Belmont City Council
October 13, 2026

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. ITEMS BEFORE 7:00 PM - none

4. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

5. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION -
none

6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS

7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT

ON THE AGENDA

8. COUNCILMEMBER ANNOUNCEMENTS

9. CONSENT BUSINESS

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS - none

11. GENERAL BUSINESS

12. BRIEF VERBAL REPORTS FROM

MEMBERS AND STAFF

13. MATTERS OF

INTEREST/CLARIFICATION

14. ADJOURNMENT
City Council
Meeting Agenda
Tuesday, October 13, 2026 City Council Chambers
City Hall, One Twin Pines Lane, Belmont, California
General order of Business City Council
Julia Mates, Mayor
Cathy Jordan, Vice Mayor
Robin Pang-Maganaris, Councilmember
Gina Latimerlo, Councilmember
Tom McCune, Councilmember
Staff
Afshin Oskoui, City Manager
Scott Rennie, City Attorney
Ken Stenquist, Police Chief
Anais Martinez Aquino, Administrative Service
Director
Grace Castaneda, Finance Director
Laura Russell, Community and Economic
Development Director
Kevin Kobayashi, Parks and Recreation Director
Edric Kwan, Public Works Director
Jozi Plut, City Clerk
MEETING ATTENDANCE:

Council meetings, unless otherwise noted, are broadcast live to Belmont residents on

1. Comcast Cable Channel 27

2. Streamed live via the City's website at www.Belmont.gov

3. ZOOM https://belmont-gov.zoom.us/ Meeting ID: 95745673035

4. Attend the meeting in the Council Chambers, Belmont City Hall 2nd floor PUBLIC COMMENT:

Public in the Council Chamber present the Clerk a request to speak slip found at the table at the rear of the chamber.

If participating virtually use the Raise Hand feature to request to speak.

For dial- in comments, call *67 1-(669) 900-6833 (your phone number will appear on the live broadcast if *67 is not dialed prior to the phone number) enter Meeting ID: 95745673035, and press *9 to request to speak All public comments are subject to a 3-minute time limit unless otherwise determined by the Chair.

Belmont City Council Meeting Agenda October 13, 2026
1 To submit a written public comment:

E-mail [email protected] before the Council discusses the item, noting the agenda topic or number in the subject line. Comments received up to three hours before the meeting will be distributed to the Council and included in the record but not read aloud during the meeting..

The Mayor has the authority to rule any speaker out of order, including speakers during the Public Comment period; If the subject raised is not within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council, during a public hearing or a general business item if the speaker is not presenting testimony or evidence relevant to the matter or if the speaker becomes disruptive to the proceedings and conduct of the meeting.

The Mayor also has the authority to order any person who willfully interrupts the meeting to be removed. All persons are expected to always conduct themselves with civility and courtesy. All persons giving comments shall speak directly to the Council and address issues, not individuals. Personal attacks, cursing and outbursts from the audience in support or opposition to a speaker are not tolerated to foster an environment where everyone feels welcome to speak.

LEVINE ACT:

The Levine Act (California Government Code Section 84308) limits campaign contributions that may be made to elected or appointed City officials (including councilmembers and the mayor) and certain candidates for elective city offices. The Act prohibits an agent of a party from contributing any amount to councilmember while a proceeding for a contract valued at $50,000 or more, permit, license, or other entitlement for use is pending that does not solely involve purely ministerial decisions. The Act also prohibits parties and participants in the above entitlement proceedings from contributing more than $500 during the proceeding and for 12 months after the proceeding and requires disclosure of the prohibited contributions. The Act prohibits certain officials, including local elected officials, from taking part in an entitlement proceeding if the official has received a contribution exceeding $500 from a party or participant in the proceeding within the preceding 12 months. An official is also prohibited from accepting, soliciting, or directing a contribution exceeding $500 from a party or participant in the proceeding for 12 months after a final decision is rendered in such a proceeding. The law is complex, and this brief description is not legal advice. If you or an agent have made any campaign contributions to a councilmember in the 12 months before a proceeding in which you have an interest or you are contemplating making a contribution within the 12 months after such a proceeding, you are urged to review the Levine Act and consider consulting an attorney. The California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) is responsible for administering the Levine Act. More information about the Act and its implementing regulations can be found on the FPPC’s website here:
https://www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/pay-to-play-limits-and-prohibitions.html

ACCESSIBILITY
If you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (650) 595-7413. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.

AGENDA POSTING: I declare a copy of this agenda was posted at City Hall, One Twin Pines Lane, and the City's website www.Belmont.gov Date: Time: /s/:

Belmont City Council Meeting Agenda October 13, 2026
2 1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. ITEMS BEFORE 7:00 PM - none

4. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

5. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION - none

6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Proclamation Designating October 2026 As Domestic Violence Awareness Month (CORA)
B. Proclamation Observing Indigenous Peoples' Day, October 12, 2026

7. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA

8. COUNCILMEMBER ANNOUNCEMENTS

9. CONSENT BUSINESS
A. Monthly Financial Report - August 2026
City of Belmont
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
October 13, 2026
City Council Chambers
City Hall, One Twin Pines Lane, Belmont, California

NOTICE REGARDING MEETING SCHEDULE
The City Council may meet prior to 7:00 PM for Study Sessions, Closed Sessions, or other Special Topics. All other business will commence at 7:00 PM as a time-certain agenda item.

A. CLOSED SESSION
B. STUDY SESSION
The public will have an opportunity to address the City Council concerning this item.

C. SPECIAL SESSION/OTHER TOPICS
ITEMS STARTING AT 7:00 PM
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Body on any City matter not on the agenda. The period for public comment at this point in the agenda is limited to 15 minutes, with a maximum of 3 minutes per speaker. Speakers who requested but did not receive an opportunity to speak during this comment period will be given an opportunity to address the Body later in the meeting. State law prohibits the Body from acting on non-agenda items.

Consent business items are considered to be routine in nature and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a member or staf request specific items to be removed for separate action.

The City Attorney will read the title of ordinances to be adopted.

Attachments:

Report for August 2026
Belmont City Council Meeting Agenda October 13, 2026
3 B. Parking and Traffic Safety Committee – Short-Term Parking Zones C. 2025-2026 San Mateo County Civil Grant Jury Response regarding ALPR usage D. Twin Pines Senior Community Center Reconstruction

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS - none

11. GENERAL BUSINESS
A. Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Replacement Project B. Proclamation of a Local Emergency in Preparation for the 2026–2027 El Nino Winter Storm Season
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution approving the Parking and Traffic Safety Committee (PTSC) recommendations to: (1) install one 20-foot, 30-minute parking space in front of 880 Old County Road; (2) install two 20-foot, 30-minute parking spaces in front of the new development at 580 Masonic Way when construction nears completion, and (3) authorize the City Manager or their designee to adjust the time restrictions for the two parking spaces in front of 580 Masonic Way.

Attachments:

Staff Report
Resolution
Recommendation: Approve the City of Belmont’s response letter to the 2025-2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury’s report regarding Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) usage by the Belmont Police Department.

Attachments:

Staff Report
Grand Jury Report
Response Letter
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution authorizing 1) the City Manager to execute a contract for reconstruction of the Twin Pines Senior Center for $176,230 plus a 10% contingency for a total amount not to exceed $193,853, and 2) authorizing a budget appropriation of $193,853 for the reconstruction and create new Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project #8136 Senior Center Reconstruction funded by the Facility Management Fund.

Attachments:

Staff Report
Resolution
General Business items are considered separately, typically in the order listed. The chair will call for public comment on each item when the body considers the item.

Recommendation: Receive a presentation regarding the City of Belmont’s ERP replacement project and needs assessment initiation.

Attachments:

Staff Report
ERP Needs Assessment
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution proclaiming a local emergency due to the imminent threat of severe winter weather associated with the 2026–2027 El Nio season and authorizing enhanced preparedness, mitigation, coordination, and response activities.

Attachments:

Staff Report
Resolution
Belmont City Council Meeting Agenda October 13, 2026
4 12. BRIEF VERBAL REPORTS FROM MEMBERS AND STAFF

13. MATTERS OF INTEREST/CLARIFICATION

14. ADJOURNMENT
A. Verbal report from Councilmembers on Intergovernmental (IGR) and Subcommittee Assignments
B. Verbal report from City Manager
Items in this category are for discussion and direction to staf only. However, Council/Board may take final action on an item if there is no need for additional staf analysis.

Belmont City Council Meeting Agenda October 13, 2026
5 FISCAL YEAR 2026-27
MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - AUGUST 31, 2026

HIGHLIGHTS

PERFORMANCE

AT A GLANCE
REPORT
• General Fund balance increased
compared to prior YTD

FUND RECAP AT A GLANCE REPORT
Notable Fund Balance Increase compared to prior YTD:
•General Fund
•Belmont Fire Protection District
• Street Improvements
• Sewer Collection System
Notable Fund Balance Decrease compared to prior YTD:
• Measure W
• Capital Improvement Projects

CASH DISBURSEMENTS &

PURCHASE ORDER ACTIVITY
REPORT
•Amounts equal to and above $50,000

BUDGET VARIANCE
REPORT
• Management Discussion & Analysis
• Tax Trends
This report contains financial information which has not been reviewed or audited by an independent auditor, does not reflect the application of generally accepted accounting principles in all instances and is subject to future revision. This report has not been prepared with a view to informing an investment decision in any of the City’s bonds, notes or other obligations. Any projections, plans or other forward-looking statements included in this report are subject to a variety of uncertainties that could cause any actual plans or results to differ materially from any such statement. The information herein is not intended to be used by investors or potential investors in considering the purchase or sale of the City’s bonds, notes or other obligations and investors and potential investors should rely only on information filed by the City on the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board’s Electronic Municipal Market Access System for municipal securities disclosures and website, maintained on the World Wide Web at https://emma.msrb.org/
These financial reports are designed to provide a general overview of the City of Belmont’s interim finances. Questions concerning any information provided in these reports should be addressed to [email protected] or for additional information regarding the City’s financial activities, including past award winning audited financial statements, transparency efforts and best practices please visit the City at www.belmont.gov.
6 City of Belmont
Performance at a Glance
Results for the Period Ended August 31, 2026
(000's)
6/30/2017 2017 $11,128 Audited
6/30/2018 2018 $11,325 Audited
6/30/2019 2019 $14,846 Audited
6/30/2020 2020 $13,637 Audited
6/30/2021 2021 $13,398 Audited
6/30/2022 2022 $18,013 Audited
6/30/2023 2023 $26,586 Audited
6/30/2024 2024 $31,003 Audited
6/30/2025 2025 $34,416 Audited
6/30/2026 2026 $38,400 Unaudited
8/31/2026 2027 $36,821 Unaudited
* excludes Measure I
\0
Fund Balance - YTD Fund Deficits
As shown on the Fund Recap at a Glance (page 3) Library Bond Debt Service Fund has deficits and is expected to be eliminated in a future period.

The General Fund balance is $36.8 million, a decrease of $1.6 million compared to the amount at the prior fiscal year end primarily due to annual insurance premiums and pension contributions that were made in the beginning of the fiscal year.

General Fund
General Fund Balance Trend*
$0 $20 $40
Budget
Expenditures
Operating
Expenditures
Budget
Revenues
Operating
Revenues
All Funds Revenues & Expenditures
YTD Comparison (in millions)
45%
50%
1% 3%1%
Capital Improvement Plan
Streets
Sewer
Technology
Recreational Facilities
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000
$45,000
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
General Fund Balance Trend
(in thousands)
2 7
Unaudited Unaudited PY YTD
Fund Fund Balance YTD YTD PY YTD YTD YTD PY YTD Fund Balance Fund Balance Fund Name 06/30/26 Budget Actual (Under) % Actual Budget Actual Under % Actual 08/31/26 8/31/2025 (1) (2) Over (3) (Over) (1)+(2)-(3)

GENERAL FUND
101 General 38,400 2,946 5,938 (2,992) 50% 3,731 6,037 4,525 1,513 75% 3,978 36,821 34,169 102 Measure I 4,348 427 0 (427) 0% (0) 1,337 185 1,153 14% 0 4,163 3,599

SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
205 Recreation 557 732 373 (359) 51% 319 728 999 (272) 137% 886 (70) 42 206 Library Maintenance & Operation 305 53 0 (53) 0% (0) 97 112 (15) 115% 92 193 119 207 Athletic Field Maintenance 510 30 27 (2) 92% 35 62 15 47 24% 20 522 461 208 City Tree 197 2 1 (1) 41% 2 8 7 1 85% 6 191 226
209 Senior Services Donation 113 2 1 (0) 78% 0 1 0 1 0% 0 114 105 210 Development Services 2,589 1,150 587 (564) 51% 1,141 1,175 914 261 78% 845 2,261 3,110212 General Plan Maintenance 858 163 46 (117) 28% 90 242 111 131 46% 115 793 829 223 Belmont Fire Protection District 36,069 3,510 93 (3,416) 3% (66) 2,687 5,312 (2,626) 198% 5,168 30,850 26,268 225 Police Grants and Donations 30 0 0 (0) 0% (0) 4 0 4 0% 0 30 35 227 Supplemental Law Enforcement 167 35 0 (35) 0% (0) 36 34 1 96% 33 133 133 231 Street Maintenance 1,905 457 134 (322) 29% 100 550 592 (42) 108% 504 1,447 1,584 232 RMRA Street Project 816 136 72 (64) 53% 71 247 56 190 23% 375 831 494 233 Measure W 536 85 0 (85) 0% (0) 172 0 172 0% 0 536 2,618 234 Street Improvements 4,016 191 831 640 435% 83 812 84 728 10% 6 4,762 3,287 237 Traffic Impact 713 87 3 (83) 4% 5 22 0 22 0% 0 716 516 239 Public Art 706 3 0 (3) 0% 110 71 0 71 0% 0 706 548
275 Affordable Housing Successor 4,022 551 2 (549) 0% 5 402 34 368 8% 30 3,990 4,009 277 Inclusionary Housing 3,707 7 0 (7) 0% (0) 0 0 0 N/A 0 3,707 3,541 Total Special Revenue 57,815 7,193 2,171 (5,022) 30% 1,893 7,314 8,272 (958) 113% 8,081 51,714 47,926

CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS
308 General Facilities 540 4 0 (4) 0% (0) 94 0 94 0% 30 540 551 310 Infrastructure 1,809 15 0 (15) 0% (0) 339 0 339 0% 1 1,809 2,382312 Comcast PEG Program 446 14 0 (14) 0% (0) 8 0 8 0% 0 446 364341 Planned Park 127 121 0 (121) 0% (0) 111 0 111 0% 0 127 482 342 Park Impact 868 157 1,193 1,036 760% 9 240 0 240 0% 0 2,062 1,092 343 Open Space 57 0 0 (0) 0% (0) 10 0 10 0% 0 57 54399 Capital Improvement Projects 1,814 8,866 419 (8,446) 5% 993 9,452 248 9,204 3% 710 1,985 2,988704 Special Assessment Districts 354 2 0 (2) 0% (0) 0 0 N/A 0 354 341 Total Capital Projects 6,015 9,178 1,612 (7,565) 18% 1,001 10,253 248 10,006 2% 741 7,380 8,256

DEBT SERVICE & OTHER FUNDS
406 Library Bond Debt Service 71 117 0 (117) 0% (0) 115 574 (459) 500% 553 (503) (207) 501-505 Sewer Collection System 55,346 3,434 22 (3,412) 1% 2,865 5,643 2,213 3,430 39% 5,173 53,155 45,704 507 Sewer Treatment 30,200 557 0 (557) 0% (0) 626 1,366 (740) 218% 1,355 28,834 28,519525 Storm Drainage Enterprise 510 410 67 (343) 16% 62 571 360 212 63% 317 218 624 530 Solid Waste Management 2,648 128 55 (73) 43% 54 101 77 24 76% 71 2,626 2,353 570 Worker's Compensation 2,367 186 234 48 126% 198 167 875 (708) 524% 771 1,727 1,367571 Liability Insurance 3,685 189 167 (23) 88% 873 257 988 (731) 385% 651 2,864 3,455573 Fleet & Equipment Management 10,263 994 941 (53) 95% 921 1,215 1,395 (181) 115% 899 9,809 9,261574 Facilities Management 1,542 571 559 (12) 98% 529 683 575 108 84% 602 1,527 852575 Benefit Prefunding 1,180 267 226 (41) 85% 221 300 193 108 64% 721 1,213 1,127 Total Debt & Other 107,814 6,854 2,271 (4,583) 33% 5,724 9,677 8,615 491 89% 11,115 101,470 93,056Total All Funds $214,392 $29,590 $9,000 ($20,589) 30% $12,348 $34,619 $21,844 $12,204 63% $23,914 $201,549 $187,005Fund Types:

Variance
City of Belmont
Fund Recap at a Glance
Results for the Period Ended August 31, 2026
(000's)
General Fund - Used to account for and report all financial resources not accounted for and reported in another fund.Special Revenue Funds - Used to account for and report the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are restricted or committed to expenditure for specific purposes other than debt service or capital projects.

Capital Projects Funds - Used to account for and report financial resources that are restricted, committed, or assigned to expenditure for capital outlays, including the acquisition or construction of capital facilities and other capital assets.Debt Service & Other Funds - Includes funds used to account for and report financial resources that are restricted, committed, or assigned to expenditure for principal and interest; funds used to finance and account for special activities and services performed by a designated department for other departments in the City on a cost reimbursement basis; and funds to account for operations financed and operated in a manner similar to a private business enterprise with the intent that the cost of providing goods and services is primarily financed through user charges; and funds used to account for assets held by the City as an agent.

Variance
Revenues Expenditures
3 8
City of Belmont
Budget Variance Report
General Fund / All Other Funds
Results for the Period Ended August 31, 2026
(000's)
General Fund All Other Funds
Year to Date (YTD) Annual PY YTD Year to Date (YTD) Annual PY YTD Budget Actual Variance % Budget Actual Budget Actual Variance % Budget Actual

REVENUES
Taxes 4,048 1,960 (2,088) 48% a 2,945 24,290 4,131 92 (4,039) 2% a 104 24,789 Licenses and permits 266 15 (251) 6% b 39 1,599 440 407 (33) 92% 2,642 585 Intergovernmental 108 126 18 116% 649 126 1,784 157 (1,627) 9% f 147 10,706 Charge for services 857 612 (245) 71% c 580 5,144 7,181 4,007 (3,174) 56% c 3,202 43,088 Fines and forfeits 17 9 (8) 55% 100 13 - - - N/A - -
217 331 (114) 65% d 26 1,988 1,076 140 (936) 13% d (34) 6,457 Miscellaneous 54 7 (47) 12% 322 2 85 831 746 977% 511 1,267 Transfers in 256 - (256) 0% e - 1,538 8,488 419 (8,069) 5% e 3,347 50,928 Total Revenues 5,938 2,946 (2,992) 50% 35,629 3,731 23,651 6,055 (17,597) 26% 141,908 8,618

EXPENDITURES
General Government 1,436 1,197 (239) 83% 8,616 1,091 1,574 3,023 1,449 192% g 9,445 3,032 Public Safety 3,066 2,839 (227) 93% 18,393 2,463 2,687 5,344 2,657 199% h 16,120 5,198 Streets and Utilities - - - N/A 0 0 11,748 2,522 (9,226) 21% 70,491 2,978 Culture and Recreation 529 446 (83) 84% 3,174 423 1,945 1,741 (204) 89% 11,672 1,647 Urban Redevelopment 47 43 (5) 90% 285 0 1,466 766 (700) 52% 8,794 752 Non Departmental - - - N/A 0 0 383 437 55 114% 2,295 12 Debt Service - - - N/A 0 0 994 3,066 2,073 309% i 2,970 5,963 Transfers out 959 - (959) 0% 5,755 0 7,785 419 (7,366) 5% 46,710 3,347 Total Expenditures 6,037 4,525 (1,513) 75% 36,223 3,978 28,582 17,320 (11,262) 61% 171,491 19,937 ($99) ($1,579) ($594) ($247) ($4,930) ($11,265) ($29,583) ($11,319) Management Discussion and Analysis
(Items with unfavorable budget variance more than $0.1 million) Revenues
Expenditures

EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER/
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES
Use of money and property
Trends
c) Charges for Services - the budget variance in General Fund is primarily due to the 1st quarter Public Safety and Wildfire Prevention revenue, which will be received in September.

The budget variance in Other Funds is due to the Sewer User Fee (Collection & Treatment), which is included as part of the City's Property Tax bill to be received semi-annually, typically in December and April.
f) Intergovermental - Grant revenue will be received and reported in a future reporting period. e) Transfers In - Transfer amount was budgeted based on full CIP commitments. Actual expenditures and CIP transfers are recorded as the project progresses, and any remaining budget will be carried forward to the next fiscal year or released back to the funding source upon project completion. d) Use of Money and Property - The budget variance is primarily due to quarterly interest that won't get allocated until the end of the quarter in September. a) Taxes - The budget variance is primarily due to the timing of semi-annual property tax receipts received in December and April. VLF revenue distribution was received in August in prior years but will be distributed this year in September. g) General Government - The annual insurance premium, pension and OPEB contributions were paid in July. i) Debt Service - Annual debt service on bonds were paid in July. h) Public Safety - The first quarter payments of $2.3M to BSCFD and $2.7M to San Mateo Consolidated Fire Department and annual insurance premiums were made in July. b) Licenses and Permits - The budget variance is primarily due to the Business License Tax Revenue. All businesses' licensing periods (i.e., the “tax period”) have transitioned to January 1 to December 31 and majority of the revenues will be received at license renewal in December/January. -$600
-$400
-$200
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Thousands
Sales Taxes & TOT - Monthly Comparison
Sales Taxes FY 26 Sales Taxes FY 27 TOT FY 26 TOT FY 27 $0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
$16,000
FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 20 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 FY 24 FY 25 FY 26 Thousands
Major General Fund Taxes - 10-year Trends
Prop Tax Sales Taxes TOT
4 9
Vendor Description Date No. Amount
ADP TAX PPE 08/01/26 ADP TAX PPE 08/01/26 8/7/26 DAJ000010801 130,749.87 ADP TAX PPE 08/15/26 ADP TAX PPE 08/15/26 8/21/26 DAJ000010805 127,661.59 ADP WAGE PPE 08/01/26 ADP WAGE PPE 08/01/26 8/7/26 DAJ000010798 578,242.09 ADP WAGE PPE 08/15/26 ADP WAGE PPE 08/15/26 8/21/26 DAJ000010802 557,833.91 ALLIANT INSURANCE SERVICES FY27 VEHICLE PHYSICAL DAMAGE 8/14/26 EFT00043192 54,529.00 CALPERS COB CONTRIBUTIONS PPE082126 8/24/26 DAJ000010774 154,982.03 CALPERS COB CONTRIBUTION PPE07/24/26 8/4/26 DAJ000010748 151,911.84 CALPERS COB CONTRIBUTION PPE 080726 8/10/26 DAJ000010757 152,345.71 CALPERS HEALTH PREMIUMS AUGUST 8/10/26 DAJ000010758 257,996.39 CCAG ELIGIBLE FUNDING 8/14/26 1206684 100,707.00
COMFORT INTERNATIONAL INC CH AC2 DRAIN REPAIR 8/7/26 1206672 54,787.50 KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOC., INC. JULY 2026 8/21/26 EFT00043255 54,602.50 MISSIONSQUARE DEF COMP ACCT#302442 8/24/26 DAJ000010773 57,285.32 MISSIONSQUARE DEF COMP ACCT#302442 8/10/26 DAJ000010756 57,116.34 PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INC AUG 2025 - SEPT 2025 8/7/26 EFT00043109 61,779.00 SAN MATEO, CITY OF FY25/26 SEWER SERVICE CHARGES 8/14/26 1206697 223,340.48 STEPFORD PD EQUIPMENT 8/7/26 EFT00043144 50,061.50
Total Disbursements in Excess of $50,000 2,825,932.07 $ Total Count 17
Vendor Description Date No. Amount
CASEY CONSTRUCTION INC 26 SEWER&STORM DRAIN REHAB 8/10/26 27 00027 1,913,949.40 WILSEY HAM 26 SANITARY SEWER&STORM DES 8/24/26 27 00031 307,346.00 PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INC 2026 PAVEMENT REHAB PROJECT 8/12/26 27 00029 258,730.00 TANNER PACIFIC INC 2026 SEWER&STORM DRAIN REHA 8/3/26 27 00026 252,942.00 CASEY CONSTRUCTION INC COB-RALSTON RET WALL REPAIR 8/24/26 27 00032 59,147.00 Total Purchase Orders Issued in Excess of $50,000 2,792,114.40 $ Total Count 5
Disbursements Amounts Equal to $50,000 and Above
Purchase Order Amounts Equal to $50,000 and Above
City of Belmont
Disbursements & Purchase Order Activity Report
Results for the Period Ended August 31, 2026
5 10
Beginning Balance Ending Balance
July 31, 2026 Receipts Disbursements August 31, 2026
City of Belmont $137,082,318.19 14,375,342.15 $ (14,299,599.52) $ 137,158,060.82 $ Belmont Fire Protection District 30,885,265.04 8,484.57 (53,881.55) 30,839,868.06 $ Total $ 14,383,826.72 167,967,583.23 $ (14,353,481.07) $ 167,997,928.88 $ - Deposit Investments Pool Total
City of Belmont & Belmont Fire Protection District $ 167,433,968.86 563,960.02 $ 167,997,928.88 $ - Respectfully Submitted,
s/b Grace Castaneda
Grace Castaneda
City Treasurer
I certify that this report accurately reflects all investments of City of Belmont and Belmont Fire Protection District, and is in conformance with the adopted Investment Policy mandated by Government Code 53646. Furthermore, I certify to the best of my knowledge, sufficient investment liquidity and anticipated revenues are available to meet the Agency's budgeted expenditure requirement for the next six months.

CITY OF BELMONT

TREASURER'S REPORT
August 31, 2026
Balance Summary
Agency Receipts and Disbursements Summary
treasurer report 08-2026

11 Investment Type
Issuer
Fund Documents Par Amount Current Market Value* Interest Total Maximum
Weighted
Average
Maturity/Life Rate
Deposit
General Account Wells Fargo 563,960.02 $ 563,960.02 $
Investments:**
L.A.I.F.-POOL https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/pmia-laif/pmia/index.asp 131,344,291.63 131,196,185.44 422,819.17 18 months 3.863% L.G.I.P. -POOL https://www.calfitfund.com/document-center/ 36,089,677.23 36,088,613.86 114,283.98 90 days 3.800% Total 167,997,928.88 $ 167,848,759.32 $ 537,103.14 $
*Fair Market Value ratios for LAIF are based on a quarterly basis, while LGIP is on a monthly basis. **The LAIF-BOND account has withdrawn all of its funds as of the end of March 2026.

Investment Detail

CITY OF BELMONT

TREASURER'S REPORT
August 31, 2026
Aug-25 Sep-25 Oct-25 Nov-25 Dec-25 Jan-26 Feb-26 Mar-26 Apr-26 May-26 Jun-26 Jul-26 Aug-26 LAIF-POOL 149,987,206 148,501,206 148,016,791 147,848,791 142,558,791 141,908,237 141,908,237 140,152,237 138,874,405 137,019,405 139,691,405 129,453,292 131,344,292 LAIF-BOND 3,665,995 3,665,995 3,706,029 3,706,029 643,029 676,221 221 - - - - - - LGIP-POOL 25,203,753 40,307,924 41,784,521 42,125,776 36,323,974 36,089,677 INTEREST-LAIF 4.251% 4.212% 4.150% 4.096% 4.025% 3.931% 3.871% 3.826% 3.811% 3.810% 3.816% 3.840% 3.863% INTEREST-LGIP 3.760% 3.770% 3.760% 3.780% 3.790% 3.800%

0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

7.00%
$0
$20,000,000
$40,000,000
$60,000,000
$80,000,000
$100,000,000
$120,000,000
$140,000,000
$160,000,000
City of Belmont Investment Portfolio Trends

Parking and Traffic Safety Committee - Short Term Parking Zones - Staff Report (1).docx

STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: October 13, 2026
Agency: City of Belmont
Staff Contact: Daniel Matthews, Assistant Engineer, [email protected], (650)-637-2985 Agenda Title: Parking and Traffic Safety Committee – Short-Term Parking Zones Agenda Action: Resolution
Recommendation
Adopt a resolution approving the Parking and Traffic Safety Committee (PTSC) recommendations to: (1) install one 20-foot, 30-minute parking space in front of 880 Old County Road; (2) install two 20-foot, 30- minute parking spaces in front of the new development at 580 Masonic Way when construction nears completion, and (3) authorize the City Manager or their designee to adjust the time restrictions for the two parking spaces in front of 580 Masonic Way.

Strategic Focus Area
Infrastructure and Mobility
Background
The Parking and Traffic Safety Committee (PTSC), composed of representatives from the Public Works, Police, and San Mateo Consolidated Fire Departments, receives and reviews requests from the community related to traffic calming, traffic safety, and parking requests.

The business owner at 880 Old County Road requested that PTSC evaluate several parking management options to better support pick-up and drop-off activities at their business, including the installation of short-term parking along the frontage.

In coordination with the entitled development at 580 Masonic Way, the Community Development Department and the developer asked the committee to consider installing two new short-term parking spaces on Masonic Way to support planned commercial unit on the ground floor.

Analysis
Parking is in high demand along and adjacent to the Old County Road corridor. Although the corridor has an existing four-hour parking limit, the mix of commercial businesses on the west side and high-density residential development on the east side results in limited turnover of on-street parking. Many businesses, including The Cats Inn at 880 Old County Road, lack off-street parking and therefore have limited options for accommodating customer pick-up and drop-off activities.

The combination of existing and planned activity creates a need for curb management strategies, including short-term parking, to support local businesses and loading activities while increasing turnover of onstreet parking. 13

Parking and Traffic Safety Committee - Short Term Parking Zones - Staff Report (1).docx 880 Old County Road
In reviewing the request, the Committee determined that the pet boarding facility generates sufficient short-term customer and drop-off activity to support the installation of a short-term parking/loading space along the curb.. Staff will monitor the space following installation to evaluate its use and determine whether it is effectively serving its intended purpose. 580 Masonic Way
At the time of entitlement, the development project at 580 Masonic Way did not include commercial or retail space. The developer is now proposing two ground-floor commercial units near the intersection of Masonic Way and Hiller Street.

Because the project does not include on-site parking for the commercial units, the developer have requested two short-term parking spaces in front of the units as part of community feedback. The spaces would be installed as construction nears completion. The Committee supportsthe request and recommends advance approval so that the spaces can be installed when needed.

Because the future commercial tenants are not yet known, staff recommends authorizing the City Manager or designee to establish the short-term parking time limit, within a range of 20 minutes to two hours, based on the needs of the businesses occupying the commercial unit.

Alternatives

1. Do not approve the installation at 880 Old County Road and/or 580 Masonic Way

2. Refer back to staff for additional information
Attachments
A. Resolution
Fiscal Impact
☐ No Fiscal Impact
☒ Funding Source Confirmed:

Current fiscal year 2026-27’s operating budget in the Street Maintenance Fund (Account 231-3-701-8351) includes funding for minor improvements recommended by PTSC.

Source: Purpose: Public Outreach:

Citizen Initiated Discretionary Action Other*
*A virtual community feedback meeting was held on 9/9/2026 to gather community input on the proposed improvements.
14

RESOLUTION NO. 2026 –

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELMONT ESTABLISHING (1) ONE 20-FOOT, 30-MINUTE PARKING SPACE IN FRONT OF 880 OLD COUNTY ROAD, (2) TWO 20-FOOT, 30-MINUTEPARKING SPACES IN FRONT OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT AT 580 MASONIC WAY, AND (3) AUTHORIZE THE

CITY MANAGER OR THEIR DESIGNEE TO ADJUST THE TIME RESTRICTIONS FOR THE TWO PARKING SPACES IN FRONT OF 580 MASONIC WAY.

WHEREAS, the Parking and Traffic Safety Committee (PTSC) received requests to evaluate short-term parking zones in front of 880 Old County Road and 580 Masonic Way; and,
WHEREAS, the PTSC reviewed and discussed these items and found these improvements are warranted at all three locations.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Belmont resolves as follows:

SECTION 1. Establishes one 20-foot, 30-minute parking space in front of 880 Old County Road.

SECTION 2. Establishes two 20-foot, 30-minute parking spaces in front of the new development at 580 Masonic Way, to be installed when construction nears completion.

SECTION 3. Authorizes the City Manager or their designee to adjust the duration of the short-term parking spaces near 580 Masonic Way between 20 minutes and 2 hours based on the needs of the future businesses.
* * *
ADOPTED October 13, 2026 by the City of Belmont City Council by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
15

ATTEST:

City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Attorney
16

San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Report. Staff Report

STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: October 13, 2026
Agency: City of Belmont
Staff Contact: Andrew Armando, Interim Police Chief, 650-595-7400 Agenda Title: 2025-2026 San Mateo County Civil Grant Jury Response regarding ALPR usage Agenda Action: Motion
Recommendation
Approve the City of Belmont’s response letter to the 2025-2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury’s report regarding Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) usage by the Belmont Police Department.

Strategic Focus Area
Public Safety
Background
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) are camera-based systems that automatically capture and retain license plates for passing vehicles for a period defined by agency policy and are in use by most law enforcement agencies in San Mateo County and the State of California.

The Belmont Police Department obtained city council approval in 2024 to utilize ALPR technology and subsequently entered into a contract with Flock Safety to lease 10 fixed ALPR cameras in specific locations around the city. On August 3, 2026, the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury released a report on ALPR usage by San Mateo County Law Enforcement Agencies. The civil grand jury made findings related to specific ALPR usage by agency and made recommendations to the agencies based on issues defined by the grand jury.

Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 933.05, the civil grand jury made a request for a response from the governing body of the City of Belmont. The request for response from the civil grand jury to the Belmont City Council included three findings with three corresponding recommendations. These findings and recommendations will be addressed within the analysis section of this staff report.

Analysis
The San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury report is attached to this document and specifically identified on page 14 that the City of Belmont had their ALPR policy posted in a “conspicuous” place and the audit practices on the police department were “strong.” Further, the grand jury identified that the Belmont Police Department’s data retention policy was “consistent” with the information on the Belmont Police Department’s Flock transparency portal.

On page 17 of the grand jury report, the Belmont Police Department had three findings that were listed as F3, F6 and F8. The grand jury report listed three recommendations that were listed as R3, R6 and R8. The 17

San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Report. Staff Report
findings and recommendations are identified as follows:

Finding 3 and Recommendation 3:

F3- The ALPR operator shared ALPR information with private university security entities but did not establish that the receiving entity was a “public agency” as defined in civil code section 1798.90.55(b), or that the sharing was otherwise permitted by law within the meaning of civil code section 1798.90.55(b).

R3- The ALPR operator currently identified as sharing ALPR data with private university security entities should obtain and retain a written legal and factual determination that the recipient is a “public agency” under civil code section 1798.90.55(b), or that the sharing is otherwise permitted by law; if no lawful basis exists, the operator should terminate the sharing relationship.

Regarding F3 and R3, the Belmont Police Department prior to receiving the grand jury report, began a process to significantly reduce the number of agencies that were allowed to access Belmont Police Department’s ALPR data. The Belmont Police Department specifically reduced the number of agencies that we share with to the 17 law enforcement agencies that operate within the County of San Mateo. This number includes local city and county law enforcement agencies, the California Highway Patrol and Investigators from the California Department of Forestry. Prior to receipt of the grand jury report, the Belmont Police Department had already ceased to share ALPR data with an agency that could be classified as a “private university security entities.”
Finding 6 and Recommendation 6:

F6- The ALPR operator’s Flock Safety contract does not include provisions specifically requiring compliance with applicable ALPR laws.

R6- Upon contract renewal, the ALPR operator should incorporate contractual language requiring vendor compliance with applicable California law and prohibiting vendors from disclosing ALPR data to unauthorized third parties. Operators should consider provisions similar to those contained in the Town of Colma contract with Flock.

Regarding F6 and R6, upon contract renewal evaluation in 2027, the Belmont Police Department will incorporate contractual language requiring vendor compliance with applicable California laws as well as our policy. While the Belmont Police Department complied with the applicable state laws and worked within a clearly defined policy, the police department will incorporate specific language to clearly require vendor compliance with the law.

Finding 8 and Recommendation 8:

F8- The operator’s ALPR policy did not establish criteria governing the approval of in-state ALPR data sharing requests or the termination of existing network sharing relationships.

R8- The ALPR operator should include in their ALPR policies written criteria governing the approval, denial, periodic review and termination of in-state ALPR network sharing relationships.

Regarding F8 and R8, the Belmont Police Department reviewed the grand jury report and determined to 18

San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Report. Staff Report
incorporate a clearer and more defined process to govern data sharing approval and termination for allied agencies. As described above, the Belmont Police Department currently only shares data with 17 law enforcement agencies working in San Mateo County and has created an ALPR data sharing form that requires law enforcement agencies to acknowledge and comply with the following:

1. The Requesting Agency is a public agency as defined in California Civil Code § 1798.90.5(f), and is not a federal agency, an agency of another state, or a private entity.

2. BPD ALPR information will be used only for legitimate law enforcement or public safety purposes, and only as permitted by law. Each query will be tied to a case or incident number or other record of investigative purpose.

3. BPD ALPR information will not be used, sold, shared, transferred, or made accessible for any unlawful purpose, including immigration enforcement, or to any third party without prior written authorization from BPD, consistent with California Civil Code § 1798.90.55(b). This includes federal or out-of-state agencies, contractors, and any aggregated or national data-sharing network. The Requesting Agency will notify BPD of any unauthorized access or disclosure.

4. The undersigned is authorized to make this acknowledgment on behalf of the Requesting Agency.

After this form is reviewed, signed and returned to the Belmont Police Department, it is retained on file.

Each subsequent year there is a review of the requesting agency’s usage to ensure compliance with our policy. An updated acknowledgement is requested annually to confirm continued compliance with law and policy. This review is in addition to the normal audit process outlined in our policy. This additional process has been incorporated within our ALPR policy and updated on our transparency portal.

Alternatives

1. Refer back to staff for further information

2. Respond to the civil grand jury with our response to the required recommendations.

Attachments
A. 2025-2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury report “Is our Flock of ALPR cameras properly tended?”
B. Draft letter from Interim Police Chief Andrew Armando dated October 13, 2026.

Fiscal Impact
☒ No Fiscal Impact
☐ Funding Source Confirmed:

Source: Purpose: Public Outreach:

Staff Statutory/Contractual Requirement Posting of Agenda 19 Page
4 of 4
San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Report. Staff Report
20 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 1 Is Our Flock of ALPR Cameras
Properly Tended?
San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury
2025-2026
Release Date: August 3, 2026
21 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 2 ISSUE | SUMMARY | BACKGROUND | METHODOLOGY | DISCUSSION | FINDINGS RECOMMENDATIONS | REQUEST FOR RESPONSES | RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS | BIBLIOGRAPHY | APPENDIX
ISSUE
Over the past year, Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) have come under increasing public scrutiny. This report examines whether ALPR operators in San Mateo County (SMC) are in full compliance with applicable California law and whether their practices align with their adopted ALPR policies.

SUMMARY
Automated License Plate Readers have become widely deployed in SMC, with more than 500 cameras now in operation by law enforcement agencies (LEAs) within the County. The rapid increase in ALPR deployment has been accompanied by California legislation governing ALPR use, and also by increased media coverage of alleged violations. Over the past year, SMC LEAs have made notable operational improvements, particularly with respect to out-of-state data sharing. Most changes were driven by stronger default compliance made by Flock Safety (Flock), now the dominant ALPR platform among the SMC operators reviewed. But SMC ALPR operators continue to have many of the same operational deficiencies identified by a 2019 California State Audit that investigated four operators elsewhere in California. Many of the required policy documents are deficient or need significant revision to accurately reflect current operations, and audit materials produced were inconsistent in scope and rigor. Although the materials reviewed did not identify current sharing by SMC operators with out-of-state entities, most operators did not document criteria, process, or controls governing in-state sharing in a manner sufficient to demonstrate compliance with law. This report presents findings and recommendations to promote transparent operation of ALPR systems consistent with public safety, privacy, and applicable law.

BACKGROUND
Automated License Plate Readers
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) are camera-based systems that automatically capture and analyze license plates on passing vehicles. Cameras are typically located at fixed roadside locations along high-traffic corridors, major intersections, city entry/exit routes, areas with high crime rates, and transportation infrastructure (bridges, tunnels, freeways). These systems combine high-speed cameras, infrared illumination, and optical character recognition software to convert license plate images into searchable digital data. Law enforcement agencies use ALPR systems to locate stolen vehicles, identify vehicles connected to criminal investigations, generate investigative leads, and assist in locating missing persons. When connected through regional or national networks, ALPR systems allow investigators to reconstruct vehicle movements across jurisdictions.

Digital imaging, optical character recognition, and large-scale data storage allow ALPR systems to process large numbers of license plates quickly and automatically. Modern systems can read thousands of plates per hour and store the results in databases that investigators can search later.

When a motor vehicle is detected by an ALPR as it passes through the camera's field of view, a digital record is generated recording the vehicle's license plate number, an image of the plate, a 22 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 3 contextual image of the vehicle (make, model, color, etc.), the date and time of the scan, the location of the camera, and the identification number of the camera device. Once the image is captured, the digital record is immediately transmitted to a cloud-based database that compares the scanned license plate and other vehicle data against law enforcement watch lists, often referred to as “hot lists,” that may include information on vehicles that have been reported stolen, those associated with criminal investigations, outstanding warrants, or connected to missing persons or Amber Alerts.

When a match occurs, the system can send an alert to officers or dispatch centers in real time.

ALPR cameras are usually deployed as part of a network such that when the same vehicle is detected by multiple cameras, investigators can analyze those detections to determine travel routes and timelines. By default, only data captured by cameras within that local jurisdiction are available.

LEAs typically elect to contribute their data to regional databases or multi-jurisdictional systems that allow sharing across multiple cities, counties, or states. The ability to share data among multiple jurisdictions is more effective in assisting law enforcement in their investigations as suspects rarely limit their travel within a single jurisdiction.

As of March 30, 2026, more than 582 ALPR cameras were deployed across SMC. These cameras are operated by municipal police departments within their respective jurisdictions and by the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office (SMCSO) in unincorporated areas and in jurisdictions where the Sheriff provides contracted law enforcement services. The only police department in SMC with no ALPR cameras is Broadmoor.

Operator Cameras as of
3/30/2026
Comments
Atherton 53 Earliest in SMC, 2020.

Belmont 10
Brisbane 16
Burlingame 18
Colma 11
Daly City 44
East Palo Alto 25
Foster City 20
Half Moon Bay 14 Separate Flock contract, operated by
SMCSO.

Hillsborough 22
Menlo Park 32
Pacifica 10
Redwood City 25
San Bruno 54
San Mateo 66
23 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 4 Operator Cameras as of
3/30/2026
Comments
San Mateo County Sheriff's
Office
109 Includes unincorporated SMC (except
Broadmoor), Portola Valley, San Carlos
and Millbrae.

South San Francisco 37
Woodside 26 Separate Flock contract, operated by
SMCSO
Key Issue
ALPRs and the sharing of image data across jurisdictional lines have created controversy with respect to issues of privacy. While not the focus of this report, some civil liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), argue that vehicle tracking could affect freedom of association if it reveals attendance at protests, political meetings, or religious gatherings (First Amendment).

Others, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) question whether large-scale tracking of vehicle locations over time could constitute a search under constitutional law (Fourth Amendment).

While the focus of this report is not to investigate the constitutional issues surrounding ALPRs, data sharing among law enforcement agencies has become a significant public concern and has, in some communities, resulted in the suspension or termination of ALPR programs. Although no such actions have occurred in SMC, several Bay Area jurisdictions—including Mountain View, Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, and Santa Cruz—have discontinued their use of ALPR systems.

This report evaluates, based on records obtained during the investigation, whether SMC LEAs satisfy California law governing the use of ALPR systems and the sharing of ALPR data. Civil Code section 1798.90.51 requires APLR operators to implement and publicly post a usage and privacy policy. This report also evaluates whether the policies produced accurately describe actual operations.

Legislative Framework
California has enacted legislation governing the use of ALPR systems, with a focus on transparency, accountability, and limitations on data sharing. The primary statutory framework was enacted by Senate Bill 34 (SB 34) (Stats. 2015, Ch. 532), codified at Civil Code sections 1798.90.5 through 1798.90.55.

Effective January 1, 2016, SB 34 imposes requirements governing the collection, storage, access, and sharing of ALPR data. SB 34 applies to both operators of ALPR systems and entities that access ALPR data. Among other requirements, ALPR operators must adopt written usage policies, maintain detailed audit logs, implement reasonable security measures, and provide an opportunity for public comment prior to implementing an ALPR program. The California Department of Justice has issued guidance on SB 34 in Information Bulletin No. 2023-DLE-06.

In addition to SB 34, Senate Bill 54 (SB 54) (Stats. 2017, Ch. 495), known as the California Values Act (Gov. Code § 7284 et seq.) restricts the use of state and local law enforcement resources for 24 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 5 federal immigration enforcement purposes. SB 54 limits the sharing of certain information with federal immigration authorities and reinforces the principle that local law enforcement data systems, including ALPR databases, must not be used in a manner inconsistent with California law. The California Department of Justice has issued guidance clarifying these restrictions in Information Bulletin No. 2025-DLE-08.

In 2025, the California Legislature passed Senate Bill 274, which would have imposed additional restrictions and oversight. The bill proposed limiting retention periods for non-matching records and expanding state-level review of ALPR use. However, SB 274 was vetoed by Governor Gavin Newsom, who concluded that SB 274 did “not strike the delicate balance between protecting individual privacy and ensuring public safety,... particularly with respect to cold cases.” Collectively, these statutes establish a legal framework that emphasizes transparency, accountability, and restricted data sharing, while placing primary responsibility for compliance on individual law enforcement agencies.

Data Sharing and Side-Sharing
The effectiveness of ALPR systems depends in large part on the ability of LEAs to share data across jurisdictions. Within most ALPR platforms, each agency organizes its cameras into one or more networks that govern both system configuration and data sharing. Agencies may control which other agencies can discover their networks and whether access requests are automatically approved or require explicit authorization. Once access is granted, authorized users from another agency may query shared ALPR data without further approval.

While this model enhances investigative capability—particularly in cases involving vehicles that travel across jurisdictional boundaries—it also places responsibility on each agency to ensure that data sharing practices comply with California law. Civil Code section 1798.90.55(b) provides that a public agency shall not sell, share, or transfer ALPR information, except to another public agency, and only as otherwise permitted by law. The SMCCGJ found that data sharing practices vary widely among agencies, with some limiting access to nearby jurisdictions and others permitting broad sharing within the state. The decentralized nature of these sharing controls creates a structural risk:
compliance with California law depends not on system-enforced restrictions, but on how individual agencies configure and manage their networks. As a result, even where written policies are compliant, system configurations may permit data sharing practices that are inconsistent with statutory requirements. In general, as the size of a network increases and more law enforcement agencies are granted access, the risk of misuse correspondingly increases.

A related concern is the practice commonly referred to as “side-sharing.” For purposes of this report, “side-sharing” refers to the practice in which a California ALPR operator conducts a network query on behalf of an organization that is not authorized to access the data directly—typically an out-ofstate or federal agency—and then provides the results outside of the ALPR system. In such cases, audit records reflect that the query was initiated and used by a California agency, when in fact the request originated from, and the results were delivered to, an external entity.

Because the ALPR audit logs reviewed by the SMCCGJ record only the identity of the querying agency and do not capture the ultimate recipient of the data, side-sharing is inherently difficult to detect. Activity that appears compliant on its face may, in fact, circumvent the restrictions imposed by California law, including limitations on sharing ALPR data with entities outside the state. 25 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 6 Side-sharing may involve attempts to access ALPR data outside of established sharing arrangements, including by law enforcement personnel who do not have authorized access. For example, a federal immigration agency may seek to obtain ALPR data from a California jurisdiction in a manner inconsistent with the restrictions imposed by SB 54. Such access could be facilitated by directly contacting personnel within a California LEA and requesting that they conduct an ALPR query on behalf of the external agency.

This issue has been the subject of media reporting and public concern, although verification in specific instances is challenging due to the limitations of available audit data. Media coverage of public statements by certain law enforcement officials has further highlighted the potential risk.

The SMCCGJ found that existing controls to prevent or detect improper data sharing, including sidesharing, are limited. While the ALPR platform provides audit logs, role-based access controls, and, more recently, anomaly detection tools, these features rely on agency-level oversight and do not provide a comprehensive or system-enforced safeguard. There is no centralized mechanism to prevent a user from conducting a query on behalf of an unauthorized entity or to ensure that query results are used solely for authorized purposes.

As a result, compliance with California law in this area depends largely on the policies, training, and oversight practices of individual agencies. In the absence of stronger technical controls or more robust audit capabilities, the risk of unauthorized data access—whether through misconfiguration or side-sharing—remains a significant concern.

Flock Safety
Flock Safety is the largest provider of ALPR systems in the United States and the primary provider of ALPR systems used by LEAs in SMC. The company provides both the physical camera infrastructure and a cloud-based software platform that enables agencies to collect, store, search, and share vehicle detection data. This represents a significant market shift from Vigilant Solutions, who was the most common provider in 2019.

Note that while nearly all ALPR cameras in SMC are provided by Flock, Pacifica also operates 4 Axon mobile cameras that were not investigated by SMCCGJ. Also, ALPR data collected by Flock cameras may also be forwarded to intelligence fusion systems that include other types of surveillance data. Some SMC LEAs use C3.ai, and SMC has recently funded a pilot with Peregrine Systems. These systems are capable of sharing data among agencies and across state boundaries but were not investigated by SMCCGJ and have not received wide media attention.

Flock cameras are typically installed at fixed locations such as major intersections, highways, and entry or exit points to a community. These cameras do not continuously track vehicles; rather, they capture individual “snapshots” or detections as vehicles pass through a camera’s field of view. Each detection includes a license plate number, vehicle characteristics (such as make, color, and body type), and metadata including the date, time, and location of the observation.

This information is transmitted to Flock’s cloud-based platform, where it is indexed and made searchable. Authorized users access the system through a web-based interface, allowing them to query historical detections or monitor real-time alerts. For example, agencies may create “hotlists” of vehicles of interest—such as stolen vehicles or those associated with criminal investigations— which trigger notifications when detected by any connected camera. 26 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 7 A key feature of the system is its ability to aggregate data across multiple cameras and jurisdictions.

While a single camera provides only a point-in-time observation, multiple detections across different locations can allow investigators to infer travel patterns or identify a vehicle’s movement over time.

All user activity—including searches, alerts, and administrative actions—is recorded in audit logs.

These logs are intended to support oversight and accountability by providing a record of how the system is used. Although Flock hosts the data and provides the technical infrastructure, each customer agency retains control over its own data and is responsible for determining who may access it and under what conditions.

Data Sharing Framework
A defining feature of the Flock platform is its ability to facilitate data sharing among law enforcement agencies. This capability is implemented through a system of configurable “Networks,” which function as both administrative groupings and sharing mechanisms. Each agency organizes its cameras into one or more networks and determines whether those networks are visible to other agencies within the platform. When a network is made visible, other agencies may discover it— typically through a map-based interface—and request access.

These access requests are routed to a designated administrator within the owning agency. Depending on how the system is configured, the administrator may review and approve each request individually, or the system may automatically approve requests based on predefined criteria. Once access is granted, users from the approved agency can query the shared data directly, without needing to request permission for each individual search.

This model allows investigators to search for vehicles across jurisdictional boundaries, which can be particularly useful in cases involving regional travel or coordinated criminal activity. At the same time, it introduces complexity, as each agency must determine which other agencies should be granted access and under what conditions.

Agencies can limit sharing in several ways, including restricting access to specific agencies, geographic regions, or operational groupings. Importantly, sharing permissions are not transitive: if Agency A shares data with Agency B, and Agency B shares data with Agency C, Agency C does not automatically gain access to Agency A’s data.

Private entities, such as commercial businesses or homeowners’ associations, participate in the system differently. Their cameras are not visible within the shared network interface, and they do not independently request access to law enforcement data. Instead, data from private cameras is typically shared directly with local LEAs through arrangements managed with Flock outside the standard user interface.

While this network-based architecture enables collaboration and enhances investigative capabilities, it also places primary responsibility on each agency to manage its sharing relationships in a manner consistent with applicable laws and local policy.

Concerns
Beginning in 2025, a number of media reports and public records analyses brought increased attention to the use of ALPR systems, particularly with respect to how data was being shared among law enforcement agencies. These reports identified instances in which California agencies had configured their systems in a manner that allowed access to ALPR data by out-of-state entities, a practice inconsistent with California law.
27 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 8 Within SMC, the Menlo Park Police Department acknowledged prior instances in which ALPR data had been shared across state lines. Similar issues were identified in other jurisdictions throughout California, suggesting that these were not isolated occurrences but rather reflected broader challenges in how the systems were configured and used.

In addition to concerns regarding system configuration, analysis of audit data highlighted issues related to how queries were conducted and documented. In some cases, users entered generalized descriptions such as “Investigation,”1 without specifying a particular law enforcement purpose.

While such entries are not necessarily improper, they limit the ability of agencies, auditors, and the public to determine whether queries were conducted for authorized purposes.

Taken together, these findings raised questions not only about compliance with legal requirements, but also about the adequacy of system controls and oversight mechanisms. They also underscored the degree to which proper use of the system depends on both technical configuration and user behavior.

System Controls and Vendor Response
In response to these concerns, Flock implemented a series of changes beginning in 2025, aimed at reducing the likelihood of improper data sharing and improving the ability of agencies to monitor system use. These changes reflect a shift from a system that relied heavily on user discretion to one that incorporates more structured controls and constraints.

One of the most significant changes involved restrictions on data sharing across state lines. Prior to 2025, agencies had broad discretion to configure sharing relationships, including the ability to enable “Nationwide” access or establish direct connections with out-of-state agencies. Although such configurations were inconsistent with California law, they were technically permitted within the system.

To address this issue, Flock implemented a phased set of changes. Nationwide sharing was first disabled by default in February 2025 and then permanently removed in March 2025, eliminating the ability for California agencies to broadly expose their data to agencies outside the state. In June 2025, Flock further restricted sharing by disabling the ability to create new out-of-state sharing relationships.

Importantly, these changes did not automatically terminate existing shared relationships. Instead, Flock undertook a process of customer outreach and education, encouraging agencies to review and modify their configurations. As a result, most agencies voluntarily discontinued such arrangements, although some pre-existing relationships remain subject to ongoing legal proceedings. As of this writing, the City of El Cajon is the only California agency with ALPR network sharing relationships extending outside the state. In October 2025, the California Attorney General filed an action against El Cajon alleging non-compliance with SB 34; the case is currently in litigation.

In addition to changes in sharing controls, Flock introduced enhancements aimed at improving how system use is documented and monitored. Historically, users were able to enter free-form text to 1 Analysis done by the SMCCGJ on all 2025 network queries in California on one SMC LEA’s data found that 13.1% of queries entered only “Investigation” as the “Reason” for performing the query. 28 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 9 describe the purpose of a query in a “Reason” field. In practice, this resulted in inconsistent and often vague entries2, limiting the effectiveness of audit review.

In December 2025, Flock augmented this approach by requiring users to select an “Offense Type” from a standardized list3based on National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) codes.

Within California, categories inconsistent with SB 54 are disabled. This change provides a more consistent framework for documenting queries and enables more meaningful analysis of system use.

Many agencies have supplemented this requirement by mandating the entry of a case number, linking each query to a specific investigation. This case number is useful for auditing queries within a department but is ineffective for analysis of network queries as LEAs in California do not share a common case management system.

Flock also expanded its audit and monitoring capabilities. Audit logs continue to record all user activity, but additional tools have been introduced to support review. Activity logs track changes to system configuration, including modifications to sharing settings, while the Transparency Portal allows agencies to publish usage statistics and audit summaries.

In April 2026, Flock introduced “Audit Assistance,” an automated tool that analyzes system activity and identifies patterns that deviate from an agency’s typical usage. These alerts are intended to assist administrators in identifying potential misuse, including unusual query patterns or activity that may warrant further review (side-sharing).

Additional controls have been implemented to restrict system access and reinforce appropriate use.

These include limitations on “guest” users outside the agency’s domain and role-based access controls that allow agencies to tailor system permissions based on user responsibilities. Flock’s terms of service also prohibit use of the system on behalf of unauthorized individuals or agencies.

While these changes represent meaningful improvements, they are primarily designed to support and guide user behavior rather than to enforce compliance directly. As such, their effectiveness depends on how agencies configure and use the system.

Training and Compliance Support
Flock provides training on system operation, legal use, and compliance requirements as part of its onboarding process. Agencies may supplement this training with local policies, procedures, and internal controls tailored to their operational environment. While these resources support compliance, they do not substitute for agency responsibility to ensure that system use is consistent with applicable laws and policies.

Remaining Limitations
Notwithstanding these enhancements, important limitations remain in the system’s ability to prevent or detect improper use.

First, while audit logs provide a record of which agency conducted a query and when it occurred, they do not capture how the resulting information is ultimately used or shared. This means that even 2 The search reason “warrant” could refer to a warrant issued by a California judge for an authorized law enforcement purpose, or alternatively to an administrative warrant issued by a federal agency such as ICE. Numeric strings typically correspond to sections of California penal code, but many LEA’s listed a crime category such as “theft” or “burglary”.

The SMCCGJ found no accepted usage of the “Reason” field across or even within LEAs. 3 A list of these offense codes is provided in Appendix A. 29 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 10 where a query appears appropriate on its face, there is no direct way to determine whether the results were subsequently provided to an unauthorized party.

Second, the system does not technically prevent a user from conducting a query on behalf of another individual or agency (side-sharing). Although such conduct may violate policy or law, it is not inherently detectable through system controls alone. As a result, certain forms of misuse— particularly those involving indirect access—are difficult to identify through audit data.

Finally, the effectiveness of audit and monitoring tools depend on active review by agency personnel. Identifying potential issues requires not only access to audit data but also the time, expertise, and judgment to interpret that data. This introduces variability in how different agencies monitor system use and respond to potential concerns.

These limitations illustrate that, while system-level controls can reduce risk, they cannot fully eliminate it. Effective oversight requires a combination of technical controls, clear policies, and consistent enforcement.

Conclusion
Flock has implemented a number of substantive changes to its platform in response to concerns regarding data sharing and legal compliance. These changes have improved transparency, standardized key aspects of system use, and provided agencies with additional tools to monitor activity.

At the same time, the system continues to rely heavily on agency-level decisions regarding configuration, access, and oversight. Certain risks—particularly those associated with indirect or unauthorized use—cannot be fully mitigated through system design alone.

As a result, responsibility for ensuring compliance with Civil Code sections 1798.90.5 through 1798.90.55 ultimately rests with each individual law enforcement agency. The effectiveness of the system, therefore, depends not only on the capabilities of the technology but also on how it is implemented and governed at the local level.

METHODOLOGY
To determine whether ALPR operators in SMC comply with applicable California law and whether their practices align with their adopted ALPR policies, the SMCCGJ began by reviewing the content available on the public websites of each LEA in the County. Most LEA websites include information regarding ALPR usage and transparency, often with a link to the agency’s Flock Transparency Portal, which is maintained by Flock on behalf of its customers.

The SMCCGJ issued document requests to all ALPR operators in SMC, seeking ALPR policies, recent audit reports, current Flock contracts, and any supporting documentation demonstrating compliance with California law and agency policy. Findings based on nonproduction reflect the absence of responsive records produced to the SMCCGJ, not a conclusive determination that no responsive record exists.

The SMCCGJ was able to identify an ALPR policy document for every SMC ALPR operator, which guided the examination of compliance with that policy. For some operators we were provided an organization audit report, which lists all ALPR queries initiated within that LEA. The organization audit was visually reviewed in a spreadsheet, which is feasible for what is at most a few hundred rows. Some operators provided a network audit report, which lists all ALPR queries initiated by 30 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 11 other Flock customers on that operator’s data. As the network audit report can be quite large (upwards of 25,000/month), analysis of this data was carried out by first loading it into a database.4 The SMCCGJ examined network sharing reports from the operators that provided them. This information is also publicly available through Flock Safety’s Transparency Portal. The network sharing reports identify the agencies and entities with which each operator shares ALPR data.

The SMCCGJ conducted interviews with several LEAs in SMC, with representatives of Flock, and with the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center (NCRIC).The SMCCGJ collected media reports related to ALPR implementations in SMC, in the state of California, and nationwide.

DISCUSSION
Public Interest
Issues related to the use of ALPR systems have received significant public attention in both SMC and throughout California. Several communities within the County have debated canceling their ALPR contracts or exploring alternative provider. As of this date, all have decided to continue operations with Flock. An article on ALPR usage published by Palo Alto Online on December 29, 2025, was the publication’s most-downloaded article of the year.

For the general public, it can be difficult to determine the root cause of security breaches reported in the media. Coverage has variously attributed these incidents to product design limitations, accidental or intentional misconfiguration, and inadequate operator training. As discussed earlier in this report, ALPR system functionality has evolved in response to public concerns, with enhancements intended to facilitate compliance with applicable laws.

Sharing Within San Mateo County
This investigation found that the extent of data sharing among SMC ALPR operators varies significantly, with the number of network sharing relationships ranging from three in Woodside to 335 in San Bruno. During the course of this investigation, one SMC operator reduced the scope of their network sharing after evaluating the public safety value of broader data access against local privacy considerations. Some LEAs felt that broad access was valuable in addressing the pattern of crimes committed in their community. Others felt that sharing too broadly would not solve more crimes and could risk losing the support of their local community.

As of December 2025, no SMC operators were found to be sharing ALPR data with entities outside California. The investigation did identify instances in which SMC operators shared ALPR data with private organizations, specifically security agencies serving Stanford University and University of the Pacific. Under Civil Code section 1798.90.55(b), a public agency may share ALPR information only with another “public agency” and only as otherwise permitted by law. The materials produced did not establish that the private university security recipients meet the definition of a “public agency” or that an applicable statutory exception authorizes the sharing. It remains the responsibility of each LEA to determine whether such entities qualify as public agencies under applicable law. If deemed public agencies, these entities would be subject to the same statutory and policy requirements governing ALPR use.
4 The network audit report was delivered in comma-separated value format, was then bulk-loaded into a MySQL database and then queried using the Structured Query Language. 31 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 12 The table below summarizes these findings.

Operator Network
Shares
2/26/2026
Network
Shares
4/13/2026
Private University
Security Shares
4/13/2026
Apparent Sharing
Guideline
Atherton 315 317 2
Belmont 157 145 2 Adjacent Counties
Brisbane 93 92 1 50-mile radius
Burlingame Not available 357 2
Colma 321 326 2
Daly City Not available Not available not available Flock portal is not enabled.

East Palo Alto 303 308 2
Foster City Not available Not available Not available Flock portal excluded network sharing report.

Half Moon Bay Not available 290 0
Hillsborough 303 318 2
Menlo Park 247 242 1
Pacifica 276 283 2
Redwood City 102 100 1 Bay Area Counties
San Bruno 331 335 2
San Mateo 283 280 0
San Mateo County
Sheriff's Office
299 300 2 Reduced in February to
adjacent Counties.

South San Francisco 15 15 0 San Mateo County
Woodside 3 3 0 Adjacent towns
Public Commentary
Under Civil Code section 1798.90.55(a), a public agency that operates an ALPR system must provide the opportunity for public comment. The SMCCGJ did not identify any instances in which ALPR cameras were deployed without the required public notice and discussion.

ALPR Policies
California law requires each ALPR operator to adopt a written ALPR policy and to post that policy in a conspicuous manner (Civ. Code, §§ 1798.90.53(a)–(b); 1798.90.51 (a)–(b)). The California Department of Justice provides a model ALPR policy template, which agencies may adopt or 32 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 13 modify. Some departments also utilize policy templates developed by Lexipol, a provider of standardized law enforcement policy materials.

The following section evaluates each SMC law enforcement agency’s ALPR policy, including whether it is conspicuously posted, and assesses whether the agency’s actual operations are consistent with its stated policy.

Summary Matrix of ALPR Policy and Operational Findings
Policy Posting and Currency. Most LEAs and police departments provided an ALPR policy in response to the SMCCGJ document request. The SMCGJ reviewed each policy for alignment with the policy templates and guidance provided by the State of California and Lexipol. The SMCCGJ also reviewed each department’s public website to determine whether the policy was conspicuously posted in accordance with California DOJ guidance 2023-DLE-06, and whether the publicly posted version matched the version provided in response to the document request.

Audit Practices. The SMCCGJ requested copies of recent audit reports from each LEA. Where an audit frequency was specified in an agency’s ALPR Policy, the SMCCGJ reviewed the materials provided to determine whether audits appeared to have been conducted at the stated intervals. The SMCCGJ also examined the contents and scope of each audit report.

For purposes of this investigation, a “strong” audit is one that substantiates compliance with both applicable California law and each material element of the LEA’s stated ALPR Policy. California law requires a policy to describe monitoring and “a process for periodic system audits,” but does not prescribe a uniform audit report format or methodology. The labels “strong,” “partial,” and “weak” are assessment terms used in this report and are not statutory classifications.

In the absence of meaningful audit controls, the public has limited assurance that an agency’s stated policies are being consistently implemented in practice. By contrast, a “weak” audit examines only selected legal or policy elements and does not comprehensively evaluate operational compliance.

Finally, the SMCCGJ reviewed whether audit reports were made available to the public or presented to the relevant city, town, or county governing body.

Data Retention. Civil Code section 1798.90.51(b)(2)(D) requires each ALPR policy to specify a data retention period after which ALPR data will be deleted unless it is associated with an active investigation or otherwise retained pursuant to law. The SMCCGJ compared the retention period stated in each agency’s ALPR policy with the retention period displayed on Flock’s Transparency Portal and, where available, the retention provisions contained in the agency’s Flock contract.

Matching retention periods were classified as “consistent,” while differing retention periods were classified as “inconsistent.” We did not examine in detail the process by which Flock deletes data after the stated retention period, as this topic has been addressed by third-party audits.

Data Sharing Process. Each policy must describe criteria and a process for sharing ALPR data. We examined this statement to ensure that it prohibits the sale of ALPR data, out-of-state sharing, sharing to private parties, and usage for other than valid law enforcement purposes. We examined any written guidelines and processes for receiving and approving requests for sharing data, and for any documentary evidence supporting the implementation of that process. Most policies included the sharing process description and documented from templates, but our interviews and document requests did not find an LEA who followed the process described in this “Template.” Several LEAs described the sharing process provided by the Flock platform, which is what we heard described 33 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 14 during interviews as the adopted process. The LEAs with outdated policies described an outdated sharing process mediated by NCRIC. No LEA’s policy described guidelines for ALPR data sharing within California, though several outlined coherent criteria for what sharing requests to approve.

Contract Terms. The SMCCGJ reviewed the 14 Flock contracts provided in response to its document requests. One contract included an addendum with California compliance provisions (“CA terms”) requiring Flock to adhere to California law governing the protection, access, and disclosure of ALPR data maintained on behalf of California LEA customers, consistent with recommendations previously issued by the California State Auditor.

The absence of express contractual compliance terms does not itself establish a violation of California law, which applies regardless of contract language. In this report, the presence or absence of such terms is evaluated as an additional contractual compliance control.

The table below summarizes the SMCGJ’s assessment of ALPR policy compliance and operational alignment among LEAs in SMC.

Agency Policy Posting /
Currency
Audit Practices Data
Retention
Data
Sharing
Process
Contract
Terms
Atherton Not conspicuous;
current, but with
multiple versions
Strong;
published in
Council
Minutes
Inconsistent Template No CA
terms
Belmont Conspicuous;
current
Strong; not
published
Consistent Flock No CA
terms
Brisbane Not conspicuous;
current
Audit reports
not provided
Consistent Template No CA
terms
Burlingame Not conspicuous;
current
Audit reports
not provided
Consistent Template Contract
not
provided
Colma Not conspicuous;
current
Strong; not
published
Inconsistent Template CA terms
included in
addendum
Daly City Conspicuous,
outdated (NCRIC
references)
Strong, regular
audit; not
published
Inconsistent Outdated No CA
terms
East Palo Alto Conspicuous;
current
Partial; publicly
posted
Consistent Not
described
No CA
terms
34 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 15 Agency Policy Posting /
Currency
Audit Practices Data
Retention
Data
Sharing
Process
Contract
Terms
Foster City Conspicuous;
current, but broken
link to policy
Audit reports
not provided.

Inconsistent Template No CA
terms
Hillsborough Not conspicuous;
Outdated (NCRIC
references)
Audit reports
not provided.

Consistent Outdated No CA
terms
Menlo Park Not conspicuous;
current
Weak;
published in
City Council
minutes.

Consistent Template No CA
terms
Pacifica Conspicuous;
current
Brief, but
strong; not
published
Consistent Flock Contract
not
provided
Redwood City Conspicuous,
outdated (NCRIC
references)
Strong; not
published
Inconsistent Outdated No CA
terms
San Bruno Conspicuous;
current
Partial; not
published
Consistent Flock No CA
terms
San Mateo Conspicuous;
current
Weak; not
published
Consistent Template No CA
terms
SMC Sheriff's
Office
Conspicuous;
current
Partial;
published in
BOS minutes.

No stated
retention
Template No CA
terms
South San
Francisco
Conspicuous;
current
Partial; not
published.

Consistent Template No CA
terms
Woodside Conspicuous (via
SMC SO) and
current
Strong;
published in
Town Council
minutes
Consistent Template Contract
not
provided.

As shown above, while several agencies demonstrate strong alignment between policy and operational practices, others exhibit deficiencies in audit procedures, inconsistencies in stated data retention practices, and incomplete or inaccurate documentation of data-sharing processes and decisions. These findings highlight the absence of standardized ALPR governance and oversight practices across SMC.
35 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 16

FINDINGS
This section summarizes findings based on evidence produced or otherwise reviewed by the SMCCGJ. The accompanying table identifies the findings assigned to the governing body of each LEA based on the evidence described in this report.

F1. The ALPR operator’s ALPR policy was not posted in a manner that appears consistent with the California Attorney General’s guidance on “conspicuous” posting.

F2. The ALPR operator’s ALPR Policy appears to be outdated because it describes ALPR operations as mediated by NCRIC, a practice the investigation found was discontinued several years ago.

F3. The ALPR operator shared ALPR information with private university security entities but did not establish that the receiving entity was a “public agency” as defined in Civil Code section 1798.90.55(b), or that the sharing was otherwise permitted by law within the meaning of Civil Code section 1798.90.55(b).

F4. The ALPR operator did not produce records demonstrating that audits required by its ALPR policy had been conducted.

F5. The audit reports produced by the ALPR operator were insufficient to substantiate compliance with applicable California law and the operator’s published ALPR policy.

F6. The ALPR operator’s Flock Safety contract does not include provisions specifically requiring compliance with applicable California ALPR laws.

F7. The operator’s ALPR policy described a process requiring written requests and executed agreements for ALPR data-sharing relationships; however, the records produced did not substantiate that this process was followed or that the required agreements were obtained.

F8. The operator’s ALPR policy did not establish criteria governing the approval of in-state ALPR data-sharing requests or the termination of existing network-sharing relationships.

F9. The retention period specified in the operator’s ALPR Policy does not match the retention period as reported by the Flock transparency portal or Flock contract.

RECOMMENDATIONS
While the recommendations below are generally applicable to all LEAs in SMC, some recommendations have already been implemented by some LEAs. The accompanying table identifies the recommendations directed to the governing body of each LEA reviewed by the SMCCGJ.

R1. The ALPR operator should conspicuously post the current version of their ALPR Policy as required by Civil Code sections 1798.90.51(a)–(b).

R2. The ALPR operator with outdated ALPR policies should revise those policies to accurately reflect current operational practices.

R3. The ALPR operator currently identified as sharing ALPR data with private university security entities should obtain and retain a written legal and factual determination that the recipient is a “public agency” under Civil Code section 1798.90.5(f), or that the sharing is otherwise permitted by law; if no lawful basis exists, the operator should terminate the sharing relationship. 36 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 17 R4. The ALPR operator should prepare audit reports in accordance with the frequency stated in the operator’s published ALPR policy.

R5. The audit reports produced by the ALPR operator should substantiate compliance with applicable California law and the operator’s published ALPR policy.

R6. Upon contract renewal, the ALPR operator should incorporate contractual language requiring vendor compliance with applicable California law and prohibiting vendors from disclosing ALPR data to unauthorized third parties. Operators should consider provisions similar to those contained in the Town of Colma contract with Flock.

R7. The ALPR operator should update its ALPR policy to accurately reflect the process used to approve ALPR data-sharing relationships.

R8. The ALPR operator should include in their ALPR policies written criteria governing the approval, denial, periodic review, and termination of in-state ALPR network-sharing relationships.

R9. The ALPR operator should update their ALPR policy or Flock contract terms, as necessary, so that the stated retention rule accurately reflects operations.

REQUEST FOR RESPONSES
Pursuant to Penal Code 933.05, the Civil Grand Jury requests responses from the following governing bodies:

Respondent Findings Recommendations
Atherton Town Council F1, F3, F6, F7, F8, F9 R1, R3, R6, R7, R8, R9 Belmont City Council F3, F6, F8 R3, R6, R8
Brisbane City Council F1, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8 R1, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8 Burlingame City Council F1, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8 R1, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8 Colma City Council F1, F3, F5, F7, F8, F9 R1, R3, R5, R7, R8, R9 Daly City City Council F3, F6, F7, F8, F9 R3, R6, R7, R8, R9 East Palo Alto City Council F3, F5, F6, F7, F8 R3, R5, R6, R7, R8 Foster City City Council F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9 R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 Half Moon Bay Town Council F3, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9 R3, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 Hillsborough Town Council F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6, F7, F8 R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8 Menlo Park City Council F1, F3, F5, F6, F7, F8 R1, R3, R5, R6, R7, R8 Millbrae City Council F3, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9 R3, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 Pacifica City Council F3, F5, F6, F8 R3, R5, R6, R8
Portola Valley Town Council F3, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9 R3, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 City Council of Redwood City F2, F3, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9 R2, R3, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 San Bruno City Council F4, F5, F6, F7, F8 R4, R5, R6, R7, R8 San Carlos City Council F3, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9 R3, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9 37 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 18 Respondent Findings Recommendations
Ken Binder, San Mateo County
Sheriff
F3, F5, F6, F7, F8, F9 R3, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9
San Mateo City Council F4, F5, F6, F7, F8 R4, R5, R6, R7, R8 South SF City Council F5, F6, F7, F8 R5, R6, R7, R8
Woodside Town Council F5, F6, F7, F8 R5, R6, R7, R8

RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS
California Penal Code Section 933.05 provides as follows (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:
(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 therefor.
(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 yet 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 therefor.

Under Penal Code section 933(c), the governing body of a public agency must respond within 90 days after the grand jury submits its final report, and an elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility under Penal Code section 914.1 must respond within 60 days regarding matters under that officer’s or agency head’s control. 38 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 19

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Automated License Plate Readers, Report 2019-118, California State Auditor, February 2020.

California Automated License Plate Reader Data, 2023-DLE-06, California Department of Justice.

National Crime Information Center Administration of Warrants, 2025-DLE-08, California Department of Justice, April 7, 2025.

A Delicate Balance: Privacy vs. Protection, Report of the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury, 2016–2017.

FOOTNOTES
1 Analysis done by SMCCGJ on all 2025 network queries in California on one SMC LEA’s data found that 13.1% of queries entered only “Investigation” as the Reason for performing the query. 2 The search reason “warrant” could refer to a warrant issued by a California judge for an authorized law enforcement purpose, or alternatively to an administrative warrant issued by a federal agency such as ICE. 3 A list of these offense codes is provided in Appendix A. 4 The network audit report was delivered in comma-separated value (CSV) format, bulk-loaded into a MySQL database and analyzed using the Structured Query Language (SQL).
5 https://www.paloaltoonline.com/police/2025/11/05/east-palo-alto-leaders-push-back-on-license-plate-readers-amid-privacyconcerns/ 6 https://www.coastsidenews.com/news/half-moon-bay-to-revisit-license-plate-reader-program-and-ice-policies/ 7 https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2025/12/29/the-years-biggest-stories/ 39 2025 – 2026 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Page 20 Appendix A - Flock Safety Offense Types
40 Draft.Letter
October 13, 2026
Honorable Rachel Holt
Judge of the Superior Court
C/O Jenarda Dubois
Hall of Justice
400 County Center; 8th floor
Redwood City, California 94063-1655
Dear Judge Holt,
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury report entitled “Is Our Flock of ALPR Cameras Properly Tended?” The City of Belmont’s required responses which were approved by the city council on this date are listed below:

Finding 3 and Recommendation 3:

F3- The ALPR operator shared ALPR information with private university security entities but did not establish that the receiving entity was a “public agency” as defined in civil code section 1798.90.55(b), or that the sharing was otherwise permitted by law within the meaning of civil code section 1798.90.55(b).

R3- The ALPR operator currently identified as sharing ALPR data with private university security entities should obtain and retain a written legal and factual determination that the recipient is a “public agency” under civil code section 1798.90.55(b), or that the sharing is otherwise permitted by law; if no lawful basis exists, the operator should terminate the sharing relationship.

Response: Regarding F3 and R3, the Belmont Police Department prior to receiving the grand jury report, began a process to significantly reduce the number of agencies that were allowed to access Belmont Police Department’s ALPR data. The Belmont Police Department specifically reduced the number of agencies that we share with to the 17 law enforcement agencies that operate within the County of San Mateo.

This number includes local city and county law enforcement agencies, the California Highway Patrol and Investigators from the California Department of Forestry. Prior to receipt of the grand jury report, the Belmont Police Department had already ceased to share ALPR data with an agency that could be classified as a “private university security entities.”
41 Finding 6 and Recommendation 6:

F6- The ALPR operator’s Flock Safety contract does not include provisions specifically requiring compliance with applicable ALPR laws.

R6- Upon contract renewal, the ALPR operator should incorporate contractual language requiring vendor compliance with applicable California law and prohibiting vendors from disclosing ALPR data to unauthorized third parties. Operators should consider provisions similar to those contained in the Town of Colma contract with Flock.

Response: Regarding F6 and R6, upon contract renewal evaluation in 2027, the Belmont Police Department will incorporate contractual language requiring vendor compliance with applicable California laws as well as our policy. While the Belmont Police Department complied with the applicable state laws and worked within a clearly defined policy, the police department will incorporate specific language to clearly require vendor compliance with the law.

Finding 8 and Recommendation 8:

F8- The operator’s ALPR policy did not establish criteria governing the approval of instate ALPR data sharing requests or the termination of existing network sharing relationships.

R8- The ALPR operator should include in their ALPR policies written criteria governing the approval, denial, periodic review and termination of in-state ALPR network sharing relationships.

Response: Regarding F8 and R8, the Belmont Police Department reviewed the grand jury report and determined to incorporate a clearer and more defined process to govern data sharing approval and termination for allied agencies. As described above, the Belmont Police Department currently only shares data with 17 law enforcement agencies working in San Mateo County and has created an ALPR data sharing form that requires law enforcement agencies to acknowledge and comply with the following:

1. The Requesting Agency is a public agency as defined in California Civil Code § 1798.90.5(f), and is not a federal agency, an agency of another state, or a private entity.

2. BPD ALPR information will be used only for legitimate law enforcement or public safety purposes, and only as permitted by law. Each query will be tied to a case or incident number or other record of investigative purpose.

3. BPD ALPR information will not be used, sold, shared, transferred, or made accessible for any unlawful purpose, including immigration enforcement, or to any third party without prior written authorization from BPD, consistent with California Civil Code § 1798.90.55(b). This includes federal or out-of-state agencies, contractors, and any 42 aggregated or national data-sharing network. The Requesting Agency will notify BPD of any unauthorized access or disclosure.

4. The undersigned is authorized to make this acknowledgment on behalf of the Requesting Agency.

After this form is reviewed, signed and returned to the Belmont Police Department, it is retained on file. Each subsequent year there is a review of the requesting agency’s usage to ensure compliance with our policy. An updated acknowledgement is requested annually to confirm continued compliance with the law and policy. This review is in addition to the normal audit process outlined in our policy. This additional process has been incorporated within our ALPR policy and updated on our transparency portal Respectfully,
Andrew Armando
Interim Police Chief
Belmont Police Department
43

Twin Pines Senior Center Reconstruction - Staff Report (1)

STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: October 13, 2026
Agency: City of Belmont
Staff Contact: Kevin Kobayashi, Parks and Recreation, (650) 595-7488, [email protected] Agenda Title: Twin Pines Senior Community Center Reconstruction Agenda Action: Resolution
Recommendation
Adopt a resolution authorizing 1) the City Manager to execute a contract for reconstruction of the Twin Pines Senior Center for $176,230 plus a 10% contingency for a total amount not to exceed $193,853, and 2) authorizing a budget appropriation of $193,853 for the reconstruction and create new Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project #8136 Senior Center Reconstruction funded by the Facility Management Fund.

Strategic Focus Area
Infrastructure and Mobility
Background
On August 8, 2026, the Twin Pines Senior Community Center experienced significant flooding resulting from a clogged toilet that continuously overflowed overnight. Subsequent investigation determined that the floor drain in the men's restroom was obstructed due to a blockage at the exterior sewer cleanout, preventing water from draining properly and causing water to back up throughout portions of the facility.

The flooding affected multiple areas of the Senior Center, including the lobby, men's and women's restrooms, front desk area, two administrative offices, several storage closets, and the multiuse ballroom.

City staff discovered the flooding the following morning and immediately began response efforts, including shutting off the water supply and manually removing standing water to prevent further damage.

Due to the extent of the water intrusion, the City retained Alpha1 Reconstruction to perform emergency remediation services. Alpha1 mobilized to the site on August 9 and initiated moisture mitigation efforts, including removal of damaged lobby carpeting and installation of dehumidifiers and air-moving equipment. The contractor subsequently completed demolition of water-damaged materials and conducted comprehensive moisture mitigation activities throughout the affected areas.

Alpha1 has completed the remediation and moisture mitigation phase of the project, and the facility has been verified to be free of residual moisture and water damage. However, portions of the building require reconstruction, including replacement of drywall, carpeting, hardwood flooring, baseboards, and paint within the affected areas.
44

Twin Pines Senior Center Reconstruction - Staff Report (1) Analysis
Following completion of the emergency remediation and moisture mitigation work, staff solicited proposals from qualified contractors to perform the reconstruction and restoration of the Twin Pines Senior Community Center. The scope of work includes replacement of damaged drywall, flooring, baseboards, paint, and other building finishes necessary to restore the facility to its pre-loss condition and allow the building to reopen to the public.

The City received proposals from two qualified contractors, Alpha1 Reconstruction and Zone 4. Staff reviewed the proposals and determined that Alpha1 Reconstruction submitted the lowest responsive proposal. Alpha1 Reconstruction also completed the emergency remediation and moisture mitigation work associated with the flood event and is familiar with the existing site conditions and project requirements. Awarding the reconstruction contract to Alpha1 Reconstruction will provide continuity between project phases, facilitate efficient project delivery, and restore the damaged areas of the facility so the Twin Pines Senior Community Center can resume normal operations as quickly as possible.

Procurement
The reconstruction work constitutes a public project under the Belmont City Code and was procured in accordance with the City's informal bidding procedures. Pursuant to Belmont City Code Sections 2-29(g) and 2-146, public project construction contracts up to the amount established in California Public Contract Code Section 22032(b) may be awarded through the informal bidding process and are within the City Manager's contract authority. Staff solicited proposals from qualified contractors and received bids from Alpha1 Reconstruction in the amount of $176,230 and Zone 4 in the amount of $234,109. Staff determined that Alpha1 Reconstruction submitted the lowest responsive proposal. To restore the facility to operational condition and reopen it to the public, staff is recommending that Alpha1 Reconstruction complete the necessary reconstruction and repair work.

Approval of the proposed resolution will authorize a budget appropriation of $176,230 plus a 10% contingency for a total amount not to exceed $193,853 for the reconstruction and restoration of the Twin Pines Senior Community Center. In the meantime, the City has submitted a claim with its insurance to recover costs related to damages at the Twin Pines Senior Community Center, which would include the remediation services performed and this reconstruction and restoration work.

Alternatives

1. Take No Action.

2. Refer back to staff for more information.

Attachments
A. Resolution
Fiscal Impact
☐ No Fiscal Impact
45

Twin Pines Senior Center Reconstruction - Staff Report (1) ☒ Funding Source Confirmed:

Budget appropriation of $176,230 plus a 10% contingency for a total amount not to exceed $193,853 in the current FY 2026-27 is required to fund the new CIP Project #8136 for the
reconstruction of the Twin Pines Senior Center (Account# 399- 4-803-8136-9030), funded by the Facilities Management Fund.

The City has submitted a claim with its insurance to recover costs related to damages at the Twin Pines Senior Community Center, which would include the remediation services
performed and this reconstruction and restoration work.

Source: Purpose: Public Outreach:

Staff Discretionary Action Posting of Agenda
46

RESOLUTION NO. 2026 –

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELMONT

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT FOR THE

RECONSTRUCTION OF THE TWIN PINES SENIOR COMMUNITY CENTER FOR $176,230 PLUS A 10% CONTINGENCY FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $193,853, AND APPROPRIATING ASSOCIATED EXPENDITURES IN THE FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2026-27 BUDGET RELATED TO THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE TWIN PINES SENIOR COMMUNITY CENTER.

WHEREAS, on August 8, 2026, the Twin Pines Senior Community Center experienced significant flooding resulting from a clogged toilet that continuously overflowed overnight; subsequent investigation determined that the floor drain in the men's restroom was obstructed due to a blockage at the exterior sewer cleanout, preventing water from draining properly and causing water to back up throughout portions of the facility; and, WHEREAS, the flooding affected multiple areas of the Senior Center, including the lobby, men's and women's restrooms, front desk area, two administrative offices, several storage closets, and the multiuse ballroom; City staff discovered the flooding the following morning and immediately began response efforts, including shutting off the water supply and manually removing standing water to prevent further damage; and, WHEREAS, due to the extent of the water intrusion, the City retained Alpha1 Reconstruction to perform emergency remediation and moisture mitigation services, including removal of damaged materials, installation of dehumidifiers and air-moving equipment, demolition of water-damaged materials, and comprehensive moisture mitigation throughout the affected areas; and,
WHEREAS, Alpha1 Reconstruction has completed the emergency remediation and moisture mitigation phase of the project, and the facility has been verified to be free of residual moisture and water damage; however, portions of the building require reconstruction, including replacement of damaged drywall, carpeting, hardwood flooring, baseboards, paint, and other building finishes necessary to restore the facility to its pre-loss condition; and, WHEREAS, the City solicited proposals from qualified contractors to perform the necessary reconstruction and restoration work, and received proposals from Alpha1 Reconstruction in the amount of $176,230 and Zone 4 in the amount of $234,109; and, WHEREAS, Alpha1 Reconstruction submitted the lowest responsive proposal and is familiar with the existing site conditions and project requirements as a result of completing the emergency remediation and moisture mitigation work; awarding the reconstruction work to Alpha1 Reconstruction will provide continuity between project phases, facilitate efficient project delivery, and allow the Twin Pines Senior Community Center to resume normal operations as quickly as possible; and,
WHEREAS, the reconstruction work constitutes a public project under the Belmont City Code and was procured in accordance with the City's informal bidding procedures; 47

pursuant to Belmont City Code Sections 2-29(g) and 2-146, public project construction contracts up to the amount established in California Public Contract Code Section 22032(b) may be awarded through the informal bidding process and are within the City Manager's contract authority; and,
WHEREAS, the current FY 2026-27 budget does not include sufficient funding for the reconstruction and restoration of the Twin Pines Senior Community Center, pending approval of the necessary budget appropriation; and,
WHEREAS, staff recommends initiating a new capital improvement program (CIP) project #8136 named “Senior Center Reconstruction” and transferring $176,230 plus a 10% contingency from the Facility Management Fund to fund the required reconstruction and restoration cost.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Belmont resolves as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Manager is authorized to execute an agreement with Alpha1 Reconstruction for reconstruction and restoration of the Twin Pines Senior Community Center for $176,230 plus a 10% contingency for a total amount not to exceed $193,853, and SECTION 2. The Council amends the FY 2026-27 budget by appropriating funds for the reconstruction and restoration of the Twin Pines Senior Community Center and initiated the new CIP Senior Center Reconstruction Project No. #8136, funded by a transfer from the Facility Management Fund (Account 574-1-504-9623) to the Senior Center Reconstruction Project No. 8136 for the required reconstruction work (Account 399-4-803-8136-9030 and 399-1-504- 7612).
* * *
ADOPTED October 13, 2026 by the City of Belmont City Council by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
48

ATTEST:

City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Attorney
49

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Replacement Project - Staff Report

STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: October 13, 2026
Agency: City of Belmont
Staff Contact: Ken Stenquist, Assistant City Manager, [email protected] Agenda Title: Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Replacement Project Agenda Action: For Information Only
Recommendation
Receive a presentation regarding the City of Belmont’s ERP replacement project and needs assessment initiation.

Strategic Focus Area
Fiscal and Organizational Sustainability
Background
The City of Belmont has utilized Microsoft Dynamics GP (GP), formerly known as Great Plains, as its primary enterprise resource planning (ERP) system since fiscal year 2006-07. GP supports core financial and administrative functions, including the City's general ledger, accounts payable, accounts receivable, purchasing, and related financial management activities.

Microsoft has announced that product enhancements and technical support for Dynamics GP will end on December 31, 2029. While the City has several years before the formal end of support, transitioning from a long-standing financial system is a significant undertaking that requires advance planning, procurement, data conversion, business process redesign, system implementation, staff training, and organizational change management. Beginning the planning process now will allow the City to evaluate its options thoughtfully and avoid making a technology decision based solely on an approaching deadline.

The City also recognizes that its financial system does not operate independently. Financial management is interconnected with the City's human capital management, payroll, permitting and land management, reporting, document management, payment, and other business systems. Accordingly, the City intends to evaluate its broader business systems environment as part of the ERP planning process to determine whether existing systems should be retained and integrated, enhanced, or potentially replaced as part of a coordinated modernization effort.

Analysis
The City solicited proposals from qualified firms to conduct an ERP and Business Systems Needs Assessment and develop a long-term technology roadmap. The purpose of this work is not to select a replacement system at this stage. Rather, the assessment will provide the City with the information necessary to understand its current environment, define future business and technology needs, evaluate potential approaches, and establish a realistic path toward eventual procurement and implementation. 50

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Replacement Project - Staff Report Although the immediate driver for the assessment is the announced end of support for Microsoft Dynamics GP, the review will consider the City's broader business systems environment. This includes, but is not limited to, financial management, human capital management, and permitting and land management systems. The assessment will examine how these systems support current business practices, where gaps or inefficiencies exist, the extent of manual workarounds and duplicate data entry, the quality and accessibility of information, existing system integrations, and opportunities to improve business processes through technology.

The assessment will also consider the City's future needs. This includes identifying opportunities for greater automation, improved reporting and data access, enhanced employee and customer self-service, improved integration among systems, and alignment of technology with the City's organizational structure and service delivery needs. An important objective will be distinguishing between improvements that can be made to existing systems in the near term and changes that should be addressed through a future ERP or other business system replacement.

Following the assessment, the consultant will develop an ERP and Business Systems Roadmap that is expected to identify:
• Current system strengths, limitations, and opportunities for improvement; • Future-state business and technology requirements;
• Options for replacing, enhancing, or integrating the City's existing financial, human resources, permitting, and related systems;
• Potential integration requirements among the City's business systems; • A recommended approach and sequencing for future system procurement and implementation; • Preliminary implementation timelines and major project milestones; • Organizational, staffing, and subject-matter expertise needed to support implementation; • Data conversion, training, change management, and organizational readiness considerations; • Planning-level capital and ongoing operating costs; and • Key risks, dependencies, and decisions that will need to be addressed before proceeding with a system replacement.

The City selected Plante Moran following its evaluation of proposals received. Plante Moran has provided consulting services to public-sector clients across California since 2006, with experience in technology assessment, strategic planning, system modernization, software selection, contract negotiation, and implementation support. The firm has evaluated a range of ERP solutions and has experience with systems implemented by neighboring jurisdictions, providing the City with relevant public-sector and regional perspective. Plante Moran's proposed scope of services is included as Attachment A.

Future ERP Selection and Implementation
The needs assessment and roadmap represent the first phase of what is expected to be a multi-year effort.

Following completion of the assessment, the City will have a better understanding of whether its existing systems should be retained, enhanced, integrated, or replaced and the appropriate sequence for doing so.

Subsequent phases would likely include development of detailed functional and technical requirements, 51

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Replacement Project - Staff Report preparation of procurement documents, solicitation and evaluation of proposals, system demonstrations, contract negotiations, implementation planning, data conversion, configuration, testing, training, and deployment.

An ERP replacement is substantially more than a software purchase. It is an organization-wide business transformation project that will require participation from virtually every City department. The City will need to dedicate internal subject-matter experts who understand existing financial, human resources, purchasing, budgeting, reporting, and operational processes. Depending on the scope and implementation approach ultimately selected, additional project management, technical, data, change management, and implementation resources may also be required.

The future resource commitment will depend significantly on the results of the needs assessment and the system and implementation approach ultimately selected. The City will therefore use the roadmap to develop a more informed estimate of both one-time and ongoing costs, including software licensing or subscription costs, implementation services, data conversion, integration, training, change management, project management, and additional staff resources that may be necessary during implementation.

The City should also expect that the ERP project will require a dedicated governance structure and executive sponsorship to facilitate timely decision-making and maintain coordination among departments.

The assessment will help identify the appropriate governance model and organizational capacity needed to successfully undertake the project while continuing to provide day-to-day City services.

Project Schedule and Next Steps
The initial needs assessment will begin with project kickoff and engagement with City leadership, department representatives, and key system users. Plante Moran will review relevant documentation and conduct individual and group interviews and workshops to understand current business processes, system functionality, existing challenges, and future needs.

The consultant will then present its findings to City staff for validation and develop a draft ERP and needs assessment roadmap. Following staff review and refinement, a final roadmap will be presented to the City.

The roadmap will provide the foundation for determining the City's next steps, including whether to proceed with procurement of a replacement ERP and/or other business systems, the appropriate timing and sequencing, and the resources required.

The City Council presentation is intended to provide an overview of the City's current ERP environment, explain the need to begin planning for the eventual replacement of Dynamics GP, and introduce the needs assessment and roadmap process. No decision regarding a specific replacement ERP system is being requested at this time. Future recommendations regarding system selection, procurement, project funding, and implementation will be brought forward for Council consideration as the assessment and subsequent planning work are completed.

Alternatives

1. Not Applicable
52

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Replacement Project - Staff Report Attachments
A. Plante Moran ERP Needs Assessment Proposal
B. Presentation
Fiscal Impact
☐ No Fiscal Impact
☒ Funding Source Confirmed:

There is no direct fiscal impact related to this informational report. Funding for the needs assessment services have been budgeted under Capital Improvement Program (CIP) ERP
System Replacement Project No. 2161 (Account# 399-1-501- 2161-9030).

Source: Purpose: Public Outreach:

Staff Council Vision/Priority Posting of Agenda
53 AUGUST 24, 2026
Count on us.

CITY OF BELMONT, CA
ERP Needs Assessment Proposal
54 August 24, 2026
Ken Stenquist
Interim Assistant City Manager
1 Twin Pines Ln,
Belmont, CA 94002
Dear Mr. Stenquist,
Thank you for the opportunity to submit our proposal for ERP Needs Assessment Services to the City of Belmont (the “City”). Based on our discussion of your needs, we understand that the City seeks to analyze its existing software environment footprint and gauge its needs for business processes and enterprise systems. Given the complexity and risks involved with undertaking these projects, our response highlights our background, customized project approach, and relevant experience. The unique factors below make Plante Moran an ideal fit for the City’s needs.

Dedicated public sector focus: Our public sector technology team brings extensive ERP knowledge within the public sector and is focused on performing technology projects in this sector. We bring lessons learned from over 100 municipal ERP selections and are knowledgeable of the ERP solutions available in your market to help you pick the right one.

Experience supporting California cities with ERP project. Ourteam has performed ERP projects for public sector organizations nationally and in California, including:
– City of Alameda
– City of Concord
– City of Cupertino
– City of Daly City
– City of Pomona
– City of San Mateo
– City of Santa Maria
– City of South San Francisco
An honest, unbiased assessment approach. Our team is experienced in assessing whether organizations should optimize or replace their software. We fully take into account the associated cost, level of effort, and organization-wide impact involved and we take our recommendation seriously.

Vendor independence. We are independent from all public sector ERP software providers. Our recommendations are based on the needs of the City — no one else’s.

We are ready to provide objective and comprehensive ERP consulting services to the City. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,
Plante & Moran, PLLC
Mark Warner, Engagement Partner
248-223-3799 | [email protected]
55 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 3
Table of contents
Firm Qualifications .............................................................................................................4 Firm overview..........................................................................................................................5 How we serve the public sector ........................................................................................... 6 Better client service starts with how we’re structured......................................................7 Experience serving public sector clients in California........................................................8 California public sector consulting clients........................................................................ 10 Software selection and implementation qualifications .................................................. 12 Workplan............................................................................................................................16 Needs Assessment Workplan Overview........................................................................... 17 Proposed detailed workplan............................................................................................... 18 Optional post-assessment services summary.................................................................. 27 Plante Moran SelectIQ........................................................................................................ 29 Team....................................................................................................................................31 Your consulting team.......................................................................................................... 32 Resumes................................................................................................................................ 33 References..........................................................................................................................39 Cost......................................................................................................................................42 Fee schedule......................................................................................................................... 43 Fee assumptions.................................................................................................................. 43 56 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 4
Firm Qualifications
57 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 5
Firm overview
For more than 100 years, we’ve provided our clients with advisors, ideas, and breakthrough strategies they can count on.

We are among North America’s largest accounting, tax, consulting, and wealth management firms. Our firm specializes in financial, compliance, human capital, operations improvement, strategic planning, technology selection and implementation, and wealth management services.

Fast facts
1924
Year founded
4,500+
Staff
400+
Partners
34 Offices worldwide
50 States with clients
150+
Countries where
we’ve served clients
45+
Services available
25+
Industries served
A better approach to client service,
100 years in the making.

Plante Moran’s founders had a vision:
“to create a people firm disguised as an
accounting firm.”
Now, over 100 years later, we’re fully invested
in taking that legacy into the future, moving
forward together with our clients.

When you work with our team, you can count
on us to see the story behind the numbers and
deliver relationships beyond results.

Learn more about our story — and
what it means for our clients — at
plantemoran.com/count-on-us.
58 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 6
How we serve the public sector
Many consulting firms specialize in one service or industry — when needs arise outside that area, you’ll likely have to engage another firm. Plante Moran offers something different: access to a wide range of experts and consulting capabilities across both the public sector and related industries. We will always connect you to the right specialist at the right time, serving you as one unified team.

With consulting capabilities designed for the public sector, Plante Moran is one firm with all bases covered.

SOFTWARE ADVISORY
• Needs assessment and options
analysis
• Independent product/integrator
selection assistance
• Contract negotiations guidance
and statement of work
development
• Includes ERP, FIN, HCM, EAM,
CIS, land management, etc.

DATA GOVERNANCE &

ANALYTICS
• Analytics advisory services
• Data management/data
warehouse services
• Data governance/data
quality/business intelligence
• Generative AI workshop and
strategy

INTERNAL CONTROLS &

RISK ADVISORY
• Internal audit program
development and execution
• Segregation of duties analysis and
conflict resolution
• Standard operating procedure
development
• Grant compliance

CYBERSECURITY
• Outsourced fractional virtual CISO
• Cyber compliance and risk
assessments
• Penetration testing and threat
intelligence
• IT audits

FORENSIC ACCOUNTING

SERVICES
• Financial investigations and fraud
detection
• Fraud risk and awareness training
• Contract compliance assessments

SOFTWARE IMPLEMENTATION

ASSISTANCE
• Project management assistance
• Subject matter expertise on best
practices
• Quality assurance/independent
verification and validation (IV&V)

BUSINESS PROCESS

IMPROVEMENT
• Current- and future-state process
mapping
• Best-practice recommendations
and decision support
• Future state visioning

CHART OF ACCOUNTS

SUPPORT
• Align existing chart of accounts to
standardized reporting and
business processes
• Set the new chart of accounts as
the foundation for a new ERP
system implementation

ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE

MANAGEMENT
• Communication and training
support
• Change agent network support
• Change impact assessments
• Project readiness reviews
• Post-go-live support planning

TECHNOLOGY STRATEGY & EXECUTION
• Organization-wide technology assessments
• Technology strategic planning, including
transformation with AI and emerging
technology
• Project management and execution of
technical projects

OUTSOURCED ACCOUNTING
• Controllership, including bank reconciliation and month-end close • Budget development
• Audit preparation and facilitation
• Financial planning analysis, including utility rate studies • Accountant of record services
59 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 7
Better client service starts with how we’re structured
Some firms serve clients primarily with professionals from the nearest office. We take a different approach. If the professionals best suited to your needs are 100 miles away, or even 1,000 miles away, we believe you should have access to them.

You’ll work with Plante Moran experts who are the best fit for your specific needs, regardless of where they’re located.

We emphasize firmwide collaboration, shared knowledge, and client-focused decision-making. Rather than operating as separate offices or service groups, our structure is designed to bring together the right mix of perspectives and expertise for each client. The result is guidance informed by the collective experience of the firm, not just individual specialists. We refer to this as our “one-firm” firm model (a concept popularized by former Harvard Business School Professor David Maister).

Many firms have expertise. What makes Plante Moran
different is how our expertise works together for our clients.

Here’s what the City can expect:
• The right blend of relevant expertise:

We organize our firm by industry group
and staff your team with professionals
who have focused their careers on
serving Government clients. That means
we look across all our offices, not just
the one closest to you, to build a team
aligned with your needs.
• As your priorities change or new
questions arise: You’ll have access to
subject matter and technical specialists
across our firm who work as one united
team on your behalf.

The advantage of a connected firm:

Because our teams are used to working
across offices, locations, and service areas,
we collaborate efficiently whether the right
professional is down the street or across
the country. Our collaboration practices
and technology help us stay aligned with
your priorities, share knowledge
effectively, and respond quickly to your
evolving needs.
focused on the
City
Firmwide expertise,
working together
Industry-focused
professionals on your
team
Easy collaboration,
regardless of location
Responsive support
as new needs arise
60 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 8
Experience serving public sector clients in California
Our multidisciplinary team has provided consulting services to public sector clients across California since 2006. Our trusted, independent advisors are prepared to help the City minimize risk, improve effectiveness, and efficiently provide key services to your constituents.

Industry involvement
Our participation and involvement in California's state and local professional organizations keep us current with the industry and regional issues and trends relevant to the City. Our professional staff participate in the following organizations:

The Municipal Information Systems Association of
California (MISAC) comprises public agency information
technology professionals working throughout California. We have presented on technical topics and attended the annual conference each year.

The California Society of Municipal Finance Officers
(CSMFO) is a statewide organization committed to improving the knowledge and skills of local government finance
professionals. We participate on the Commercial Roundtable and attend the annual conference each year, where we
present our thought leadership and connect with our peers and client network.

California Association of Building Officials (CALBO)
represents building officials, code enforcement professionals, and other local professionals through building code
development, education, advocacy, and regulatory
leadership. We participate in the Annual Business Meeting where we connect with our peers and client network
Experience responding to California’s unique needs
We currently serve over 1,400 clients across industries in California. We understand that our clients in California face challenges specific to the state, including:

Staffing: Organizations in California face unique staffing challenges, especially in the technology sector. As part of an approach to help you achieve a successful outcome, we can review your specific staffing environment, provide strategies to mitigate risks, and formulate plans for successful staffing throughout your key projects, if appropriate.

California’s regulatory environment: California’s laws create requirements other states don’t face. Our team works with current state and local rules and helps clients plan for upcoming changes.

Local needs within a national context: With extensive experience across California, we understand the varied needs of different communities and how others address similar changes. Drawing on both local and national insights, we develop practical solutions for the City.
61 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 9
Securing the right relationships to support strong project outcomes: Our existing relationships with clients and vendors in the California marketplace strengthen our understanding of the business and regulatory trends occurring in the state. These ongoing lines of communication enable us to advocate for our clients’ needs in the vendor marketplace. As a result, we can connect you with other organizations tackling similar needs to collaborate on solutions as appropriate.

How we utilize cooperative agreements
One important quality that sets Plante Moran apart is the number of cooperative procurement vehicles we can offer our public sector clients in California.

Cooperative agreements provide their users with access to competitively negotiated professional services contracts. While the traditional procurement cycle can take several months, a cooperative agreement leverages pre-negotiated terms and rates that can be used for the different services we offer, as noted above.

We participate in the cooperative agreements listed below. If the City also utilizes any of these agreements, the City will save time, energy, and resources when purchasing any additional services or resources from Plante Moran in the future. In this way, we can be an efficient long-term partner to the City.

Cooperative Agreements available to our California clients – Equalis
– The Interlocal Purchasing
System (TIPS)
– Foundation for California Community Colleges (FCCC) CollegeBuys – Los Angeles County Enterprise Services Master Agreement (ESMA) 62 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 10
California public sector consulting clients
Below is a representative (not all-inclusive) list of our public sector clients in California and a summary of the consulting services we have provided.

Legend of services
Application consulting Operations, process, and policy
Technology assessment, strategy, and modernization Internal controls and enterprise risk Cybersecurity Organizational change management
Business analytics Additional services
CLIENT

GOVERNMENT
City of Alameda
City of Berkeley
City of Concord
City of Cupertino
City of Daly City
City of Long Beach
City of Milpitas
City of Mountain View
City of Ontario
City of Palm Desert
City of Palo Alto
City of Petaluma
City of Pomona
City of San Mateo
City of Santa Barbara
City of Santa Maria
City of South San Francisco
City of Sunnyvale
City of Ventura
City of West Sacramento
County of Marin
County of Monterey
County of Orange
County of San Bernardino
County of San Diego
63 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 11
CLIENT
County of Sonoma

SPECIAL DISTRICTS
California Department of Managed
Healthcare
California Department of Transportation
California Public Utilities Commission
Contra Costa Water District
Eastern Municipal Water District
Golden Gate Bridge Highway &
Transportation District
Irvine Ranch Water District
Long Beach Transit
Los Angeles County Employees Retirement
Association
Los Angeles Fire and Police Pensions
Marin Housing Authority
Mesa Water District
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Placer County Water Agency
San Diego Association of Governments
San Mateo County Transit District
Santa Clara Valley Water District
Santa Margarita Water District K-12 SCHOOL DISTRICTS
Aspire Public Schools
San Francisco Unified School District

HIGHER EDUCATION
California State University, Long Beach
California State University, Chico
California State University, Sacramento
Cerritos College
Coast Community College District
San Jose Evergreen Community College
District
SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory at
Stanford University
South Orange County Community College
District
University of California, Davis
University of California, Irvine
University of California, Los Angeles
University of California, Merced
University of California, Santa Barbara
University of California, Santa Cruz
University of Southern California
64 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 12
Software selection and implementation qualifications
During our 40+ years of conducting enterprise solution selection and implementation projects, we have developed an extensive set of tools, templates, and methods to streamline these projects while ensuring that the integrity and thoroughness of the process is maintained.

Managing and optimizing enterprise systems, individually and holistically, is a continuous and dynamic process necessary for improving ROI, efficiency, and control across your organization. Our custom, systematic approach prevents costly customizations and workarounds. It brings you closer to meeting your IT investments' objectives while reducing risk.

Our management consultants bring expertise to multiple enterprise systems that support multiple lines of business within a municipal-based organization, including:

Complete independence from the ERP vendor marketplace
We provide clients with advice and counsel based on proven technology management practices and solutions rather than vendor relationships. Because we are independent of all public sector ERP software providers, we are not bound by any agreements to recommend certain products. Through our numerous system selection and implementation projects, we have gained significant experience and knowledge of providers of municipal software solutions for public sector entities and the advantages/drawbacks of their solutions. Overall, it is our goal to help our clients select the software solution(s) that best meets their requirements in both the short- and long-term.

Vendor liaison program (VLP) and marketplace awareness
While we are independent of the vendor marketplace, our robust VLP allows us to provide extensive knowledge of the functionality, vendor background, pricing, contract terms, integration, and services of the public sector software marketplace — before the system selection process begins. Our VLP empowers our staff to monitor specific vendors to:
• Maintain an understanding of current and future products and services • Obtain the maximum number of vendor responses to RFPs developed for our clients • Maximize vendor understanding of our clients’ needs
• Understand the vendor’s market position and capacity to effectively serve • Track mergers, acquisitions, and major announcements associated with these vendors • Identify the business justification vendors are successfully using to win public sector business 65 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 13
ERP solutions analyzed and selected
Products analyzed and/or selected by our clients over the last five years — for which we’ve assisted in negotiating contracts and/or providing implementation assistance — include the following:
– Oracle PeopleSoft
– Oracle NetSuite
– Oracle E-Business
Suite
– Oracle ERP Cloud
– Tyler Enterprise ERP
– Tyler ERP Pro
– Tyler EnerGov
– Tyler NewWorld
– Infor CloudSuite
– BS&A Software
– Microsoft Dynamics
– UKG
– SymPro
– SAP
– CGI Advantage
– Workday
– iNovah
– NEOGOV
– Springbrook
Land Management / Permitting solutions analyzed and selected We proactively engage the permitting and electronic plan review marketplace as unbiased advisors, bringing significant experience evaluating, defining integrations for, and implementing leading permitting and land management solutions. Examples include:
– Accela
– Tyler Technologies EPL
– Oracle Permitting &
Licensing
– Clariti
– Accela
– ePermitHub
– Bluebeam
– OpenGov
– Infor
– ePlanSoft
– Salesforce
– CitizenServe
– iMS
– Archistar
– Central Square
CMMS and Asset Management solutions analyzed and selected We actively monitor the CMMS and asset management marketplace (including solution capabilities and integrators serving public sector operations) to facilitate a thorough, independent evaluation and selection of the vendor best meeting the City's needs.
– Brightly (formerly Dude Solutions/
Assetic)
– OpenGov AMS (formerly Cartegraph)
– Trimble Unity Construct and Maintain
(formerly Cityworks)
– Cogsdale
– IBM Maximo
– AssetWorks
– Track-It!
– Tyler Enterprise Asset Management
– Oracle Utilities Work and Asset Management
– Infor Asset and Work Management
– Vueworks (AtkinsRealis)
– NEXGEN
ERP total cost of ownership (TCO) model
As part of our ERP needs assessment methodology, we’ve invested significant time and resources into the development of our ERP TCO model. This Excel-based model includes a control panel for monitoring assumptions used in the TCO calculations (e.g., length of implementation, percentage of license fees charged for maintenance, inflationary factors, etc.). It also allows for quick analysis as assumptions are validated with the City.

Besides the assumptions mentioned above, the primary input into the TCO component of the model is marketplace data that is stored in a database maintained by Plante Moran consultants. This marketplace data is gleaned from hundreds of ERP proposals we have evaluated and a similar number of ERP contracts we have assisted clients with over the years. Using this marketplace data and a variety of metrics, we will determine approximate ERP costs for the City, including population size, number of employees, scope of solution, and complexity of operations (including budget). 66 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 14
In addition to these ERP “hard costs,” we use a similar methodology to estimate “soft costs,” including internal costs such as staffing, facilities, supplies, etc. We’ve used a variety of methods such as project contingency (i.e., percentage of total “hard costs” implementation), overhead allocation based on estimated staffing costs, and others.

ERP project critical success factors
Although not specifically requested by the City, we believe it is important to understand the critical success factors relative to an ERP initiative that we have learned through involvement in other ERP procurement and implementation projects.
• Obtain visible executive level sponsorship. Without a strong level of visible executive sponsorship on the project, the project team will face significant challenges with changing business practices, obtaining necessary resources from the organization, and working through staff change management issues. Our assistance to the City in this area would be as follows:
o Identify an individual who has a high level of authority and responsibility within the organization to provide executive sponsorship on the project. o Document the roles and responsibilities for this individual as part of the project charter. o Ensure that this individual is visible at key points during the selection and implementation phases of the project.
o Implement an executive steering committee as part of the project that would be chaired by the executive sponsor.
• Conduct appropriate due diligence activities on potential solutions. Our approach to serving the City is intentionally very comprehensive and inclusive. Our goal is to achieve staff buy-in and ensure staff enter the system implementation phase with as much knowledge as possible. They should have clear expectations as to what is required to achieve a successful implementation. Ultimately, we want to obtain the best solution for the City, one that enhances various business processes. Our assistance in this area would be as follows:
o Implement a comprehensive governance structure during the selection phase that appoints module leads and teams that include process owners and representative process end-users. o Conduct interviews with departments to ensure their needs are understood and incorporated into the process.
o Provide insight into the products, services, and technologies that are being proposed by the responding vendors.
o Identify an evaluation process and scoring methodology that reflects the needs and priorities of the City.
o Involve business staff at a variety of points within the software selection phase, including:
– Involvement in departmental interviews
– Review and approval of functional
requirements
– Development of vendor demonstration
scripts
– Analysis of the appropriate sections of the
ERP vendor responses
– Participation in vendor demonstrations
– Participation in site visits and reference
checking
67 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 15
• Negotiate a comprehensive statement of work (SOW) and contract. Having been involved with many ERP selection and implementation projects, we are aware of potential issues that may arise during system implementation that will be governed by the SOW and contract. As a result, our top priority is to develop a comprehensive SOW and negotiate a contract that protects the financial and other interests of the City. Our assistance in this area would be as follows:
o During the selection phase of the project, we will institute the concept of a “solution gap log,” describing gaps between the selected vendor’s solution and the needs of the City. This log will be an input during the SOW and contracting phase.
o We will leverage our SOW checklist (refined through our extensive experience performing other projects) to adequately address the scope of software, hardware, and services in the SOW.
o Implement contract provisions.
• Involve appropriate levels of client staff during the implementation. One of the major problems that our clients face during ERP implementations is the ability to commit the necessary amount of time and resources required to perform implementation activities. Most municipal organizations have seen their staffing levels reduced, in some cases significantly, during economic malaise, while service levels have increased. The effect of managing current operations while undertaking an ERP implementation has become overwhelming for many organizations. Our assistance to the City in this area would be as follows:
o Set realistic expectations as to the level of staff effort required during the early part of the selection phase of the project with executive management. o Communicate with key decision makers to help them understand their responsibility to commit their time in a meaningful way during system implementation. o Request information from vendors as to expected levels of staff commitment during the implementation phase of the project.
o Implement an appropriate phasing of modules during system implementation that is achievable within current staffing constraints.
o Secure external contract resources to perform the City activities during system implementation for certain technical and business areas. o Determine if recent retirees can be contracted back to the City to provide backfill to existing operations so key staff can be freed up for the project. o Defer other non-critical projects to a future timeframe. o Expedite initiation of implementation activities to the selection phase of the project (e.g., identification of key issues and opportunities, data cleansing, collection of documentation for use by the software vendor, etc.).
• Successful implementation of ERP application - We have extensive knowledge of software selection best practices through numerous software selection and implementation projects. In addition, our robust and thorough selection process has resulted in the ability to significantly minimize risk during the implementation phase of the project. The thoroughness and self-documented nature of our process has translated to outcomes that have not been challenged by vendors through a formal protest process. This means our clients experience minimal change order activity during the implementation and achieve expected project budgets and timeframes. 68 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 16
Workplan
69 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 17
Needs Assessment Workplan Overview
For your ease of review, we’ve consolidated our detailed workplan into the following summary overview.

PHASE /

STEP KEY ACTIVITIES DELIVERABLE
PHASE 0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND PLANNING

0.1 Project initiation. Introduce team, finalize scope & timeline, hold kickoff, build org structure, and set up a secure SharePoint collaboration center. Project SharePoint site

0.2 Project charter. Framework covering objectives, business drivers, guiding principles, constraints, key risks, roles, scope, milestones, and org structure. Project charter

0.3 Detailed project plan. Major phases, milestones, and work tasks with due dates; reviewed and updated throughout. Detailed project plan

0.4 Schedule & status management. Recurring meetings with the City PM covering status, scheduling, risk reviews, and action items. Project status meetings PHASE 1 NEEDS ASSESSMENT

1.1 Collect & review documents. Review org charts, prior studies, workflows, desk manuals, and existing systems inventory. Items-to-collect list

1.2 Project kickoff meeting. Introduce project, approach, timeline, and roles to City stakeholders; may include live polling. Kickoff presentation

1.3 Stakeholder interviews. Process-owner, departmental, and executive interviews across Financials, HR, CMMS/Asset Management, Land Management, reporting, conversions, and interfaces. Educational + investigative lens to surface gaps, needs, and risks.

Stakeholder interviews

1.4 Observations & recommendations. Categorized into functional gaps, system utilization, process, and policy; delivered with a tracking sheet.

Observations & tracking
document

1.5 Software inventory & strategy. Inventory all systems/interfaces with future-use ratings: Replace, Consider, Maintain, Interface. Software inventory & strategy

1.6 Draft needs assessment report. Exec summary, key themes, action plan, 10-year cost estimate, marketplace assessment, staffing estimate, and next steps.

Needs assessment report
(draft)

1.7 Finalize & present report. Incorporate City feedback, deliver final report, and formally present to a chosen audience.

Final needs assessment
report
Note: Focus is on imminently replacing Dynamics GP for Financials, assessing fit/gaps for ADP (HR/Payroll/Time), and evaluating medium-to-long-term fit of land and asset management systems. A high-level workplan for solicitation development through implementation follows separately. 70 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 18
Proposed detailed workplan
We describe each phase of our proposed project through completion of needs assessment, its respective activities, and the deliverables you can expect to receive in the workplan below. Note that a high-level version of our workplan for solicitation development through implementation will follow.

Phase 0: Project planning and management
The purpose of this initial phase is to establish the project leadership and management activities that we’ll execute throughout the project’s duration. As the project advances, we’ll conduct regular project management meetings to coordinate and verify the completion of all in-scope tasks.

0.1 Conduct project initiation activities
During the project initiation meeting, we’ll introduce the project team and finalize the project scope, deliverables, and timetables. We will then hold a project kickoff meeting to communicate the goals, structure, and timeline of the project to stakeholders. Before or during the project kickoff, we’ll work with the City to develop a project organizational structure, draft a project charter, create a project plan, and schedule project status meetings. We will also set up a project collaboration center, a secure SharePoint environment in which to store and share project documents.

0.2 Develop project charter
We will develop a draft project charter that provides a framework for the following areas of focus:
– Project overview
– Project objectives
– Business drivers
– Project guiding principles
– Project constraints
– Key risks
– Roles and responsibilities
– Scope plan (both in- and out-of-scope items)
– Project milestones and deliverables
– Project organizational structure
The project charter helps us drive effective decision-making during the project, as well as enforce best practices within existing or new software (which may result in changes to current-state processes). We will provide the project charter to the City for review and approval before commencing significant project activities.

Deliverable: Project charter (see the sample below)
71 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 19 72
ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 20

0.3 Develop detailed project plan
We will work with the City to design a detailed project plan that meets the City’s overall priorities and specific needs. This will include:
• Major phases and milestones.
• Work tasks and their due dates.

We will regularly review and update the project plan as needed throughout the project.

Deliverable: Detailed project plan

0.4 Manage project schedule and moderate project status meetings We will facilitate regularly scheduled meetings with the City’s project manager. These meetings will cover status updates, scheduling, risk reviews, follow-up on action items, etc.

Deliverable: Project status meetings
Phase 1: Needs assessment
The purpose of this phase is for our team to develop an understanding of how departments currently use the existing ERP system and how processes function in practice. As part of our needs assessment, we’ll review existing documentation and interview key stakeholders. We will then offer actionable recommendations for the City to improve in the future-state.

1.1 Collect and review documents
We will review any available existing documentation gathered and provided by the City, so that we can develop a comprehensive understanding of current operations and technologies. We will review potential documents, including:
• Organizational charts.
• Previous studies that are relevant to the project.
• Preexisting workflow documentation/flowcharts, such as those already developed. • Existing “desk manuals” and system documentation.
• A listing of existing systems supporting the various business processes that we’ll evaluate for potential replacement or interfacing with a new ERP system.

Deliverable: Items-to-collect list
73 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 21

1.2 Facilitate project kickoff meeting
We will hold a project kickoff with the City’s stakeholders to introduce the project, discuss our approach, provide a timeline, and outline their roles. This typically includes a larger organization-wide audience but could be limited to a smaller leadership group, if desired. We will develop the presentation with input from the project team. The presentation may include live polling for real-time feedback on goals and concerns.

Deliverable: Kickoff presentation

1.3 Conduct stakeholder interviews
Following the collection of background documentation and the project kickoff, we’ll conduct a series of stakeholder interviews. These may include executives, process owners, and department end-users. To prepare interviewees, we’ll provide an interview guide and questionnaire to facilitate discussion on:
• High-level objectives and expectations for new system(s). • Inventory and use of existing business processes and systems. • Identification of shadow systems used to supplement ERP system functionality. • Integration requirements between applications and technologies. • Key reporting requirements.
• Organizational limitations and barriers to change.
• Planned or in-progress technology enhancement initiatives. • Desired enhancements or changes for the future-state system and processes.

These interviews will help us understand the City’s current processes, compliance with those processes, issues with existing technology, and common complaints. This will allow us to identify improvement opportunities related to processes and technology in enterprise systems operations. Interviews also serve as a critical element in our change management approach; the input from both process owners and departmental stakeholders will allows us to identify, discuss, and seek buy-in for potential future-state changes that could impact them.

While these interviews will be largely conversational, our team will approach the interview with both an educational and investigative lens:

Educational
• Provide the advantages and disadvantages of redesigning business processes. • Discuss opportunities for improving business processes and reporting. • Provide insights into industry best practices and ERP system capabilities.

Investigative
• Identify gaps in the current business applications and processes. • Determine desired functional improvements in existing systems. 74 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 22
• Understand reporting needs.
• Identify staff concerns about current operations, data-handling redundancies, etc. • Discuss proposed business process redesign opportunities that staff believe will benefit their department’s operations and the quality of services.
• Determine existing and desired interfaces/integrations. • Identify project concerns and risks.

We will conduct three types of interviews, which can be adjusted based on the unique needs of the City:
• Process owner interviews: We will discuss current business processes and current- and futuresystem needs with the staff who perform/own these processes. These are the core interviews in which we’ll develop an understanding of current-state processes and how the current systems support them. The scope of the processes included in these interviews is outlined in the “process scope” table below.
• Departmental interviews: We will conduct individual sessions with each department of the City to discuss their specific needs, business systems, and project goals. We will also examine the department’s processes related to the in-scope areas.
• Executive interviews: We will hold conversations with department leaders to better understand their perspectives on project objectives, risks, outcomes, and priorities.

Process scope
Plante Moran will include assessment of the functional areas below in its scope. We understand that the City would like an assessment of its most major business systems, with the goal of imminently replacing Dynamics GP for Financials. It is our understanding that the City would further like to assess fit and gaps for ADP for Human Resources, Payroll, and Time, and assess the medium-to-long-term fit of its land management and asset management systems. Should our understanding be incorrect, we are happy to discuss modification of the functional areas below to better fit the City’s specific needs.

Financials
– Accounts Payable
– Accounts Receivable
– Bank Reconciliation
– Budget Management
– Cash Receipting
– Fixed Assets
– General Ledger
– Grant Management
– Project Accounting
– Purchasing
Human Resources
– Payroll
– Timekeeping
– Employee Benefits
– Employee Self-Service
– Personnel Actions
– Position Control
– Performance Management
– Onboarding/Offboarding
– Recruitment
– Employee Files/Records
Computerized Maintenance
Management, Asset Management
– Asset Information Management
– Work initiation
– Work planning and scheduling
– Work execution
– Work completion/analysis
Land Management
– Building Permitting
– Right of Way and Engineering
Permitting
– Code Enforcement
– Planning and Zoning
Other
– Reporting & Dashboards
– Conversions
– Document Management
– Interfaces
Deliverable: Stakeholder interviews
75 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 23

1.4 Document observations and recommendations
We will document key observations and recommendations for improvement throughout our stakeholder interviews. These observations will be based on our identification of the topics below:

Duplicated
efforts
Cycle time Searching and
indexing
Internal
process
controls
Role ambiguity Recognize
past practices
Multiple
sources of
truth
We will base our recommendations for improvements on industry best practices and our experience with similar public sector clients and application environments. We will organize these observations and recommendations into the following categories to guide how the City should address these issues:
• Functional gaps: Identify current system functionality gaps that need to be reviewed and resolved by the development of requirements and the evaluation of vendor solutions. • System utilization: Document issues resulting from underuse of the system or using multiple systems, leading to time-consuming data transfer and reconciliation. • Process: Document difficulties from the current process or lack of standardization and discuss necessary process changes before system implementation. • Policy: Highlight areas needing policy adjustments or new policies to resolve issues. Discuss and adjust policies before implementing a new system.

We will provide our observations and recommendations to the City for review. Once the City confirms the accuracy of the observations, we will provide a tracking sheet so that the City can discuss all relevant plans to prepare for implementation of the future-state recommendation.

Deliverable: Observations and opportunities, associated tracking document

1.5 Develop software inventory and strategy
We will inventory all systems, applications, and interfaces used in the City’s ERP environment. We will then present a software inventory table to the City with future-use recommendations using the legend below:

LEGEND CODE DESCRIPTION
R Replacement This application is intended for replacement with the selected solution.

C Consider This application is being considered for replacement with the selected solution, based on the strength of the finalist vendor offering and cost/benefit of the replacement module.

M Maintain This application won’t be replaced during this effort.

I Interface This application won’t be replaced but should be interfaced/integrated with the selected solution.
76 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 24
We will refine the application migration table with the City during the RFP development process.

An example of what an inventory table could look like is shown below:

APPLICATION NOTES MIGRATION PLAN
Active directory Single sign-on solution I
CentralSquare Land management solution I
Solver Budget planning tool C
ADP HR/Payroll/Timekeeping system C
Microsoft Dynamics GP Legacy financial system R
Deliverable: Software inventory and strategy

1.6 Develop draft needs assessment report
We will create a report based on the discovery activities outlined above, taking a proactive approach to prepare the City for the project. Instead of focusing only on the current environment, we will connect it to desired outcomes (i.e., a new solution) and detail steps to achieve them, resulting in a clear action plan.

Our experience serving similar organizations has shown us that concentrating solely on functional requirements for a future system is insufficient for successful implementation. Other important factors include identifying process changes, preparing for the implementation of staffing, and identifying potential risks related to data migration and new interfaces. For that reason, our report won’t simply list gaps in the current-state systems; it’ll offer actionable recommendations that will guide the City through the transition to its future environment.

Note that this scope anticipates that based on City needs, Financials and HR, Payroll, and Timekeeping will be covered in greater detail in our needs assessment than Land Management, CMMS, and Asset Management. Given the City’s opportunity to consider the strengths and weaknesses of its ADP implementation in its current state during its procurement window for Financials, we intend to provide the City with the necessary information to determine the financial system selection should consider if solution providers can also offer solution for HR, Payroll, and Timekeeping.

Given the recent acquisitions of CMMS/Asset Management solutions and the stable state of the Land Management solution, we understand the City’s goal for the assessment to be gathering the information it needs to determine if the processes in place with current solutions meet the City’s business needs, or if those areas may require further consideration after the replacement of Financials is complete.

The report will include the following sections:
• Executive summary.
• Key themes that summarize the detailed observations and recommendations. • An action plan outlining strategies and timing for implementing the detailed recommendations and transitioning to the future-state environment. Strategies will be categorized into the selection, preimplementation, implementation, and post-go-live phases. • Cost estimate, including:
77 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 25
o 10-year total cost of ownership.
o Estimates of software, support, and implementation costs, including services like change management support and integration development assistance. • Marketplace assessment, including:
o Trends in the marketplace.
o Potential solutions available that meet possible selection scope of the City. o Single solution vs. multiple system “best-of-breed” approach. • Implementation staffing estimate, a high-level estimate for planning purposes showing:
o Potential roles that will need to be defined and filled. o Level of effort for each role.
o Project staffing strategies.
• Considerations for next steps, including:
o Risks to consider.
o Governance considerations.
o Procurement decisions.
o Estimated project timeline.

Deliverable: Needs assessment report draft
Example Components of a report below:
78 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 26

1.7 Finalize and present needs assessment report
After the City has reviewed the draft needs assessment report, we will make the appropriate finalization updates and provide the final report. We will then formally present the report to an audience of the City’s choosing onsite.

Deliverable: Final needs assessment report
Number Function Process Area Opportunity Action Item Category Timing 1 Technical Reporting
The City should consider decentralizing reporting ability and responsibility throughout HR and Finance. Modern ERP reporting tools typically require less IT-centric skillsets to learn, and while this would require training for HR and Finance staff, teams have expressed the willingness to take this on. This would allow Finance and HR better control over reporting for their business areas and eliminate the risk of relying on an individual for reporting needs.

Consider staff suited to take on reporting
training during the implementation. System Utilization Implementation 2 Technical Workflow
The City will be introduced to workflow capability through acquisition of a new ERP system, and should consider migrating approval processes to that system in place of manual ink approvals wherever possible and strive to limit exceptions (such as ink signatures for contracts).

Prepare staff for paperless approval
processes. System Utilization Implementation
3 Finance General Ledger
The City appears to be open to instituting a monthly soft-close. FMS is currently capable of this function, and the City should consider enabling soft-close before the selection of a new ERP system. Adjusting to this change now will provide the City an opportunity to begin change management early while immediately providing a path to cleaner reconciliation while highlighting transactions that may be submitted late to help account for possible reconciliation issues.

Consider implementation of a monthly softclose in FMS as soon as possible and continue to use this function in the future
ERP. System Utilization Immediate
4 Finance Cashiering The City might consider acquiring a separate payment processor for Consider an additional payment processor to System Utilization Immediate 5 Finance Projects
Any ERP the City would expect to acquire to replace FMS will be capable of tracking project transactions. The City should consider adopting functionality available in these systems, which will empower project managers to track their own projects with less intervention from Finance. With the introduction of better project cost tracking in the ERP, Finance should begin setting expectations that departments will be responsible for project cost tracking.

Finance to determine if it will ask its
department users to utilize the future ERP's
project modules for cost-tracking,
offloading most of the tracking burden from
Finance. System Utilization Implementation
79 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 27
Optional post-assessment services summary
The following summarized workplan highlights the key deliverables of a post-needs assessment scenario for the replacement of Dynamics GP. Should the City request additional detail about any one of these phases or associated deliverables, we are happy to provide it.

Phase 2: RFP development and solicitation, vendor selection, and contract negotiations
This phase includes review of vendor proposals, coordination of vendor demonstrations, interviews, and facilitation of selection committee meetings to determine vendor semi-finalists and a vendor finalist. The major outcome of this phase is the selection of an ERP system(s) and vendor, based on the supporting selection criteria. We will provide coaching to the City throughout the due diligence process.

PROJECT ACTIVITIES DELIVERABLES / ACTION ITEMS

2.1 Develop functional and
technical requirements
– Build requirements unique to the City into our best-practice requirements
– Associate business use cases with their relevant business specifications – Finalized requirements

2.2 RFP preparation and
delivery planning
– Identify possible evaluation criteria and weighting factors – Review procurement decisions
– Identify procurement advisory and selection team candidates – Procurement planning matrix

2.3 Develop solution selection
criteria and define decision
making process
– RFP solicitation schedule
– Evaluator scoring templates
– Vendor selection criteria and specific requirements to be fulfilled

2.4 Develop interface
requirements
– Define required interfaces for retained systems to be integrated with selected ERP
–

2.5 Develop request for
proposal (RFP) document
– Comprehensive list of required and optional modules and functional requirements
– RFP templates, guidelines, and vendor questions
– Pricing forms, functional specification compliance templates, managed (hosted) service capabilities matrix, implementation service hours allocation matrix

2.6 Assist with distribution of
RFP document
– Vendor contact distribution list
– Identification of vendors with existing partner relationships

2.7 Pre-proposal guidance – Draft RFP addendum reviews
– Draft responses to vendor questions during open RFP solicitation period
80 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 28

PROJECT ACTIVITIES DELIVERABLES / ACTION ITEMS

2.8 Analyze and evaluate ERP
vendor proposals
– Comprehensive vendor proposal analysis report with our SelectIQ approach
– Facilitation of proposal analysis meeting
– In-depth cost analysis
– Documented vendor follow-up questions
– Scoring to identify semi-finalist vendors

2.9 Facilitate vendor shortlist
process
– Letter templates for vendors proceeding forward to demonstrations – Software demonstration scripts based upon defined business use cases – Scoring/feedback forms for software demonstrations, reference checks, and other due diligence
– Demonstration scheduling template and other due diligence templates

2.10 Facilitate vendor solution
demonstrations (optional)
– Moderate demonstrations onsite on the City’s behalf
– Note items for clarification during demo for follow-up

2.11 Support postdemonstration due
diligence evaluation
activities
– Vendor evaluation reference checking forms
– Vendor evaluation scoring form updates
– Participation in reference interviews

2.12 Assist in the selection of
the preferred vendor
– Tabulated evaluation team scoring forms (matrices) and analysis – Meeting to select finalist vendor
– Written executive summary framing finalist vendor recommendation

2.13 Contract negotiations
advisory services
– Contract negotiation strategy checklist
– Examples of previously executed contracts from similar municipalities with vendor-accepted terms and conditions
– Contract negotiation support
– Recommended terms and conditions
– Strategies for SOW development
81 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 29
Plante Moran SelectIQ
AI-assisted proposal analysis, guided by consultant judgment.

SelectIQ makes complex vendor responses faster, more
organized, easier to compare, and enables quicker decisions.

ORGANIZE
Transforms vendor inputs into
structured comparison views
across requirements, pricing,
staffing, implementation approach,
references, and exceptions.

COMPARE
Highlights meaningful differences
across vendors so evaluators can
focus on fit, risks, tradeoffs, and
follow-up questions.

DISCUSS
Supports documented, defensible
selection discussions by pairing
analysis outputs with our
procurement and ERP advisory
experience.

How SelectIQ supports the proposal analysis phase

1. Intake 2. Synthesis 3. Review 4. Evaluation support
Vendor responses,
pricing, questionnaires,
references, staffing
estimates, and
exceptions are collected
in standardized forms.

AI-assisted
summarization and
grouping creates
practical comparison
views for requirements,
costs, scope, staffing, and
risks.

Plante Moran consultants
review outputs, verify
context, and develop
questions or clarifications
for evaluators and
vendors.

The City receives
structured materials that
support shortlisting,
demonstrations, due
diligence, and final
selection discussions.

Tangible Impact for the City of Belmont
Better evaluation conversations
Faster organization. Less time spent organizing
vendor information; more time spent testing vendor
fit and feasibility.

Flexible comparison. Evaluators can compare
requirements, scope, cost, staffing, and exceptions
without losing detail.

Better follow-up. Side-by-side analysis helps identify
questions before demonstrations and due diligence.

Responsible use commitments
Human-led decisions. AI assists analysis; it does not
select a vendor or replace City procurement
judgment.

Consultant review. Plante Moran consultants review
and validate AI-assisted outputs before client use.

Accountability. Our engagement team remains
accountable for the analysis, recommendations, and
facilitation support.

SelectIQ helps make complex ERP proposal information easier to understand, compare, and discuss while preserving the independence, documentation, and professional judgment that matter in a public procurement. 82 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 30
Phase 3: Implementation advisory services
The scope of this phase will involve all activities to initiate, plan, configure, test, and accept the ERP solution identified.

PROJECT ACTIVITIES DELIVERABLES

3.1 Project initiation and
implementation planning
support services
– Project organizational chart
– Roles and responsibilities (R&R)
matrix
– Project charter
– Scope statement
– Implementation lessons learned
– Client success characteristics
– Project issues, risks, and
decisions tracking log
– Stakeholder communications
plan
– Project management plan
– Review of vendor WBS
– Project schedule management
plan
– Project timeline
– Project deliverables tracking
– Stakeholder R&R matrix
– Budget monitoring tool
– Project change control
procedures

3.2 Project execution and
control support services
– Defined hardware, applications,
and database configuration
environment reviews
– Project status reports
– Updates to communications,
schedule, risks, and decision
logs/plans
– Training curriculum reviews
– Training materials
– Application unit testing and/or
test scripts
– Application and service tracking
– Client deployment process
– Meeting minutes
– Process diagram and procedure
updates
– Implementation vendor invoice
reviews
– Data conversion maps and
analytics strategies
– Transition strategy and go-live
checklist

3.3 Project closing and postimplementation support
– Post-implementation roadmap
– Transition plan
– Post-implementation process
and system audit
– Ongoing system support
procedures
– Year-end cutover checklist
– Lessons learned documentation
83 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 31
Team
84 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 32
Your consulting team
Our staffing approach aligns project responsibilities with each team member’s expertise and experience to maximize value and support the City’s objectives, while leveraging a team that has successfully worked together on similar engagements. The firm will designate a project manager as the primary day-to-day contact, responsible for coordinating governance, defining roles and responsibilities, and assigning resources based on project needs. In addition to a committed core project team, Plante Moran provides access to a broad network of public sector specialists and subject matter experts who can be engaged as needed to support project success. Assuming an October 1 start date, the following are key staff that may be assigned.

TEAM MEMBERS PROJECT ROLES
Mark Warner Engagement Partner
Mark will have overall responsibility for all project resources, ensuring that all Plante Moran services are completed within schedule and budget. His focus will be on the City’s satisfaction with the work of our consulting team. He’ll make sure the right resources of our firm are assigned, look out for your interests proactively, and respond to your questions promptly.

Brian Pesis Project Director
Brian will lead the execution of the engagement and is accountable for delivery of all work products. He will direct the project team, manage workstreams, and ensure activities are completed on time, within scope, and aligned to the City’s governance and operating environment. Brian will ensure the internal team has the resources necessary and produces high-quality, decision-ready deliverables that support the City’s needs
Matt Coats Project Manager, CMMS/Asset Management Lead
Matt will collaborate with the City’s Project Manager to facilitate the execution of the project work plan and schedule while managing the Plante Moran project team. He will lead the ERP discovery process, the facilitation of interviews, the preparation and review of project deliverables, and ensure schedule compliance.

Matt will be the day-to-day contact and will manage all phases of this project.

Jenna Houterloot Finance Lead
Jenna will serve as the Finance Subject Matter Expert, supporting stakeholder interviews, providing functional finance expertise, and contributing to key project deliverables to ensure the engagement reflects public-sector financial best practices.

Santana Walker HCM, Payroll & Time Lead
Santana will serve as the Human Resources, Payroll, and Timekeeping subject matter expert. She will provide perspective and review all Human Resourcesrelated materials and deliverables, and provide guidance on industry best practices throughout the project.

Caroline Glass Land Management Lead
Caroline will serve as the Land Management subject matter expert. She is a certified urban planner (AICP) and previous deputy development services director for land use planning, zoning, building permitting/inspections, licensing, addressing, and code enforcement. She will lead process discovery and analysis for Land Management.
85 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 33
Resumes
Mark Warner
Partner
Role: I’ll have overall responsibility for all Plante Moran project resources ensuring that all our services are completed within schedule and budget. My focus will be on the City’s satisfaction with the work of our consulting team. My primary goal is to make sure we are applying the right resources of the firm to look out for your interests proactively, respond to your questions promptly, meet all deadlines, ensure no surprises, and value your time.

Experience: I spend all my time working with public sector clients, with a significant majority of them local governments and other agencies. My clients appreciate my no-nonsense approach, which helps them meet deadlines while staying current on operational best practices and industry insights throughout the year. I have 25 years of experience in financial accounting, process improvement, prepackaged enterprise software system selection and implementation, and project management.

Select key clients:
- City of New Orleans, LA
- Kent County, MI
- City of Grand Rapids, MI
- City of Greeley, CO
- Gwinnett County, GA
- St Johns County, FL Las
Vegas Convention and
Visitors Authority
- Cuyahoga County Public Library
- Great Lakes Water Authority
- Southeast Michigan Council of
Governments
Professional affiliations: I am a member of the national Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) and am active in the Michigan, Colorado and Ohio chapters. I’ve been fortunate over the last 20 years to have been involved in the leadership of the Technology Resource Committee of the Michigan GFOA. I’m also a frequent public sector presenter on topics related to the software application lifecycle including best practices, software optimization and other technology modernization approaches.

Fun fact: I’m passionate about the National Park System that Theodore Roosevelt worked to build over a hundred years ago. I’ve been fortunate enough to have taken several cross-country road trips visiting these amazing jewels of our nation.
86 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 34
Brian Pesis
Public Sector Consulting Principal
Role: As the Project Director, I will be responsible for working with your leadership to understand your objectives and concerns. I will guide our team’s project strategy, provide input based on my experience, and review deliverables for quality assurance and alignment with project objectives.

Experience: I have spent over a decade working exclusively with public sector organizations on complex technology and process improvement initiatives. I lead our team’s west coast consulting efforts, focusing on helping government and public utility organizations. In all projects, I focus on facilitating business process improvement, as well as connecting clients facing similar obstacles.

Highlights include:
• West Coast focus: As the leader of our team’s west coast consulting services, I help lead technology and business process improvement projects across the western United States. This provides me with a deep understanding of trends and obstacles in the region, and a network of organizations in similar initiatives that can share lessons learned and tested solutions. • Software advisory and implementation: I guide clients through projects for key enterprise systems, including ERP (Financial/HR), CIS/UB (Customer Information Systems or Utility Billing), and EAM (enterprise asset management) solutions. I recently authored the ERP selection chapter of the Public Technology Institute’s book “CIO Leadership for Cities and Counties: Emerging Trends and Practices” • Technology assessment and planning: When there is a need to assess your organization’s overall technology environment, I will help our team work with your leadership team to understand your business needs and desired strategic outcomes. I will help our team meld operational needs with strategic goals to develop a realistic plan to guide your investment in technology in coming years.

Select key clients:
- City of Concord, CA
- City of Cupertino, CA
- City of Daly City, CA
- City of Greeley, CO
- City of Milpitas, CA
- City of Mountain View, CA
- City of Ontario, CA
- City of Petaluma, CA
- City of Philadelphia, PA
- City of Pomona, CA
- City of San Mateo, CA
- City of Santa Maria, CA
- City of South San Francisco, CA
- Contra Costa Water District, CA
- County of El Paso, CO
- County of Garfield, CO
- County of Gwinnett, GA
- Irvine Ranch Water District, CA
- Las Vegas Convention and
Visitors Authority, NV
- Left Hand Water District, CO
- Marin County, CA
- Mesa Water District, CA
- Metro Water Recovery, CO
- Placer County Water
Authority, CA
- Santa Margarita Water
District, CA
- Truckee Meadows Water
Authority, NV
Professional affiliations: Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA), California Society of Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO) and Colorado Government Finance Officers Association (CGFOA), GovAI Coalition, Municipal Information Systems Association of California (MISAC) Fun fact: I enjoy photography, woodworking, and camping with my wife, son, & chocolate lab. When I travel, you can find me at a hole-in-the wall restaurant, state/national park, or with a cup of good coffee! 87 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 35
Matt Coats, PMP
Public Sector Consulting Manager: Information Technology Role: As the Project Manager, I will be responsible for working for keeping the project on track as your day-to-day point of contact for our team. I’ll also serve to coordinate action items and deliverables that require participation from the City.

Experience: I have over eleven years of experience in public sector technology, the first eight being an IT project resource and project manager at the City of South Bend, Indiana. That first-hand municipal experience included needs assessment, process improvement, system selection, contract negotiation, and implementations across finance, water utility, community development, public works, and human resources business units. I’ve personally experienced the challenges that come with undertaking enterprise-scale projects with the limited resource availability inherent to the public sector, and I’m eager to bring lessons learned to the City.

Highlights include:
• I bring public sector experience to all of my projects by assisting with stakeholder interviews, understanding organizational needs, and guiding clients toward their objectives. • Throughout these activities, I will identify opportunities for process improvement and share real-life public sector benefits of process change.
• Having over seven years of leading public-sector focused ERP projects, I am well-prepared to merge that experience with the unique challenges the City faces we know of now and those We will come to learn throughout the course of this project.

Select key clients:
- Truckee Meadows Water
Authority, NV
- Left Hand Water District, CO
- Denver Metro Water
Authority, CO
- The City of Mountain View, CA
- The City of Pomona, CA
- El Paso County, CO
- The City of South San
Francisco, CA
- The City of Greeley, CO
- North Weld County Water
District, CO
- Marion County, OR
- Marin County, CA
Fun fact: My favorite hobby is board games. I’m most drawn to complex strategy games with a focus on long-term planning and critical decision points, such as Terraforming Mars (a favorite of mine since 2018), Twilight Imperium, and Ark Nova.

Professional affiliations and licensure: I am a certified Project Management Professional (PMP) and certified in ITIL Foundation.

Client success story: I believe in looking for solutions by inquiring the reason and history behind the problems of current state. One client described severe inefficiencies to their cashiering process brought on by required use of a particular payment processor, which allowed them reduce costs passed on to their income-sensitive customers. The greatest inefficiencies occurred in high-value transactions that didn’t involve the customers this client wanted to protect, and by asking if there would be any reason this client couldn’t establish a separate payment processor for these cases, the client realized they hadn’t considered that alternative, which they then pursued.
88 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 36
Jenna Houterloot, MS
Senior Consultant
Role: As the Finance Lead, I will provide functional expertise throughout the engagement, supporting stakeholder interviews, validating business requirements, and contributing to project deliverables.

Experience: I am a senior consultant on the Information Technology Consulting Public Sector & Infrastructure team with over four years of experience serving public sector clients across the nation on a wide variety of process and technology improvement projects.

Highlights include:
• Functional needs assessments, system selection, and implementation: I have 4+ years of experience supporting public sector organizations through ERP needs assessments, including RFP development, proposal analysis, ERP system selection, and system implementation. • Business process improvement: I bring extensive knowledge and experience documenting business processes to help clients identify bottlenecks and pain points in the current state, along with opportunities to streamline and enhance business operations through advanced software solutions. • Public sector knowledge: Throughout my time with the firm thus far, I have worked exclusively with public sector organizations which has allowed me to develop a comprehensive understanding of unique public sector needs. I have facilitated financial, human resources, and community development interviews for a multitude of clients, gaining insight into the specific rules and regulations that govern the public sector.

Select key clients:
- City of Concord, CA
- City of Daly City, CA
- City of South San
Francisco, CA
- County of Marin, CA
- San Mateo County Transit
District (SamTrans)
- Metro Water Recovery, CO
- Left Hand Water District,
CO
- City of Marco Island, FL
- City of Santa Maria, CA
- County of St Johns, FL
- County of Volusia, FL
- City of Plymouth, MN
- County of Scott, MN
- Fayetteville Public Works
Commission, NC
- City of San Mateo, CA
- Irvine Ranch Water
District, CA
- City of West Palm Beach,
FL
Fun fact: While based in the Midwest, I grew up skiing (and now snowboarding), starting at age three, and still make an annual winter trip to Park City with family and friends.

Client success story: While I have supported ERP implementations for a variety of clients, one engagement stands out. I have been supporting a small utility district through a multi-phase ERP implementation to replace its legacy systems. With only one internal resource responsible for all project activities and no prior ERP implementation experience within the organization, our team's support has been critical throughout the initiative. Serving as an extension of the district's team, I have provided project management advisory services, implementation oversight, vendor accountability, and strategic guidance to help keep the initiative on track and well-positioned for long-term success. 89 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 37
Santana Walker
Senior Information Technology Consultant, Human Resources Subject Matter Expert: Public Sector Government Operations
Role: As a dual role on the public sector consulting team, I specialize in ERP software implementations and am a recognized subject matter expert in human resources. I specialize in human resource management and workforce management informatics, information technology assessments in addition to all matters related to Human Resources.

Experience: I have a deep understanding of, and experience in HR, finance and payroll software implementation. Highlights Include:
• Senior Consultant and HR SME for the City of Concord, California- I led all stakeholder and departmental interviews within the Human Resources department, made a list of software requirements for selection, and assisted in writing the final needs assessment report. • Senior Consultant for the County of St. John’s, Florida, I co-led a 3-day Human Resources Best Practices intensive “bootcamp” with their HR department staff, referencing best practices with respect to their current needs assessment and gap analysis. I completed their Workday implementation (Cognizant) as a HR SME.
• Senior Consultant for the County of Ramsey, Minnesota- I am currently leading their Workday implementation (Cognizant) as an HR SME, leading all workstreams and ensuring the software is set to meet their needs along with up to standards with current best practice measures.

Select key clients:
- County of Nassau, NY
- County of Seminole, FL
- Great Lakes Water Authority
in Detroit, MI
- County of El Paso, CO
- City of Cape Coral, FL
- City of Concord, FL
- City of Pomona, CA
- City of Kalamazoo, MI
- City of Waco, TX
- Town of Cary, NC
- Village of Montgomery, IL
- City of Pflugerville, TX
- City of Madisonville, KY
- City of Philadelphia, PA
- Irvine Ranch Water District, CA
- Truckee Meadows Water
Authority, NV
- County of St. Johns, FL
- County of Ramsey, MN
- City of Concord, CA
- City of West Sacramento, CA.

Fun Fact: On my free time you can find me, my husband, and our three kids at a Midwest racetrack. I grew up surrounded by asphalt oval racing in the Midwest since I was 11. My husband races the two super late models we own: a Wegner 5.3L and a Tiry 6.2L. Before the pit gates open, you’ll find us with our kids at the local coffee shop sipping on ice espresso blends and checking out the local food scene.

Client Success Story: On one of the first implementations I was ever part of, I was the Lead Software Engineer (yes—on the client side!) for the HR, finance and payroll departments with a healthcare system.

I single handedly organized, planned, and executed training for over 800 medical, administrative, and executive staff for the go-live of their new HRM/WFM system, and it has been one of my largest success stories, to date.
90 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 38
Caroline Glass, AICP
Manager
Role: As the Land Management expert, I’ll leverage my prior experience as a deputy development services director to lead the process discovery and analysis for Land Management including land use planning, zoning, building permitting/inspections, licensing, addressing, and code enforcement.

Experience: I am a member of Plante Moran’s Public Sector practice and a Public Service Delivery Service Line Advisor. My experience with technology projects including competitive system selection, RFP/RFQ and implementation as a government official guide my experience as a consultant and inform my understanding of unique municipal needs. I am always interested in fostering a collaborative approach to regulatory interactions, with an emphasis on communication and facilitation of stakeholder input.

Highlights include:
• Process improvement: I work with public sector agencies to implement process and technology improvements and improve customer service through performance measure improvements for datadriven decision making. In addition to general business process improvement knowledge, I am a subject matter expert for community development process improvements. • System selection, implementation, and optimization: Experience includes supporting agencies through Permitting and ERP System Selections, including Needs Assessments, RFP creation, vendor proposal analysis, and implementation support. I am interested in helping clients achieve meaningful future state process improvements with technology improvements. I have worked with several clients to stabilize and improve a recently implemented land management systems. • Public sector experience: I have public sector experience as a former Deputy Development Services Director, overseeing public sector planning/zoning, building permitting and inspections, licensing, addressing, and code enforcement, and as a former land use planner. Additional public sector experience includes project/grant management, geographic information systems (GIS), and Community Rating System (CRS).

Select key clients:
- Boynton Beach, FL
- Palm Beach County, FL
- Volusia County, FL
- Seminole County, FL
- Daly City, CA
- City of Doral, FL
- Village of Arlington
Heights, IL
- Marco Island, FL
- City of West Palm Beach, FL
- Eastern Municipal Water
District, CA
- Irvine Ranch Water District, CA
- City of Dearborn, MI
Professional affiliations and licensure: My certifications include AICP certified planner (American Institute of Certified Planners), change management (Prosci), and Geographic Information Systems (University of Alabama). I am active in the American Planning Association (APA) and Building Officials Association of Florida (BOAF). I also serve on the board of my local Community Redevelopment Agency.

Fun fact: I lived and worked as an au pair in both Australia and Switzerland.

Client success story: When I worked in government, I always loved making SOPs and workflows for my team. As a consultant, I get to do this on a daily basis! Recently, I led our Palm Beach County land management assessment team in the creation of over 60 process maps, spanning six scope areas. The County had never previously documented their processes to this level of detail before. I am especially excited about this effort because I call Palm Beach County home. 91 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 39
References
92 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 40
City of Daly City, CA
Tim Nevin
Director of Finance and
Administrative Services
333 90th Street
Daly City, CA 94015
650-991-8040
[email protected]
ERP Selection Project
Assisted the City with an in-depth Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) needs assessment and selection project to replace the legacy CentralSquare Finance Enterprise solution supporting financials, human resources, and payroll. The project included conducting discovery interviews with process owners, City departments, and management, developing current and future state process maps, creation of an ERP gap analysis and action plan report identifying process improvement opportunities, building a request for proposals (RFP), proposal analysis, and vendor demonstration script development. We then guided the City through the proposal evaluation process to select a preferred solution. We supported the City through contract negotiations and statement of work development.

We are currently assisting the City with implementation project management assistance and organizational change management assistance.

Project Staff: Riffel, Rujan, Pesis, Rajcevic, Houterloot Project Timeline: Selection: August 2022 – March 2024 (based on City timeline preferences)
City of Pomona, CA
Sam Wong
Innovation and Technology
Director
505 S. Garey Ave
Pomona, CA 91766
909-620-2442
[email protected]
ERP System Selection
Plante Moran assisted the City of Pomona with an ERP assessment and selection project. This project began with a need to complete the planned scope and reach contract signing by the end of the 2024 calendar year to secure funding, which was successfully met.

The assessment included 20+ onsite interviews with process owners, departments, and City leadership to understand current gaps, needs for a future system, and more. As part of the assessment phase, Plante Moran documented observations and opportunities for improvement and developed an ERP needs assessment report that included action items for the City to focus on prior to, during, and after the implementation of a new system.

The selection component of the project included development of functional and technical requirements, creation and distribution of the RFP, and guidance through the proposal review and analysis process. We guided the City through the procurement process, which included vendor demonstrations and additional due diligence to make a vendor selection. Following the selection of a finalist vendor, Plante Moran supported the City with contract negotiations and statement of work development. The Plante Moran team is currently providing the City with implementation advisory support through 2026.
93 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 41
Project Staff: Brian Pesis, Nina Rajcevic, Matt Coats, Matthew Madrigal
Project Timeline: July 2024 – December 2024; Implementation:

January 2025 – Present
Left Hand Water
District, CO
Vicki Santos
Finance Manager
6800 Nimbus Rd
Longmont, CO 80503
303-530-4200
[email protected]
ERP Assessment and Selection
Plante Moran assisted Left Hand Water District with an ERP assessment and selection project, which included stakeholder interviews, management interviews, current and future state process mapping, business process improvements, Chart of Accounts redesign, an ERP needs assessment, RFP development and distribution, proposal analysis, demonstration facilitation, and additional due diligence assistance, resulting in the selection of a final vendor solution, contract negotiations and the development of statements of work. Plante Moran will provide project
management and subject matter expertise throughout its ERP implementation.

The scope of this project includes financials, payroll and time, and chart of accounts re-design.

Project Staff: Brian Pesis, Robin Milne, Matt Coats, Jenna Houterloot
Project Timeline: January 2025 - Present
City of Cupertino
Teri Gerhardt, CGCIO
Chief Technology Officer
10300 Torre Ave
Cupertino, CA 95014
408-777-3311
[email protected]
ERP Assessment and Selection Project
Plante Moran assisted the City of Cupertino with an ERP assessment and selection project. The assessment included stakeholder interviews with process owners, departments, and City leadership to identify current challenges, evaluate future needs, and develop a comprehensive ERP needs assessment report.

Building on the assessment, Plante Moran guided the City through the procurement and selection process, including requirements development, RFP development and distribution, proposal evaluation guidance, vendor demonstrations, and due diligence activities that supported the selection of a new ERP solution.

Following vendor selection, Plante Moran supported contract negotiations to help position the project for a successful implementation.

Project Staff: Rujan, Pesis, Rajcevic, Ben-Moche, Langham Project Timeline: November 2022 – March 2026
94 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 42
Cost
95 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 43
Fee schedule
We understand that keeping costs reasonable and closely aligned to the project scope is a priority for the City. Any services requested outside of the scope of this proposal will be discussed and determined before any billing takes place. The fees below represent a not-to-exceed model.

Plante Moran is uniquely structured to support the City, your fees include:

Access to all public
sector subject matter
experts within Plante
Moran
An experienced team
dedicated to serving
the public sector with
city expertise
Dedicated
innovation lab &
focus on disruptive
technologies
Best-in-class service
& data cybersecurity
protection -
independently
verified

PHASE COST
Phase 0: Project planning and management $ 6,615
Phase 1: Needs assessment 56,900
Total $63,515
Fee assumptions
Plante Moran’s fees for the engagement described in the project approach section are based upon the assumptions listed below. Should these assumptions change, we would adjust our professional fees accordingly, in consultation with the City.

Project Resources and Governance

1. The City will assign appropriate qualified staff to key project roles (including project manager) and strive to maintain consistency of its resources. The City will assign a single project manager to work directly with the Plante Moran project manager on a day-to-day basis.

2. Executive sponsorship represents all business areas and actively serves the needs of the project throughout its duration. The City maintains an active executive participation that meets throughout the project on a recurring basis.

3. City subject matter experts are available for scheduled activities and complete their assigned activities on a timely basis.

4. Client data will be provided to Plante Moran in a reasonable format.

5. City staff are available for interviews as scheduled by Plante Moran and the City.

6. Project status meetings will be conducted remotely and occur no more than once weekly.

7. All communications with the Plante Moran team will be managed through the Project Manager, unless mutually agreed upon.

8. Project decisions will be made by the City in a timely manner following the agreed-upon project plan and schedule.
96 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 44
Project Plan and Schedule

9. Project activities will be initiated by October 29th, 2026. If project activities are not initiated by this date, our proposed project team, project schedule, and project fees are subject to change.

10. There will be a single draft-to-final process for each deliverable.

11. The City will have 10 working days (or another number of days as mutually agreed upon in the project schedule) to approve or provide comments on all interim, draft, and final deliverables; any resulting delays could affect project schedule and fees.

12. All project activities will progress according to the final accepted, detailed project plan and schedule, unless both parties mutually approve changes.

Service Delivery

13. We propose performing this project in a hybrid manner, with key project activities on-site and the rest performed remotely. Proposed on-site activities include project kick-off and stakeholder interviews over the course of one week. Travel costs for these activities are included in our fees.

14. The City reserves the right to request additional on-site activities. Should any travel be agreed upon by Plante Moran and the City’s project managers, travel fees and expenses will be invoiced to the City at a flat rate of $3,045 per consulting staff per week. These additional travel costs will be over and above the fees/amounts listed in our professional services fees table.

15. All on-site work activity will be confirmed at least two weeks prior to the agreed upon travel date; any travel change fees incurred after such date will be expensed to the City.

16. All on-site work will occur between Tuesday and Thursday unless an alternative working schedule is mutually agreed.

17. The City will have 10 working days (or another number of days as mutually agreed upon in the project schedule) to approve or provide comments on all interim, draft, and final deliverables; any resulting delays could affect project schedule and fees. Final deliverables will be accessible in PDF format.

Compensation

18. The fees in this proposal are valid for 90 days from the date of this proposal.

19. Plante Moran’s fee schedule for needs assessment and selection assumes a blended rate of $315.

This rate is valid through June 2027, after which market-based increases may apply.

20. Our fees will be invoiced monthly as the work is performed and are payable within 30 days.

21. We anticipate billing the City monthly for services rendered in the prior month. Hours may be reallocated to different phases to meet the needs of the project.

22. Our invoices will apply an Technology and Related Charge, calculated at 5% of fees, reflecting Plante Moran’s continued investments in software, data, cybersecurity, and other essential technologies for delivering and securing our services. While many firms recoup these expenses through comparable fees or by embedding them within summary invoices, our approach is designed to ensure greater transparency. The fees quoted above are inclusive of the Technology and Related Charge.

Proposed Project Scope Assumptions

23. Any services provided outside of the scope of this proposal will be discussed and determined before any billing takes place.

24. Stakeholder interviews include up to twenty-two (22) hours of interview sessions anticipating fourteen (14) City departments.
97 ERP Needs Assessment
City of Belmont, CA PLANTE MORAN | 0

We look forward to working with you.

Please contact us with any questions.

Mark Warner
Engagement Partner
248-223-3799
[email protected]
Brian Pesis
Project Director
303-846-1260
[email protected]
98

Staff Report

STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: October 13, 2026
Agency: City of Belmont
Staff Contact: Afshin Oskoui, City Manager/Director of Emergency Services, [email protected]
Agenda Title: Proclamation of a Local Emergency in Preparation for the 2026–2027 El Nino Winter Storm Season
Agenda Action: Resolution
Recommendation
Adopt a resolution proclaiming a local emergency due to the imminent threat of severe winter weather associated with the 2026–2027 El Nio season and authorizing enhanced preparedness, mitigation, coordination, and response activities.

Strategic Focus Area
Public Safety
Background
El Nino is a recurring climate pattern associated with warmer-than-average sea surface temperatures in the tropical Pacific Ocean. Strong El Nino events can alter atmospheric circulation and increase the likelihood of significant precipitation in portions of California.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Climate Prediction Center has reported a greater than 90 percent probability of a very strong El Nino during the fall and winter of 2026–2027 and a 75 percent probability that the October through December period could reach historically exceptional strength. While El Nino does not predict the occurrence or location of any individual storm, historically strong El Nino conditions can increase the potential for significant precipitation and associated hazards in California.

These conditions do not mean that Belmont will necessarily experience a particular level of rainfall or any specific storm. Weather impacts remain dependent on the timing, location and characteristics of individual storm systems. Nevertheless, the potential consequences of a series of significant storms warrant advance preparation, particularly where preparedness actions require coordination among multiple jurisdictions or must be completed before rainfall occurs.

On September 21, 2026, Governor Newsom proclaimed a statewide emergency related to the developing El Nino conditions. The Governor's proclamation specifically identifies the risks of flooding, landslides, debris flows, coastal flooding and erosion and directs state agencies to take advance preparedness 99

Staff Report – Proclamation of Local Emergency 2026-27 El Nino measures.

The City's proposed action is intended to complement that statewide effort by establishing a heightened local readiness posture appropriate to Belmont's specific infrastructure, geography and operational needs.

Analysis
The City of Belmont is taking a proactive approach to preparing for what is expected to be an unusually active winter storm season. Current forecasts indicate a strong El Nino pattern developing during the fall and winter of 2026–2027, with the potential for significant rainfall and associated hazards throughout California. The City's proposed action is intended to complement that statewide effort by establishing a heightened local readiness posture appropriate to Belmont's specific infrastructure, geography and operational needs.

Belmont's geography and developed environment present a number of potential vulnerabilities during a prolonged or intense winter storm season. The City includes hillside areas and developed drainage systems, Belmont Creek and other waterways, numerous streets and transportation corridors, and infrastructure that can be affected by saturated soils and substantial rainfall.

Potential impacts include localized flooding, increased flows in Belmont Creek, blocked or overwhelmed storm drain facilities, debris accumulation, erosion, slope instability, landslides, fallen trees and limbs, roadway disruptions, power outages and increased demands on emergency response personnel.

The impacts of severe weather can also extend beyond City-owned infrastructure. Private property along Belmont Creek, private drainage facilities, active construction sites and other privately controlled areas can affect the City's ability to manage stormwater and respond to emergencies. Effective winter preparedness therefore requires coordination among City departments, neighboring jurisdictions, regional agencies, property owners, businesses and residents.

Preparation Already Underway
Typical of the City’s efforts each year staff has not waited for the first major storm to begin preparing.

Staff has been coordinating with cities throughout the region and San Mateo County to update contact information associated with mutual-aid agreements and ensure that the City can quickly identify and access appropriate personnel, equipment and other resources if local capabilities become strained and to further strengthen regional coordination and establish a common understanding among participating agencies regarding preparedness and potential resource needs.

In addition to formal mutual-aid coordination, staff is working with neighboring agencies to develop a coordinated regional approach to El Nino preparedness. This work is intended to facilitate information sharing, identify potential resource constraints, improve communication during significant weather events and strengthen the ability of agencies to assist one another when conditions exceed the capacity of an individual jurisdiction.

Within the City organization, recurring pre-winter and ongoing situational coordination meetings have been established among Fire, Police, Parks and Recreation, Buildings, and Public Works. These meetings provide an opportunity for the departments responsible for public safety, infrastructure and field 100

Staff Report – Proclamation of Local Emergency 2026-27 El Nino operations to review forecasts, identify potential trouble spots, assess equipment and staffing readiness, and coordinate operational priorities before and during significant weather events.

The City is also establishing on-call agreements with qualified consultants and contractors who can provide specialized services, equipment and emergency repair capabilities when needed. Establishing these relationships before an emergency occurs is intended to reduce procurement delays and allow the City to move more quickly when emergency conditions require specialized resources or repairs.

A significant component of the City's preparation is focused on Belmont Creek and the City's drainage infrastructure, and other potential areas of concerns within parks and open space. As of writing of this report, creek maintenance and dredging work is currently underway at Old County Road and El Camino Real. The current schedule targets dredging during the week of October 5, with additional time available if necessary. Completing this bi-annual work before the primary winter storm season will improve channel conditions and reduce potential obstructions within the City’s jurisdiction.

Staff has also completed inspections of storm drain inlets throughout the City. The next phase of this work is to clear leaves, vegetation and other accumulated debris from identified inlets and drainage hotspots so that the City's stormwater system is positioned to function effectively during significant rainfall.

Recognizing that portions of Belmont Creek are located on or adjacent to private property, the City has developed a new informational flyer explaining property-owner responsibilities associated with creek maintenance. Staff is also developing an annual notification process so that creek property owners receive timely reminders of their responsibilities before each winter season. This effort is intended to improve understanding of maintenance obligations and reduce conditions on private property that could interfere with drainage or create hazards during significant storms.

The City is similarly undertaking its annual seasonal outreach concerning private drainage and construction activities. V-ditch maintenance letters will be distributed to property owners to remind them of the importance of maintaining private drainage facilities before the rainy season. The City will also distribute winterization letters to active construction sites, emphasizing appropriate erosion, sediment, stormwater and site-security measures in advance of significant rainfall. Outreach will also be provided to participants in the City's Adopt-a-Drain program to encourage continued maintenance of storm drain inlets throughout the rainy season.

Public preparedness is another important element of the City's approach. Staff is working with the City's Communications team on a continued and coordinated El Nino public information campaign. The campaign is providing residents with practical information regarding storm preparedness and highlighting the City's Adopt-a-Drain program, sandbag filling station, creek maintenance responsibilities and other actions residents and property owners can take before and during significant weather events.

Taken together, these efforts represent a coordinated, multi-department and multi-jurisdictional preparedness strategy. The City is addressing its own infrastructure and operational readiness while simultaneously working with regional partners and communicating with property owners and the 101

Staff Report – Proclamation of Local Emergency 2026-27 El Nino community about their respective responsibilities.

Basis For A Proactive Local Emergency Proclamation
The purpose of the proposed proclamation is not to suggest that a catastrophic storm has already occurred or that the City can predict the precise timing or severity of future storms. Rather, the proclamation recognizes the heightened and imminent threat presented by the forecasted conditions and establishes a formal framework for preparedness and response before significant impacts occur.

Some of the City's most important preparedness activities must occur before rainfall begins. Drainage systems need to be inspected and cleared, creek maintenance needs to be completed, emergency contractors need to be identified and retained, mutual-aid contacts need to be current, personnel need to understand their roles, and residents and property owners need to receive information before an emergency limits the City's ability to communicate or deploy resources.

The Governor's statewide proclamation provides additional context for the City's action. The State has determined that the developing El Nino conditions warrant advance emergency preparation at the statewide level. A local proclamation would allow Belmont to similarly formalize its preparedness posture based on local conditions and vulnerabilities.

The proposed action also provides a mechanism for the City to scale its response as conditions evolve.

The City can continue monitoring forecasts and field conditions and move from preparedness to active response if circumstances warrant, while retaining the ability to terminate the proclamation when the emergency conditions no longer exist.

Financial Impact
The proclamation itself is not anticipated to have a significant immediate fiscal impact. The preparedness activities currently underway are being performed using existing staff resources and appropriations to the extent practicable. Establishment of on-call contracts and procurement of emergency supplies or services may result in additional expenditures as conditions warrant.

If emergency conditions require expenditures beyond existing appropriations, the City Manager may take actions authorized by applicable law and City policy and will return to the City Council for additional appropriations when feasible. The City will document emergency expenditures and response activities to support potential reimbursement or recovery assistance from state or federal programs, if available.

Conclusion
We have an opportunity to prepare before significant winter weather impacts occur. The combination of a potentially historic El Nino event, the Governor's statewide emergency proclamation, Belmont's local vulnerabilities and the lead time required to complete critical preparedness measures supports a proactive approach.

The City has already undertaken substantial preparation, including regional mutual-aid coordination, interagency planning, emergency resource contracting, creek maintenance, storm drain inspections, property-owner outreach, construction-site winterization and public preparedness communications. 102

Staff Report – Proclamation of Local Emergency 2026-27 El Nino The proposed local emergency proclamation would formalize this heightened readiness posture and provide the City with an appropriate framework to continue preparing, coordinate resources and respond quickly if severe weather conditions develop.

Staff recommends adoption of the attached Resolution.

Alternatives

1. Take No Action

2. Return to Staff for Additional Information
Attachments
A. Resolution
Fiscal Impact
☒ No Fiscal Impact
☐ Funding Source Confirmed:

Source: Purpose: Public Outreach:

Staff Discretionary Action Posting of Agenda
103

RESOLUTION NO. 2026 –

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELMONT

PROCLAIMING A LOCAL EMERGENCY DUE TO THE IMMINENT THREAT OF SEVERE WINTER WEATHER ASSOCIATED WITH THE 2026–2027 EL NINO SEASON
WHEREAS, El Nino is a natural climate phenomenon in which sea surface temperatures in the central and eastern tropical Pacific Ocean warm, disrupting global weather patterns and increasing the odds of exceptionally wet and destructive winter conditions in California that are typically concentrated in Southern California but can also affect Northern California; and, WHEREAS, Belmont has experienced exceptional storms and storm related damage brought about by El Nino conditions in the past; and,
WHEREAS, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Climate Prediction Center has reported that El Nino conditions are strengthening and has identified a greater than 90 percent probability of a very strong El Nino during the fall and winter of 2026– 2027; and,
WHEREAS, NOAA has further identified a significant probability that the October through December 2026 period could reach historically exceptional El Nino strength; and WHEREAS, while El Nino does not predict the occurrence, timing or location of any particular storm, the anticipated conditions increase the potential for significant precipitation and associated hazards in California; and
WHEREAS, severe winter weather may result in flooding, stormwater system impacts, landslides, debris flows, erosion, fallen trees, roadway disruptions, power outages and other conditions that threaten persons and property; and
WHEREAS, Belmont's hillside terrain, developed drainage systems, Belmont Creek and other waterways, transportation network and other infrastructure create potential vulnerabilities during periods of substantial or prolonged rainfall; and WHEREAS, the City has initiated advance preparedness measures, including regional mutual-aid coordination, interagency preparedness meetings, emergency resource contracting, creek maintenance and dredging, storm drain inspections and clearing, property-owner outreach, construction-site winterization and public preparedness communications; and WHEREAS, on September 21, 2026, the Governor of California proclaimed a statewide state of emergency to facilitate advance preparation for the developing El Nino season and the potential for flooding, landslides, debris flows, coastal hazards and other severe weather impacts; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 8558(c) recognizes storm and flood conditions that constitute or threaten extreme peril to persons and property and are, or are likely to be, beyond the control of local services, personnel, equipment and facilities as 104

conditions that may constitute a local emergency; and
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 8630 authorizes the City Council to proclaim a local emergency; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the anticipated severe winter weather conditions associated with the 2026–2027 El Nino season constitute, or are likely to constitute, conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property within the City of Belmont and warrant heightened emergency preparedness and response measures; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that proactive preparation is necessary to protect life and property, maintain essential public services, coordinate available resources, and reduce the potential impacts of severe winter weather.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Belmont resolves as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby proclaims that a local emergency exists, or is imminently threatened, within the City of Belmont due to the potential for severe winter weather associated with the 2026–2027 El Nino season, including potentially extreme rainfall, flooding, stormwater impacts, landslides, debris flows, erosion, fallen trees, roadway disruptions, power outages and related hazards.

SECTION 2. The City Manager, as Director of Emergency Services, is authorized and directed to coordinate with City departments and regional partners and to implement such preparedness, mitigation and response measures as may reasonably be necessary to protect life and property and maintain essential City services. Such measures may include enhanced inspection and maintenance of drainage facilities and waterways; pre-positioning emergency equipment and supplies; preparing City facilities and infrastructure; coordinating mutual aid and regional resources; establishing and utilizing on-call agreements with qualified contractors, consultants and other service providers; conducting emergency staffing and interdepartmental coordination; providing public information and preparedness outreach; and undertaking other appropriate emergency preparedness and response measures.

SECTION 3. To the extent authorized by applicable law and City policy, the City Manager is authorized to establish, execute and utilize emergency or on-call contracts for consultants, contractors, equipment, materials and services reasonably necessary to prepare for, respond to or recover from emergency conditions.

SECTION 4. The City Manager is authorized to utilize existing appropriations and, when otherwise authorized by law, incur expenditures reasonably necessary to implement emergency preparedness and response measures. Emergency expenditures shall be documented and reported to the City Council as appropriate.

SECTION 5. The City Manager is authorized to coordinate public information concerning emergency preparedness, storm conditions, available resources, evacuation or other protective actions, and measures that residents, businesses and property owners can undertake to reduce risks associated with severe winter weather.
105

SECTION 6. The City Council will review the need for continuation of this local emergency at least once every 60 days, or sooner as circumstances warrant, consistent with California Government Code Section 8630.

SECTION 7. The City Council will terminate the proclaimed local emergency at the earliest possible date when conditions warrant.

SECTION 8. This Resolution takes effect immediately upon adoption. * * *
ADOPTED October 13, 2026 by the City of Belmont City Council by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

ATTEST:

City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Attorney
106