for-tomorrow 2 https://iswitrs.chp.ca.gov/Reports/jsp/logout.do
3 https://www.sanmateocourt.org/court_divisions/grand_jury/2002reports.php?page=02SMC-Bicycle.html

Page 200 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 4
A few things have changed since then.

Over the years, the focus of cities and the county on improving bike and pedestrian forms of transportation has increased:
● Bicycle maps and routes are now generally available online. ● The City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) updated their San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan in 20114and 20215. ● California enacted Assembly Bill 1358, California Complete Streets Act of 20086, requiring all cities and counties to include complete streets policies as part of any substantial revision to the circulation element of their general plans; and cities and the County have adopted these complete streets policies, noting these policies in their Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans, or Active Transportation Plans. ● SMC and most of its municipalities have created and consistently upgraded their Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans.
● Unincorporated San Mateo County has created an Active Transportation Plan7(Active Transportation is a term often used to cover walking, bicycling, and other motorized devices as a primary mode of transportation).
● C/CAG, Unincorporated SMC and some cities have created Bike and Pedestrian Advisory Committees to address active transportation improvements, safety issues, and other citizen related requests.

Meanwhile, the number of bicyclists in San Mateo County has not increased since 2002, according to the California Household Travel Survey, which is regularly used for data on the number of bicyclists in a community, but is restricted to commuting.

The 2002 and 2012 surveys showed only 1% of SMC’s population rides bicycles as a form of transportation. Looking at the various municipalities’ Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans, and the surveys and counts discussed in the plans, bicycle commute ridership still hovers at approximately 1% within SMC.

It is important to note that the number of people in SMC using bicycles in lieu of a car has not increased in 20 years. This is in contrast to the estimated number of recreational bicyclists (46%) in SMC, who also use streets and bicycle paths and expect a safe ride8.

4 https://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/CBPP_Main-Report__Sept2011_FINAL.pdf 5 https://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/6_A1_San-Mateo-County-Comprehensive-Bicycle-andPedestrian-Plan-Update-Final-Plan.pdf 6 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1351-1400/ab_1358_bill_20080930_chaptered.pdf 7 https://www.smcsustainability.org/livable-communities/active-transportation/unincorporated-smc-activetransportation-plan/ 8 https://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/6_A1_San-Mateo-County-Comprehensive-Bicycle-andPedestrian-Plan-Update-Final-Plan.pdf

Page 201 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 5
However, even with roadway and signage improvements over the past 20 years, there is much San Mateo cities and the county can do to improve bicycle safety.

DISCUSSION
The merits of bicycle riding may seem self-evident, but a wide range of research reveals often surprising benefits to local economies, personal health, the environment, traffic congestion, and pedestrian safety that are unique to bicycle friendly communities.

Health Benefits
Bicycle riding contributes to both physical and mental health. Regular exercise such as cycling can help prevent heart issues9such as stroke, heart attack, high blood pressure, and may also help prevent and manage type 2 diabetes.10 Riding a bicycle is good for cognitive health and emotional well-being and can ease feelings of stress, depression, or anxiety.11 All in all, bicycling for only 30 minutes a day reduces a person’s chances of diabetes, dementia, depression, colon cancer, cardiovascular disease, anxiety and high blood pressure by 40 percent or more.12
The World Health Organization has found that “If every adult EU citizen walked or cycled for 15 extra minutes per day, we’d have 100,000 fewer people dying prematurely, each year.”13 Environmental Benefits
Among the most obvious benefits of cycling is its benign effects on the environment. A solo driver in an average car releases about 1.1 pounds of CO2 per mile.14 A standard compact to midsize car that travels 12,000 miles will emit 11,000 pounds of CO2.15 The average car produces about 1.3 billion cubic yards of polluted air over the course of its lifespan plus worn tire particles, brake wear, and the emissions from other materials in the car also contribute to air pollution.16 Recent research in Europe found that traveling by bicycle instead of by car once a day decreases your transportation carbon footprint by 67%.17

9 https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/exercise-and-the-heart 10 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4942105/ 11https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/minding-the-body/201505/bicycling-can-sharpen-your-thinking-and-improve-yourmood 12 https://www.exerciseismedicine.org/assets/page_documents/EIMFactSheet_2014.pdf 13 https://ecf.com/news-and-events/news/walking-and-cycling-reduce-congestion 14 https://www.sharetheroad.ca/what-are-the-environmental-traffic-congestion-benefits-of-cycling--s16223 15 https://www.treehugger.com/cars-are-causing-air-pollution-we-breathe-new-study-finds-4856825 16 https://www.scholaradvisor.com/essay-examples-for-college/bicycle-helps-reduce-air-pollution/ 17 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920921000687

Page 202 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 6
Traffic
As active transportation choices like walking and bicycling gain attention and popularity, researchers are beginning to investigate the role these travel modes can play in reducing traffic congestion.18 Studies show that measures taken to promote bicycling and walking have a positive effect on congestion.

Research in Washington, DC identified a causal effect of the presence of a bike-share station on traffic congestion. The result is a 2-to-3% reduction in traffic congestion that can be attributed to the bike-share station within the sample.19
Economic Benefits
Among the more surprising findings is the positive economic impact from an increase in bicycle usage but studies show that the bicycle-related economy creates jobs, economic activity, and cost savings.20
Bicycle trails and facilities have a positive, statistically significant impact on home values; a 2006 study in Minneapolis found that the median home values rose $510 for every quarter mile they were located closer to an off-street bikeway.21
Indianapolis’ Cultural Trail, an 8-mile network of separated bike and pedestrian lanes, has reinvigorated a number of struggling business districts and sparked a whopping $1 billion in increased property values.22
And in an era when streets and sidewalks across the county are in various states of disrepair, bicycle projects can significantly reduce the cost of maintaining and expanding our transportation systems.23 Even protected bicycle lanes are “dirt cheap to build compared to road projects,” says Gabe Klein, a partner at Fontinalis, a venture capitalist firm founded by Ford Motor Co. Chairman Bill Ford. Cities everywhere need to be more efficient about the money they spend to move people. "We need to get more use from the streets we already have.” Research indicates that investments in cycling infrastructure generate more jobs per dollar spent than investments in road-only infrastructure; cycling projects create a total of 11.4 local jobs for each $1 million spent while road-only projects create 9.6 jobs per $1 million.24

18 https://kawarthanow.com/2019/01/17/reduce-traffic-congestion-bikes-can-do-that 19 https://www.resources.org/archives/commentary-does-bicycle-infrastructure-reduce-traffic-congestion/ 20 https://railyards.com/blog/7-benefits-of-bike-friendly-communities 21 https://smartcity.press/bicycle-infrastructure-in-smart-city/ 22 https://indyculturaltrail.org/2015/07/23/economic-impact-figures-released/ 23https://www.aarp.org/livable-communities/getting-around/info-2016/why-bicycling-infrastructure-is-good-for-people-whodont-ride-bikes.html 24 https://www.sharetheroad.ca/what-are-the-environmental-traffic-congestion-benefits-of-cycling--s16223

Page 203 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 7
Bicycle friendly communities are important to millennial job seekers and functional bicycle infrastructures help companies attract talent. “States and cities are competing for the most mobile generation ever and so the job creators and the innovators are really pushing for these amenities.”25
Safety
The most comprehensive study of bicycle and road safety to date finds that building safe facilities for cyclists is one of the biggest factors in road safety for everyone. Bicycling infrastructure -- specifically, separated and protected bike lanes -- leads to fewer fatalities and better road-safety outcomes for all road users.26
Davis, CA was the first city to gain “platinum” status by the League of American Bicyclists and is often referred to as the “bicycle capital of America.” From 1996 to 2007, Davis only had nine fatal road crashes. Despite having the largest percentage of bike commuters in the United States, none of these accidents involved a bicyclist. With a fatal crash rate of less than 1.5 per 100,000 residents, far fewer people are killed on Davis’ roads than in the U.S. as a whole, which averaged

14.5 fatalities per 100,000 residents.

Portland, OR, another platinum bicycling city, saw a nearly 50% decrease in road fatalities as it increased its bicycle mode share from 1.2% in 1990 to 5.8% in 2000. Bike friendly communities are safer for all road users, no matter what type of transportation is being used.

Social Benefits
Finally, bicycle riding as an alternative to car travel is associated with a number of social benefits, including increased social interaction, social networks, and social capital.27 A bicycle rider has a completely different relationship with their environment than those who are cocooned in their cars.

When communities invest in bicycle infrastructure, everyone benefits. Overall, bicycle commuters are healthier and bicycle-friendly streets are safer for everyone on the road. Bicycle friendly communities reap economic benefits including more retail activity and increased home values. The evidence is clear: bicycling brings big benefits to communities who embrace it.

Status Today
Twenty years after the first San Mateo Grand Jury report, significant gaps remain in jurisdictions’ approach to bicycle safety:

25 https://railyards.com/blog/7-benefits-of-bike-friendly-communities 26 https://www.cnu.org/sites/default/files/marshallw_cnu18.pdf 27 https://www.peoplepoweredmovement.org/benefits-of-biking-walking/

Page 204 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 8
● San Mateo County and its municipalities’ characteristics make it difficult to create a consistent approach to bicycle safety.
● The use of bicycle safety education as a tool to increase safety for bicyclists and motorists is underutilized Countywide.
● Communication and coordinated planning across city lines is the exception, rather than the norm. Reporting of bicycle-related incidents is inconsistent throughout the county. ● Enforcement of bicycle laws, for motorists and bicyclists, is inconsistent and not prioritized.

Bicycle Safety in San Mateo County Cities
Each city and town in San Mateo County is unique and has a different relationship with bicycle use and safety. These variations include:
● Topography
● Objectives and priorities re bicycles and ridership
● Safety Perception
● Infrastructure
● Impact of eBikes
● Role of enforcement in bicycle safety.

For example:

Woodside and Portola Valley: Woodside and Portola Valley are hill communities with narrow roads. Woodside has a very active Circulation Committee which keeps a close eye on large bicycling events in the community and Portola Valley is focused on managing bicyclists on the weekend. But in both cases, the communities concentrate on ensuring quality of life for residents. They both see mostly recreational bicyclists.

Woodside has invested as much as $1 million to ensure a “safe route to school” for the children. However, the communities don’t make a strong effort to track riders or accidents. In both communities the Sheriff’s Office, which is their policing arm, enforces rules at some problem locations, but not regularly.

Hillsborough: Hillsborough is a relatively insular community by nature of its location and topography. It has no commercial districts and is, to a large degree, rather hilly. The view on bicyclists is very much a neighborhood view: meaning the expectation is that if there are problems with bicyclists they are brought up by members of the neighborhoods.

The primary focus on any kind of organized bicycling safety activity is efforts to teach children bicycle safety and safe routes to school at the beginning of the school year.

Belmont: Until quite recently, the City has been completely focused on ensuring that the community is comfortable for single family dwellings. However, areas close to El Camino Real are more commercial and have denser housing. The community now has both recreational and commuting bicyclists using the roads. While Belmont does have a bicycle master plan and holds an annual bike safety program for children and teenagers,

Page 205 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 9
more needs to be done. The City needs to obtain funding from external Federal, State and County sources to do more.

Half Moon Bay: Possibly more than any other community in San Mateo County, Half Moon Bay has a sophisticated, complex relationship with bicyclists. On the one hand, Half Moon Bay attracts many visitors -- both vacationers and visitors from other Bay Area communities; and on the other hand, it has a robust population of residents who use their bicycles to get to work, school, and stores. Moreover, while Half Moon Bay has many surface streets, it is dominated by Highways 1 and 92 which have many challenging safety issues. As a result, the community has a bicycle master plan that focuses on bicycle safety and traffic planning. Despite this very proactive approach, the City deals with sometimes devastating safety issues. However, it appears that concern for bicycle safety is shared by many of the participants in the community.

San Mateo: The City of San Mateo updated its bicycle master plan in 2020. As a result, the City has focused on a variety of contemporaneous issues. These include working to develop a roadway network which could accommodate both bicycles and other types of active transportation. The City believes that it still skews toward recreational bicycling but is finding that more people want to use bicycles as a way of getting around. The master plan covers some education issues such as safe routes to school and safe bicycling for seniors. The plan does not talk about safety per se but addresses it from the vantage point of education. Though the City is focused on these matters it still recognizes that there's more education to be done about the rules of the road for bicyclists.

Unincorporated San Mateo County: Large areas of San Mateo County are small towns, private land, and open space, bisected, primarily, by two lane roads and highways. To address bicycle safety in these areas, the county created the Unincorporated San Mateo County Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee. Though there is no explicit Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, they do contribute to the SMC Active Transportation plan. The Committee makes recommendations regarding bicycle and pedestrian related grants, but expressed frustration with money not being shared equitably. Additionally, the Committee inputs bicyclist’s feedback. They are concerned with the number of incidents between motorists and bicyclists that are not addressed by law enforcement. The Committee has been working with the County Sheriff to address the problem.

These are just a few examples of San Mateo County and its municipalities' approach to bicycle safety. But because the communities are so diverse, thinking about bicycle safety needs to be broad-minded.

Bicycle Safety Education in SMC: Not just for cyclists
Since bicycle safety is crucial to encouraging bicycle usage, it follows that bicycle safety education is an essential component of the bicycle safety equation.

Page 206 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 10
According to the US Department of Transportation: “Educating people about safe bicycling and walking, enforcing laws that make it easier and safer for people to bicycle and walk, and encouraging people to bicycle and walk, may help increase walking and bicycling activity, especially when combined with infrastructure improvements.”28 Moreover, as noted on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Bicycle Safety web page, “A large percentage of crashes can be avoided if motorists and cyclists follow the rules of the road and watch out for each other.”29
In San Mateo County, much of the focus on bicycle safety and bicycle safety education is focused on ensuring safe routes to schools for children. Several communities, as detailed below, have much more comprehensive approaches to bicycle safety education in their Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans. Here are some examples:
● Burlingame (Excerpt from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan) Policy 11: Educate people walking, bicycling, and driving, and the general public about roadway safety and the benefits of bicycling and walking.

11.1: Support the continuation and expansion of bicycle safety education programs such as those taught by Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition and the San Mateo County Office of Education.

Policy 12: Encourage Burlingame public schools to participate in the Safe Routes to School program organized by the San Mateo County Office of Education. ● Brisbane’s Master Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan examples:
“Policy 4.A.5: Provide support for programs that educate drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians about their rights and responsibilities, as well as traffic education and safety programs for adults and youth.”
“Programs support bicycling and walking by providing encouragement to those considering bicycling and walking, education for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians about safe and appropriate sharing of streets and roads, and enforcement of traffic laws that help ensure the safety of vulnerable road users.”
● County Sheriff:

The San Mateo County Sheriff’s office publishes a pamphlet, Bicycle Safety30, on the California Vehicle Code sections related to bicycle safety. One City, Woodside, references this document, which could be used by all cities, schools and police

28 https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/ped_focus/docs/fhwasa17050.pdf 29 https://www.nhtsa.gov/road-safety/bicycle-safety
30 https://www.woodsidetown.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/community/page/33495/bicycle_safety.pdf

Page 207 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 11
departments to improve bicycle safety education. However, the document is not available on the SMC Sheriff website.
● City of San Mateo:

San Mateo has some support for bicycle use and safety on its City website. The pages are listed in the table below.

EXISTING
Support Program Description Webpage
Bicycle Webpage There is brief text about bike
routes and using a bike with
public transport on the City’s
webpage
http://www/cityofsanmateo.org/
2125/Parking-andTransportation
Bicycle Education
Events
The city’s Public Works
Department hosts an annual
bike rodeo
http://www.cityofsanmateo.org/
3736/Bike-Rodeo
Moving to Excellent Bike Safety Education in all SMC Cities Overall, the approach to bicycle safety education in SMC communities is inconsistent. Several of the master plans recognize that bicycle safety education is about teaching motorists and cyclists of all ages about the guidelines for bicycle safety. Other communities either don’t focus much on education or are focused exclusively on “Safe Routes to School”.

Nonetheless, there are a handful of programs identified in the table below that creatively address bicycle safety, which San Mateo County and its municipalities should consider adopting.

Page 208 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 12

RECOMMENDED FOR ALL SMC CITIES
Support Program Description Webpage
Establish child and
adult education
programs
Identify and implement
education programs for
children and adults that build
bicyclists’ confidence, done
in coordination with the Parks
and Recreation Department,
Police or Local Schools.
https://www.portlandoregon.go
v/transportation/article/565224
http://www/cityofsanmateo.org/
2125/Parking-andTransportation
Establish Safe
Routes to School
Funding
Establish a stable funding
source for Safe Routes to
School programming
https://www.metro.net/projects/
sr_ts/fund-your-program
Implement and
promote
demonstration
projects
Implement short-term, highvisibility bicycle
demonstration or ‘pop-up’
projects to serve as models
that can be applied throughout
the city. Market bicycle
safety.
https://transportation.bellevuew
a.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server
_4779004/File/Transportation/P
ublications/PBII_Demo%20Bik
eway%20Brochure_20180205.
pdf
Provide safety
education program
for users of all
modes
Provide safety education
programs or communications
campaigns for people driving,
bicycling, walking, and using
micro mobility devices that
encourage safe travel
behaviors.
http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/
Create a robust
bicycling webpage
Develop and maintain a
content rich mobility
webpage(s) on the
County/City website and
communicate how to reach
city destinations by bike, on
foot or on micro-mobility
devices. Include information
on these transportation
options.
https://www.metro.net/riding/g
o-bike
http://www/cityofsanmateo.org/
2125/Parking-andTransportation

Page 209 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 13
Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plans and Advisory Committees: Planning Across the County The 2002 SMC Grand Jury Report recommended that all municipalities create Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans. As a best practice, the municipalities were encouraged to form Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committees.

To date, almost all San Mateo County jurisdictions or cities have Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans, or Active Transportation Plans. Most, if not all of these plans, align with recommendations from the 2011 C/CAG’s San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. The 2021 update of C/CAG’s plan enhances and adds to the 2011 C/CAG San Mateo County plan, but most of the cities and towns have not updated their plans to be consistent with the 2021 plan. (See Appendix D for a complete list of San Mateo County’s Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plans.)
The cities’ bicycle and pedestrian master plans help each city by identifying strategies to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety. The plans recommend improvements for roadway connectivity for bicyclists and pedestrians, within each city as well as with neighboring cities.

Numerous plans reference the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition and the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) as organizations that have certified instructors for bicycle safety education. At least several of the plans also discuss the LAB Bicycle Friendly Community Report Card to which five SMC cities and San Mateo County belong. The plans list potential State and Federal funding for projects that improve safety and roadway connectivity and make clear the importance of annually evaluating and tracking progress against objectives.

However, in SMC, County committees and municipalities do not always work together to generate consistent plans that meet C/CAG’s goal for a Countywide bicycle backbone. Though C/CAG does have an advisory committee which includes representatives from municipalities, it does not have control over what individual municipalities decide to do regarding grant applications, infrastructure projects for better bicycle and pedestrian safety and education initiatives. If the municipalities endeavored to work together to prioritize projects and programs that are consistent with C/CAG’s priorities, it would benefit all of San Mateo County, especially with respect to providing north-south connectivity between municipalities.

Metrics: If you don’t measure it, you can’t improve it.

One important measure of bicycle safety is arriving safely at a destination. This is usually reflected in the negative; that is, the number of fatalities and injuries during a calendar year versus the number of successful bicycle trips.

In San Mateo County, the cities and county rely heavily on data supplied to the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to state the number of fatalities and injuries. The CHP then maintains a database, SWITRS (California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System), which is accessible

Page 210 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 14
to the public. And, UC Berkeley maintains a website, TIMS31 (Transportation Injury Mapping System), which can further refine the raw data from SWITRS.

However, relying on this data to evaluate Bicycle Safety is problematic.

Law enforcement agencies in the County submit their bicycle accident data to SWITRS based on incidents that result in fatality or injury. However, there are bicycle accidents resulting in injury which don’t make it into SWITRS because law enforcement is not called. Some examples are bicyclists being forced off the road by motor vehicles, collision near misses and, of course, bicyclist error. Consequently, the actual number of bicycle accidents is underreported and, more importantly, the list of accident locations is not complete. Cyclists that have an incident that does not involve either the police or the fire department do not have a consistent means to log their experience. That data goes unreported. And this goes both ways; there is no means for a motorist to complain about bicycle riders’ unsafe behavior.

Countywide there is no uniform metric to measure Bicycle Safety. Without such a measure, it’s impossible to assess progress while building infrastructure, enforcing laws, and educating everyone in safety principles.

An obvious metric is bicycle accidents as recorded by SWTRS and online reports, but there is another metric which evaluates the complex equation that results in safe bicycling: Bicycle Friendly America Certification32.

The League of American Cyclists is a national organization dedicated to creating “safer roads, stronger communities and a Bicycle Friendly America for everyone.” This is a grassroots organization dedicated since 1880 to protecting the right to safe and enjoyable bicycling. A valuable achievement of this organization is establishing the Bicycle Friendly America (BFA) certification for cities and counties. This consists of a very detailed application33 that a city or county official fills out to get a comprehensive rating of bicycle safety. BFA defines bicycle safety using 5 E’s:
● Equity and Accessibility: A bicycle-friendly America for everyone ● Engineering: Creating safe and creative places to ride and park ● Education: Giving people of all ages and abilities the skills and confidence to ride ● Encouragement: Creating a strong bike culture that welcomes and celebrates bicycling ● Evaluation and Planning: Planning for bicycling as a safe and viable transportation option [Note that Enforcement, a common element in the 5 E’s of safety, is not included in the BFA definition.]

31https://tims.berkeley.edu/summary.php?showArea=city&expandTables=false&injury=3&yearRange=3&showMap =crashes
32 https://bikeleague.org/bfa/
33 https://bicyclefriendly.secure-platform.com/a/organizations/main/home

Page 211 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 15
The application covers the BFA 5 E’s and investigates what it calls the 10 building blocks of a Bicycle Friendly Community (BFC). Finally, the rating includes steps to reaching the next level of excellence. Oakland in 2022, for example, received a GOLD rating Report Card34 having been BRONZE in 2010 and SILVER in 2014. The following cities and SMC have received the following ratings:
● Menlo Park35: GOLD: 2017
● Redwood City36: BRONZE: 2016
● San Carlos37: BRONZE: 2016
● San Mateo38: BRONZE: 2016
● South San Francisco39: BRONZE: 2018
● San Mateo County40: BRONZE: 2016
The BFC Report Card is a valuable metric that all cities and the County should make use of. If SMC cities develop the information necessary to answer objective and comprehensive questions about bicycle safety, each jurisdiction would have a consistent metric that can be used to measure bicycle safety progress across the County.

Law Enforcement and Bicycle Safety
Laws regarding the operation of bicycles are in the California Vehicle Code (CVC), but in general, bicycles are governed by the same rules of the road as motor vehicles.

SMC law enforcement organizations are concerned that there is currently no way for them to track bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle accidents, from near misses to actual contact, that did not require police involvement. And, even if an incident or infraction is reported, an officer may or may not go out to speak with the complainant.

Other than the initial report, there is no single repository in SMC to store and retrieve information regarding bicycle-related citations or enforcement of bicycle law so it can be used in the future.

And perhaps most importantly, the enforcement of laws, regarding motorists and bicyclists, is inconsistent due to competing priorities and the requirement that a citation requires an incident be witnessed by an officer.

34 https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Fall_2022_ReportCard_Oakland_CA.pdf 35 https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Fall_2017_ReportCard_Menlo_Park_CA.pdf 36 https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Spring_2016_ReportCard_Redwood_City_CA.pdf 37 https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Fall_2016_ReportCard_San_Carlos_CA.pdf 38 https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Fall_2016_ReportCard_San_Mateo_CA.pdf 39https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Fall_2018_ReportCard_South_San_Francisco_CA.p df
40https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Spring_2016_ReportCard_San_Mateo_County_CA.p df

Page 212 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 16
Conflicting Priorities
Law enforcement prioritizes assets based on the needs of the community, as well as their operating budget, when it comes to providing services. While public and political prioritization of bicycle safety issues may come up from time to time, calls for service are always prioritized.

This results in minimal officer resources dedicated to bicycle safety.

Police forces will:
● Focus resources or staff on bicycle safety, if there is an uptick in accidents at a particular location, citizen requests/calls, or requests from a jurisdiction’s public works or traffic departments to focus on certain locations; or
● Provide teams to schools and special events for bicycle safety education ● Much less often, assign their police officers to bicycle safety duty exclusively (some police departments do have officers that patrol on bicycles).

In addition, law enforcement agencies do not always enforce eBike laws, but this is mostly due to the popularity of eBikes being ahead of law enforcement policies.

Because of these conflicting priorities, and limited staff, enforcement of bicycle laws pertaining to motorists as well as bicyclists appears to be underreported.

Policing Bicycles and eBikes
Law enforcement departments in the county are very aware of the importance of bicycle safety.

Common sense says people generally want the streets to be safe for motor vehicles which translates to most officer resources going to motor vehicle enforcement.

It’s possible that safer bicycle riding could lead to fewer cars and free up police resources for more pressing issues.

The New 3’ Law for Motorists and Bicycles
In January 2023, California amended the California Vehicle Code (CVC). The new law (AB. 1909) requires all motorists to give a bicyclist three feet of clearance when passing on the lefthand side of the bicyclist or (depending on the width of the road) reduce speed appropriately, when passing. (See CVC: 21750 (b) (c) (d)). This is particularly crucial on narrow two-lane roads where there are many reports of bicyclists being forced off the road or hit by motor vehicles.

Hampering the situation is the requirement that a citation can only be written if the incident is witnessed by the officer. With the advent of helmet-worn cameras, cyclists have attempted to record these incidents with the hope that the recording can be used as “visual evidence”. But this evidence, post incident, cannot be used to issue a citation.

The San Mateo County Sheriff’s Department recently announced it will allow the public to submit these incidents on the Sheriff’s website.41 These reports have since resulted in the

41https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2023/05/12/bicyclists-can-now-report-3-foot-rule-violations-online-in-sanmateo-county

Page 213 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 17
department sending a violation letter to the offending motorist; this is not a citation. However, only incidents that occur in unincorporated San Mateo County, Woodside, Portola Valley, San Carlos, Half Moon Bay, and Millbrae can use this online resource.

Citations vs. Reprimands for Education Purposes:

It is at the officer’s discretion, when addressing a law infraction, to issue a citation or give a reprimand. One advantage of a reprimand is that it creates an opportunity to educate. With officers focusing on education, these brief encounters, cumulatively, can do a lot to improve bicycle safety, for bicyclists and motorists. But only if these reprimand stops are recorded officially can an accurate picture of bicycle safety be established.

FINDINGS
F1. Bicycle policy and the approach to ensuring/improving bicycle safety is not consistent across San Mateo County due, at least in part, to:
a. Topography
b. Urban vs. suburban environments
c. Types of bicyclists (commuter, recreational)
d. Varying levels of enforcement of bicycle laws
e. Differing knowledge of bicycle laws and safe practices.

F2. Bicycle ridership as an alternative means of transportation (e.g., commuting to work, school, or transit hubs, running errands) is not increasing due, at least in part, to perceived safety issues.

F3. Bicycle accidents and incidents (such as near misses) are underreported, if reported at all.

F4. Only bicycle accidents or incidents that trigger a 911 call are consistently logged in the State (SWITRS) database and law enforcement agencies do not log bicycle accident data consistently.

F5. The amount of enforcement of laws, as they pertain to bicyclists and how motorists and bicyclists interact, is inconsistent due to other priorities (e.g., criminal enforcement and general automobile traffic) and the requirement that a citation can generally only be written if the violation is witnessed by an officer.

F6. There is no official metric in San Mateo County and its cities to evaluate how safe it is to ride a bicycle.

F7. Bicycle safety education, for the bicyclist, pedestrians and motorists, is not consistently offered across San Mateo County.

F8. Communication between various entities with responsibility for bicycle safety, including Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committees (BPACs), Law Enforcement, City Transportation Planning, and Public Works departments, is not formalized, resulting in inefficiencies, and missed opportunities (e.g., funding for improvements, shared bike safety education, or improving signage).

Page 214 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 18
F9. City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans or Active Transportation Plans, have not been adopted/created by all SMC cities.

RECOMMENDATIONS
R1. By December 2023, all law enforcement agencies and the County Sheriff should submit bicycle related data to SWITRS monthly, and regularly post and update their websites with all reported bicycle accident data.

R2. By December 2023, all law enforcement agencies should begin sending warning letters to motorists for violations of the 3 ft. law.

R3. By June 3, 2024, all law enforcement agencies should provide a means for citizens to report bicycle-related incidents that are not currently reported to law enforcement, similar to the SMC Sheriff’s Department Online Crime Reporting portal.

R4. By June 3, 2024 each city, town, and unincorporated SMC should offer a bike safety education program for riders and motorists about the laws and safety facts related to bicycles on the road.

R5. By June 3, 2024, each city, town, and unincorporated SMC should update or generate a new Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (or Active Transportation Plan) if their current plan is older than five years; consistent with the 2021 C/CAG San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan.

R6. By June 3, 2024, each city, town, and the county should apply (or reapply) online to generate the Bicycle Friendly Community Report Card.

R7. By February 1, 2024, the County should meet with cities within the County that are willing to participate, to consider establishing a regional effort that integrates the cities’ bicycle plans and to discuss how the cities and County could work together to apply for grant opportunities as a region.

REQUEST FOR RESPONSES
Pursuant to Penal Code Section 933.05, the Civil Grand Jury requests responses from the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, County Sheriff and all 20 cities and towns’ governing bodies for each Finding and Recommendation.

The governing bodies should be aware that their comments or responses must be conducted subject to the Brown Act's notice, agenda, and open meeting requirements.

RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS
California Penal Code Section 933.05, provides (emphasis added):
(a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following:

Page 215 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 19
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding; in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons, therefore.
(b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefore.

Page 216 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 20

METHODOLOGY
The Grand Jury used a variety of tools to obtain information regarding bicycle riding and safety in San Mateo County:
● Documents: The Bike and Pedestrian Master Plans that cities use to explain approaches to planning, prioritizing projects, and re-engineering their communities to make riding and walking easier and safer. These documents came with a variety of titles:
o Bike and Pedestrian Master Plans
o Active Transportation Plans
o Micro-Mobility Plans
o Transportation Plans
● Internet: Almost all the historical and current information (including the availability of documents) regarding bicycle safety came from internet searches. Information from those searches was verified.
● Survey: The Grand Jury sent a survey in December 2022 using Google Forms to understand whether the cities believe eBikes were an issue in their communities. The results helped in defining the broader issue of bicycle safety. o The survey questions and results are in Appendix A.
o Participants: The survey was sent to all the cities in SMC and, specifically, the City Managers. Many chose to have the chief of police of their city fill out the survey. Two cities did not respond to the survey.
● Interviews: The survey helped the Grand Jury develop a list of individuals for interviews. The questions for the interview came as a result of the investigation’s pivot to the state of bicycle safety in San Mateo County as a general topic. o Participants:
▪ Cities: Belmont, Daly City, Half Moon Bay, Hillsborough, Pacifica, Portola Valley, San Mateo, Woodside
▪ Unincorporated San Mateo County
▪ Police Departments: Burlingame, Foster City, Hillsborough, Redwood City, South San Francisco
▪ Sheriff of SMC
▪ BPACs: CCAG, Unincorporated SMC
▪ CyclistVideoEvidence.com: Craig Davis

Page 217 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 21

GLOSSARY
3 ft. Rule – Motorists must yield at least 3 feet between their vehicle and a bicyclist on all roadways. This rule was amended by State legislation through Assembly Bill 1909, approved by the Governor in 2022, and commencing January 2024. Additionally, this bill requires a vehicle that is passing or overtaking a vehicle to move over to an adjacent lane of traffic, as specified, if one is available, before passing or overtaking the bicycle.

Active Transportation - A means of getting around that is powered by human energy, primarily walking and bicycling.

BFA – Bike Friendly America. A program sponsored by the League of American Bicyclists to evaluate communities with respect to their support for bicycling. As of December 2022, 501 communities are certified.

BFC – Bike Friendly Community. A Bike Friendly Awards Report Card that is given to a community that applies for a ranking (i.e., Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum).

BPAC – Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
CATSIP – California Active Transportation Safety Information Pages. An online resource for improving pedestrian and bicycle safety in California. This site is administered by UC Berkeley Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTREC)42. Funding for this program was provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety43, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

C/CAG – City County Association of Governments of San Mateo County Bicycle Roadways
● Bike paths (Class I): also termed shared-use or multi-use paths, are paved rights-of-way for exclusive use by bicyclists, pedestrians and those using non-motorized modes of travel. They are physically separated from vehicular traffic and can be constructed in roadway rights-of-way or exclusive rights-of-way. Bike paths provide critical connections in the city where roadways are absent or are not conducive to bicycle travel. ● Bike lanes (Class II): are defined by pavement striping and signage used to allocate a portion of a roadway for exclusive or preferential bicycle travel. Bike lanes are one-way facilities on either side of a roadway. Whenever possible, bike lanes should be enhanced with treatments that improve safety and connectivity by addressing site-specific issues, such as additional warning or wayfinding signage.
● Bike routes (Class III): provide shared use with motor vehicle traffic within the same travel lane. Designated by signs, bike routes provide continuity to other bike facilities or designate preferred routes through corridors with high demand. Whenever possible, bike

42 http://safetrec.berkeley.edu/
43 http://www.ots.ca.gov/

Page 218 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 22
routes should be enhanced with treatments that improve safety and connectivity, such as the use of "Sharrows" or shared lane markings to delineate the road as a shared-use facility.
● Cycle tracks (Class IV): Also referred to as protected bikeways, are exclusive bike facilities that combine the user experience of a separated path with the on-street infrastructure of a conventional bike lane. A cycle track is physically separated from motor traffic and distinct from the sidewalk. The separation may be in the form of posts, parked cars or a combination of both.
eBike – motorized bicycle that comes in three different classes:
● Class I: Bicycle equipped with a motor that aids only when pedaling and ceases when 20 mph is reached.
● Class II: Same capability as a Class 1 eBike with a throttle-actuated motor. No pedaling required when operated with the throttle.
● Class III: Bicycle equipped with a motor that aids only when pedaling and ceases when 28 mph is reached.

GJ – Grand Jury
MTC – Metropolitan Transportation Commission is the transportation planning, financing, and coordinating agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area.

SHARROW – Sharrows are pavement markings that have been installed on city streets to provide guidance for both bicyclists and vehicles on roadways when sharing the road.

SMC ATP: San Mateo County Active Transportation Plan is a comprehensive framework to guide the development of active transportation projects and programs for walking, bicycling, and other forms of human powered movement for people of all ages and abilities throughout unincorporated County communities.

SWITRS – California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System.

TIMS – Transportation Injury Mapping System developed by the Safe Transportation Research & Education Center at the University of California, Berkeley.

TR-INST Form – Notice to Appear form used by law enforcement for law infractions.

Page 219 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 23
APPENDIX A: Bicycle Safety Best Practices
Bicycle Education Best Practices
There are two excellent examples of California communities that are investing in Bike Safety education: Davis and San Diego.

San Diego Bike Coalition:

This is an excellent reference tool to see all the kinds of bicycle safety education that can be offered and the resources that can be used to teach those courses. Again, the classes range from those for a variety of ages of bicyclists, basic bicycling, bicycle friendly motorist safety, and others.
https://sdbikecoalition.org/our-work/education/
Davis, California:

The City of Davis, CA, which is one of the leading bicycle communities in the US, has several pages of information about bike safety education on its website. https://www.cityofdavis.org/city-hall/public-works-engineering-and-transportation/bikepedestrian-program Two Cities Committed to Bicycling: Portland, Oregon and Davis, California Portland and Davis have become famous for their commitment to supporting bicycling, not only as recreational, but also as a true commuter alternative to motor vehicles and public transportation. Both have received the Platinum rating for a Bicycle Friendly Community from The League of American Bicyclists, while being quite different communities.

Portland is a large city of 622,000 residents with similar topography to the linked San Mateo County cities along El Camino Real: hilly and flat lands, urban centers, urban neighborhoods, suburbia, and major freeways. Portland advertises itself as “Bicycle Friendly” and claimed the highest percentage of bike commuters in US large cities in 2019 at 6% (Portland does annual bike ride census counts). Portland started investing in bicycle infrastructure with the acceptance of the 1973 Portland Bike Plan and the formation of a Bicycle Advisory Committee within the City Transportation Department. Since then, it has created:
● 385 miles of bikeways
● 36 miles of protected bike lanes
● A pedestrian and bicycle only bridge over the Willamette River and protected bike lanes on other bridges
● Intersections with bicycle specific traffic signals

Page 220 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 24
● Bicycle boxes44 at intersections to raise the visibility for motorists turning right ● A Safe Routes for Schools serving 100 schools
● 6500 bike racks to meet increased demand for safe stow of bicycles ● 3 bicycle plans over 40 years that establish policy, goals and a bikeway network ● $60 M spent to 2008 on bicycle infrastructure (one mile of installed freeway costs $60M) Portland’s safety record is very good for a large city: 4.3% of all traffic injury accidents from 2015-2019 are bicycle related. In comparison, San Francisco’s number is 14% for the same period. Portland also does better than San Mateo County (8%) and a representative city, Redwood City (10%).

Davis in California is a small city between San Francisco and Sacramento with a population of 66,800. It has earned a nationwide reputation for supporting bicycles in its community (there is a bicycle on the city logo). The topography of Davis could not be flatter and more conducive to bicycle riding. The current statistics indicate that 20% of Davis’s population commutes on bicycles. In 1967, Davis was the first community in the US to develop dedicated bicycle lanes (a total of 4!). The origins of this project were a couple that had visited the Netherlands, often cited as the most bicycle friendly nation in the world. They were so impressed with the bicycle infrastructure that they started a grassroots movement in Davis to promote safe bicycle riding.

The group had to overcome CA law that did not support bike lanes on city streets, but once the law was revised, Davis proceeded to create bicycle infrastructure throughout the City:
● 63 miles of pathways
● 102 miles of bike lanes
● 75% of roads have a posted speed limit of 25 mph
● Of the 169 miles in the road network, 140 miles of roads are posted at 25 mph or less., 21 miles of roads are posted at between 25 mph and 35 mph, and 8 miles of roads posted over 35 mph
● 1 mile of bicycle boulevards
● 1 mile of cycle track
● 4 miles of buffered bike lanes
● 4,300 bike racks within the City and over 2,000 bike racks downtown ● 25 grade separated crossings. Four overpasses and 21 underpass crossings. Gradeseparated crossings are used to move people on bikes and pedestrians over and under barriers like railroad tracks, busy roads, and the freeway.

Davis’s bicycle accidents with injury (and fatalities) are high for a city of its size. However, the number of total accidents with injury is also very low compared to cities of comparable size. For

44 https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/intersection-treatments/bike-boxes/

Page 221 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 25
example: in 2019 there were 60 bicycle accidents with injury and 221 total vehicle injury accidents resulting in 27% of all vehicular accidents involving a bicycle. Redwood City’s number is 4.8%, but their number of bicycle commuters is less than 1%. If you look at the percentage of accidents with respect to the biking population for 2019, Davis’s percentage is .4% and Redwood City’s percentage is 2.4%. Davis’s safety statistics are very good, given the number of bicycle riders.

Both Portland and Davis are renowned environments for bicycle riders because they committed early to bicycle infrastructure and consistently improved it over the years. The city government and the school systems actively support bicycle education. Both cities conduct counts to determine bicycle use. They are both advocates of the Vision Zero policy to reduce accidents and fatalities. They use the Bicycle Friendly Community evaluation process to assess their progress towards their bicycle plans and goals.

Disclosure: Portland, beginning in 2020, noted a decline in bicycle commuter percentages.

Thinking it was an aberration of the pandemic shutdown, it continued to do annual bike counts.

As of 2022, its percentage had gone down to 3.1%. The current theory of why there has been a decline is assumed to be the increase of work from home. Regardless, Portland continues to make improvements to its bicycle infrastructure and safety.

Page 222 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 26
APPENDIX B: San Mateo County Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan List Jurisdiction Year Name of Report Link to Report
Atherton Jul 2014 Town of Atherton Bicycle
and Pedestrian Master Plan
https://www.ci.atherton.ca.us/Docume
ntCenter/View/1381/AthertonBPMP_Proposed-Final-July2014?bidId= Belmont Nov 2016 City of Belmont
Comprehensive Pedestrian &
Bicycle Plan
https://www.belmont.gov/home/show
publisheddocument/14951/636179086
799900000
Brisbane Feb 2017 Brisbane Pedestrian and
Bicycle Master Plan
https://www.brisbaneca.org/sites/defa
ult/files/fileattachments/public_works/
page/149/bikepedmasterplanappendic
es.pdf
Burlingame Dec 2020 City of Burlingame Bicycle
and Pedestrian Master Plan
https://www.burlingame.org/business
_detail_T54_R154.php
Colma Feb 2021 Colma El Camino Real
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Improvement Plan
https://www.colma.ca.gov/documents/
ecr-improvement-plan/

Page 223 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 27
Jurisdiction Year Name of Report Link to Report
Daly City Feb 2020 Walk Bike Daly City; City of
Daly City Pedestrian and
Bicycle Master Plan 2020
https://dalycity.org/1106/Daly-CityPedestrian-and-Bicycle-MasterEast Palo Alto Oct 2017 2017 East Palo Alto Bicycle Transportation Plan
https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/defaul
t/files/fileattachments/planning/page/2
801/reso_4905_adopting_2017_bicycl
e_transportation_plan.pdf
Half Moon Bay Sep 2019 City of Half Moon Bay
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plan
https://www.half-moonbay.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/224 3/Bicycle-and-Pedestrian-MasterPlan-Final?bidId=
Menlo Park Nov 2020 City of Menlo Park
Transportation Master Plan
https://beta.menlopark.org/Governme
nt/Departments/PublicWorks/TransportationDivision/Bicycling Millbrae 2021/2022 City of Millbrae Active
Transportation Plan
https://www.ci.millbrae.ca.us/home/sh
owpublisheddocument/25807/637787
902014030000

Page 224 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 28
Jurisdiction Year Name of Report Link to Report
Pacifica Feb 2020 City of Pacifica Bicycle &
Pedestrian Master Plan
https://www.cityofpacifica.org/depart
ments/publicworks/engineering/bicycle-pedestrianmaster-plan Redwood City July 2018 Redwood City Moves, A
Comprehensive Assessment
of Transportation with
Redwood City
San Bruno Jul 2016 City of San Bruno Walk 'n
Bike Plan
https://sanbruno.ca.gov/DocumentCen
ter/View/1733/Adopted-San-BrunoWalk-n-Bike-Plan-PDF
San Carlos Jun 2020 City of San Carlos Bicycle
and Pedestrian Master Plan
Final
https://www.cityofsancarlos.org/home
/showpublisheddocument/8139/63815
5282314370000
San Mateo Apr 2020 San Mateo Bicycle Master
Plan April 2020 Final
https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/Docu
mentCenter/View/85445/2020-BikeMaster-Plan_Final_Updated62021?bidId=

Page 225 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 29
Jurisdiction Year Name of Report Link to Report
South San
Francisco
Mar 2022 Active South City: South San
Francisco's Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan Draft
https://activesouthcity.com/wpcontent/uploads/2022/03/SSFActiveSouthCity_PublicDraft_31Mar ch2022_plan_only.pdf
San Mateo
County
2021 2021 C/CAG San Mateo
County Comprehensive
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
https://ccag.ca.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2021/06/San-MateoCounty-Comprehensive-Bicycle-andPedestrian-Plan-Update-FinalPlan.pdf

Page 226 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 30
APPENDIX C: Survey Questions and Results
This is a summary of the responses:

1. Cities and law enforcement do not track bicycle and eBike accident statistics separately; in fact, most respondents did not track eBike specific data at all (94%).

2. Complaints on Class I Bicycle Roadways include speeding and not yielding to pedestrians.

3. Complaints on Class II and III Bicycle Roadways include speeding, improper signaling, mixed use of bikes/eBikes and violation of the 3 ft. Rule.

4. Of 361 citations issued, only 11 were specifically for eBikes. It is impossible to know if there were more eBikes in violation as there is no requirement to ID the type of bicycle when filling out the form.

5. Class 3 eBikes are more powerful machines and have specific laws regarding usage. Only 50% of the respondents were enforcing the Class 3 eBike laws.

6. Complaints and incidents regarding bicycles (from riders or others) come mostly through police reports, but also from input to City Halls, Redwood City’s “app”, city planning, parks and recreation.

7. 1/3 respondents said there has been an increase in complaints regarding bicycles in the last three years (speeding, underage use, reckless behavior, vehicular code).

8. 2/3 of respondents said there had not been an increase in complaints regarding eBikes and 25% said they didn’t know.

9. Civilian bicycle complaints are generally not available to the public (over 50% of respondents).

10. 44% of respondents said they don’t provide bicycle safety education.

11. Enforcement of bicycle-related law is done where appropriate, with discretionary authority. Effort is made to educate at the time of the infraction. Additional enforcement is budget driven.

12. Future planning for the regulation of bicycles and eBikes varies greatly in the responses (see Question II-16 in Appendix A).

List of responses to questions (on the next page):

Page 227 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 31
Number of bicycle accidents in 2022? 212
Number of bicycle accidents in 2020 to the end of 2021? 307

Page 228 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 32
How many Bicycle citations were issued in the last year? 361 How many eBike Citations were issued in the last year? 0 [Comments: this information is not tracked]

Page 229 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 33
If you are enforcing bicycle/eBike law, how is it accomplished? ● Nothing too specific. Enforcement during routine patrol if violations are witnessed. The PD has done a few details and targeted patrols in our downtown area specifically looking for bicycle violations (riding on sidewalks, helmet violations, reckless behavior, etc.). ● The Police Department enforces all laws as appropriate and with necessary and legal discretionary authority.
● Education and Enforcement
● All officers are trained to enforce Vehicle Code and Municipal Code law on bicycles and eBikes.
● On view and by complaint.
● On view and calls for service which result in Education or Enforcement. ● Traffic enforcement resulting in citations and/or verbal warnings/ education to the public. ● Through proactive patrols, directed enforcement and calls for service. ● Most bicycle stops are made for violations occurring on roadways, not on trails or sidewalks. Most bike stops result in education and not citations as evidenced by our low citation numbers.
● Primarily through education and warnings.
● We have not enforced the Bicycle/eBike law because we have not received any comments to date that have triggered the Police Department to enforce.

Page 230 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 34
● By Sheriff patrol.
● We can’t enforce much because of limitations in light of funding and staffing needs

Page 231 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 35

Page 232 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 36
Does your city/town have any future plans regarding the regulation of bicycles and eBikes? ● Not at this time.
● Yes. Additional and improved bike lanes.
● Policies in the newly adopted General Plan supporting alternative modes of transportation, including bikes.
● Awaiting the results of the County-wide eBike pilot to determine best practices to implement.
● Not at this time.
● Not at this time. There have not been complaints/concerns regarding eBikes. ● Not at this time.
● Not that I am aware of.
● No, unless we start receiving complaints.
● Yes, The City of South San Francisco's Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. ● No
● As the Town begins to understand various micro-mobility issues going forward, eBikes being part of that growth pattern, we will plan to prepare plans and outreach material to help educate the bike populations on eBike protocols and safety. ● With the growing development, more bike facilities are being provided for the general public. Public outreach and programs to help educate both current/new users are currently

Page 233 of 460 ends

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 37
being implemented citywide. Buildout of Bike & Pedestrian master plan is underway.

Alameda de Las Pulgas and Ralston 4 designs are underway. Creation of a transportation master plan is also underway. Parks & Recreation Department is developing a Master Plan that also includes implementation of eBikes policies on open space trails. ● Yes
● Nothing specific regulatory changes planned at this time. ● City is currently drafting ordinance language to address the increasing number of electric mobility devices that are present on trails and paths. Many conversations have occurred at BPAC and council (among other committees and commissions) and will continue in 2024.

Page 234 of 460 ends

September 22, 2023
Honorable Nancy L. Fineman
Judge of the Superior Court
c/o Bianca Fasuescu
Hall of Justice
400 County Center. 2nd Floor
Redwood City, CA 94063-1655
Subject: Response of the Town of Atherton to the Civil Grand Jury Report “Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County”
Dear Judge Fineman,
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Civil Grand Jury report entitled “Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County.” The Town of Atherton’s response to both the findings and recommendations are listed below.

Responses to Civil Grand Jury Findings:

F1. Bicycle policy and the approach to ensuring/improving bicycle safety is not consistent across San Mateo County due, at least in part, to:
a. Topography
b. Urban vs. suburban environments
c. Types of bicyclists (commuter, recreational)
d. Varying levels of enforcement of bicycle laws
e. Differing knowledge of bicycle laws and safe practices.

Response: